Abstract
New verification approaches are needed to strengthen compliance and build transparency under the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC). This study considers how blockchain technology could support laboratory oversight by addressing issues like data integrity, traceability, and secure data sharing in facilities handling sensitive biological materials. Low submission rates of confidence building measures currently limit the impact of the BWC. Blockchain’s decentralized, tamper-resistant ledger brings security and openness critical for international collaboration in biosecurity. Using blockchain, laboratories can establish unalterable records that build accountability and trust among stakeholders while lowering the risk of data manipulation. This system also supports cooperative investigations under Article V of the BWC by providing a secure platform for sharing sensitive biological data between states. Key benefits include more substantial information reliability, better control over access, and the ability to trace biological materials’ origins and uses, helping distinguish lawful activities from illicit ones. These improvements support BWC compliance by allowing for selective and privacy-conscious data sharing. Challenges such as scalability, technical training, balancing data security with transparency, and securing long-term funding must be addressed through thoughtful planning and cooperation. As BWC member states seek stronger compliance measures, integrating blockchain provides a solution that could significantly support global biosecurity over the next 50 years.
Introduction
The Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BWC), established in 1972 and entered into force in 1975, is a landmark treaty that bans the creation, production, and storage of biological and toxin weapons. 1 As the first multilateral disarmament agreement banning an entire class of weapons, the BWC plays a crucial role in global efforts to prevent the use of biological agents for harmful purposes. 2 The convention obligates its states parties to renounce biological weapons and supports the peaceful application of biological sciences.1,2
Despite this, the BWC faces ongoing challenges, specifically in verification and compliance monitoring.3,4 Unlike other arms control treaties such as the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the BWC currently lacks a formal verification system that allows for independent verification of state compliance.5-7 This absence raises concerns about the possibility of clandestine biological weapons programs and underscores the need for more robust mechanisms to form compliance. 4
Blockchain technology, originally developed for cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, has grown into a tool with applications in areas such as supply chain management, finance, and healthcare.8-12 With its decentralized and tamper-resistant ledger, blockchain securely records transactions with transparency, offering promising solutions to the BWC’s verification and transparency challenges. 11
With its decentralized, transparent, and tamper-resistant ledger, blockchain offers promising solutions to the BWC’s verification and transparency challenges. This case study explores how blockchain could provide a valuable solution to these challenges, potentially strengthening the BWC’s effectiveness in the coming decades. We examine how blockchain could be applied within the BWC framework to improve laboratory oversight, support compliance monitoring, and build greater trust among member states.
Historical Verification Efforts in the BWC
Since 1975, the BWC has been a cornerstone of global disarmament aimed at eliminating biological weapons. However, unlike the CWC and the NPT, the BWC lacks a formal, comprehensive verification mechanism.3,4,13 This absence became markedly apparent in the early 1990s with the revelations of biological weapons programs in Iraq and the Soviet Union, indicating significant gaps in the BWC’s ability to verify compliance. 13 In 1992, Russian President Boris Yeltsin publicly admitted the existence of a Soviet biological weapons program and similar discoveries about Iraq’s biological warfare activities came to light through United Nations Special Commission investigations. 14 These events led to the establishment of the Ad Hoc Group of Governmental Experts (VEREX) during the 1991 Third Review Conference, tasked with assessing verification measures.3,5,15 VEREX’s 1993 report proposed a mix of onsite inspections and offsite measures to increase verification, but it also acknowledged technological limitations including the dual-use nature of biological materials and the commercial availability of biodetection tools.3,5,15,16 Despite VEREX’s recommendations, US concerns about national security and the protection of sensitive biodefense information from the pharmaceutical and biotech sectors led to the rejection of the proposed BWC protocol in 2001.3,5 This rejection marked the collapse of the Ad Hoc Group negotiations, displaying the tension between transparency and national security. 4 The rapid expansion of biotechnology, comprising the advent of genetic engineering and CRISPR technologies, further blurred the lines between civilian and military applications of biology. 16 The “democratization” of biology has resulted in a broader array of actors including private companies and individuals, participating in dual-use research, which complicates compliance verification. The increasing number of Level 4 biosafety laboratories and biotech companies has made achieving transparency even more difficult. This failure to implement effective verification mechanisms has left the BWC vulnerable to noncompliance, stemming from the fundamental tension between the need for transparency and the protection of national security interests.14,16 The US withdrawal from negotiations underlined the political will required to strengthen the BWC. The United States argued that intrusive inspections could expose critical research and undermine commercial competitiveness. As the bioeconomy continues to grow with progresses like gene editing and affective computing, the challenge of tracking and monitoring biological agents only becomes more complex, signaling the need for innovative solutions to support verification. 16
Key Challenges Faced
The dual-use nature of biological materials remains a major barrier to effective verification under the BWC. 17 Unlike nuclear or chemical agents, biological materials often have legitimate civilian uses in healthcare and agriculture, making it difficult to distinguish peaceful applications from potential weaponization.14,15 The natural evolution of biological agents along with developments in synthetic biology has significantly shortened the timelines for creating new strains or modifying existing agents. 15 Biotech companies and private labs now have the capability to design organisms with specific, sometimes unpredictable, characteristics, increasing the potential for hostile misuse. This presents both technical challenges in identifying and tracking these agents and regulatory hurdles as governments struggle to manage rapidly evolving technologies.15–19
Geopolitical concerns further complicate verification. 20 As evidenced by the 2001 US withdrawal from the Ad Hoc Group negotiations, national security fears about exposing sensitive biodefense research and proprietary commercial data are central to the reluctance of some states to implement verification measures.16,17,20,21 This reluctance has caused a persistent tension between the need for transparency and the desire to protect national interests and intellectual property. The US rejection of the 2001 protocol was driven by fears that inspections would compromise national security and economic interests, a sentiment shared by other Western countries and the pharmaceutical industry.15,16,19 These concerns continue to hinder the development of an effective verification protocol.
