Soru

Read the following passage carefully:

The expanding frontier of synthetic biology presents a unique regulatory dilemma for contemporary public administration, demanding a recalibration of traditional risk assessment paradigms. Historically, biosecurity governance relied on static, agent-specific registries focused on pathogen classification. However, the democratisation of gene-editing technologies and dual-use genomic data rendering biological synthesis accessible outside institutional frameworks invalidates reactive oversight. Conventional command-and-control regulation struggles to contain decentralized innovation without stifling economic applications in agriculture and pharmaceuticals. To reconcile security imperatives with innovation trajectories, administrative bodies must transition toward adaptive governance models centered on platform-level monitoring and dynamic threat profiling. Yet, implementing adaptive oversight is constrained by institutional inertia, asymmetric technical expertise between regulators and developers, and jurisdictional fragmentation across federal entities. Crucially, embedding ethical compliance within synthetic biology requires not merely punitive legislative mandates, but structural co-regulation—where private developers, academic labs, and state actors jointly design real-time audit protocols. Without establishing integrated oversight architectures that harmonize subnational regulatory standards and continuous monitoring of gene-synthesis supply chains, administrative systems will remain perpetually reactive, risking catastrophic biosecurity failures while simultaneously impeding benign technological advances.

Based on the passage above, which of the following statements correctly articulate the author's primary thesis and core governance recommendations?