The lack of consensus on the scope and intrusiveness of verification measures remains a critical obstacle. States parties continue to disagree on how to balance security with transparency. 16 Some advocate for intrusive measures, while others argue these would infringe on sovereignty and undermine commercial interests. This divide is especially relevant in the context of the growing bioeconomy, where the distinction between civilian biotech and military research is increasingly blurred.16,19 As long as states remain unwilling to expose their biotech research and intellectual property to international scrutiny, meaningful agreements will be stalled. 16
The cost and complexity of implementing an effective verification system also pose significant challenges.21,22 Developing such a system would require substantial investment in infrastructure, personnel, and technology, resources that may not be accessible to developing nations. 21 This economic imbalance could contribute to uneven participation in verification measures, creating gaps in global compliance and hindering the overall effectiveness of the BWC.14,17,18
Political will remains a key challenge.3,20 The collapse of the Ad Hoc Group negotiations in 2001 demonstrated profound mistrust and divergent national interests among BWC states parties. The geopolitical landscape has only become more polarized, complicating global arms control efforts. 16 The failure to reconcile differing national priorities, ranging from biosecurity concerns to economic interests, has made it difficult to build a cohesive and enforceable verification framework for the BWC.
Finally, the rapid pace of biotechnological advancements complicates efforts to maintain a reliable verification framework. Emerging technologies such as blockchain and artificial intelligence (AI) present promising solutions to the BWC’s verification challenges, but traditional protocols risk becoming obsolete as the landscape of biological research continues to evolve. These technologies must be integrated into the international framework without alienating developing countries or exacerbating national security concerns. 16
Blockchain Technology as an Innovative Solution
Blockchain technology presents a new way to approach verification challenges. Fundamentally, blockchain is a decentralized and immutable ledger system that records transactions securely and transparently. 8 Its core features—decentralization, immutability, and transparency—help tackle many obstacles in maintaining data integrity and building trust across various industries. 12
Decentralization eliminates the need for a central authority by distributing the ledger across multiple nodes in a network. 12 This structure builds trust among participants as all entities have equal access to the same shared ledger, reducing concerns about bias or control. 19 Transparency is a key feature of decentralization. 10 It allows participants to verify data, promoting accountability independently. Immutability, made possible by the decentralized structure, means that once data is recorded on the blockchain, it cannot be altered or deleted without agreement from the network participants. 10 This tamper-resistant record-keeping preserves data integrity and supports trust by maintaining unaltered logs of activities.
However, blockchain’s strengths are not without limitations in contexts where data is sensitive or proprietary. The dual-use nature of biological materials requires careful consideration of how blockchain handles proprietary or classified data. Blockchain can offer permissioned blockchains, where access is restricted to only certain parties, maintaining the privacy of sensitive data while still allowing for data integrity verification. 24
Proprietary and Classified Information
Although blockchain provides transparency when dealing with proprietary or classified information, the question arises: How do you guarantee compliance and data integrity without forcing stakeholders to reveal sensitive details? Blockchain records transactions immutably, but if a stakeholder such as a state or company is unwilling to share data, the blockchain will not automatically compel them to disclose proprietary or classified details. To mitigate this, permissioned blockchains can be introduced.11,24 In the system, only authorized participants can access certain pieces of information.11,12 For example, using private keys and zero-knowledge proofs allow parties to share the integrity of the transaction (ie, the fact that data has not been tampered with) without revealing the content of sensitive information.11,12,24 Smart contracts can automate compliance reporting, but they must also respect confidentiality agreements only allowing certain data to be shared with the appropriate entities.9,25
Blockchain in Lab Oversight and Compliance Monitoring
Blockchain’s decentralized nature creates a trust-building mechanism but cannot solve the issue of unwillingness to share. Stakeholders can be incentivized through international agreements such as treaties that offer legal immunity for sharing specific data on the blockchain. Confidence-building measures including the use of blockchain for traceability of materials or manufacturing processes can also help incentivize parties by demonstrating how the technology promotes fairness and accountability across borders. 21
Blockchain brings a new level of lab oversight, creating a secure, unalterable record of material lifecycles—from acquisition to disposal.10,19 This process requires collaboration from both government and private sectors. It supports laboratories in logging material transfers, personnel access, and other activities. These logs increase accountability within the facilities. Smart contracts within the blockchain help control access to specific agents, automate compliance reporting, and, when paired with the Internet of Things (IoT) devices like sensors or radio frequency identification (RFID) tags, deliver real-time monitoring of materials.9,19,20 Smart contracts also authorize automated compliance checks, which can identify noncompliant activities and flag high-risk behavior, reducing the manual oversight burden.9,25
For compliance monitoring, blockchain supports decentralized reporting, where participants submit compliance reports on a shared platform accessible to authorized entities. 20 This reduces delays and increases transparency in reporting. Smart contracts add to this by automating checks and flagging high-risk activities. 9 By sharing verifiable data, blockchain can help build trust among participants, reducing suspicions and encouraging cooperation.3,21 While blockchain offers significant potential, its implementation is not without challenges. These challenges primarily concern security and data privacy, stakeholder resistance, and regulatory and legal concerns.
Security/Data Privacy Concerns
As blockchain technology increases data transparency, it must also balance privacy. Data privacy concerns can arise when sharing biological research data that is linked to commercial interests or sensitive national security matters. 26 In healthcare blockchain systems, for instance, encryption and private keys are used to warrant that only authorized parties can access sensitive data (like medical records).9,12 A similar approach can be applied in the BWC context to protect confidentiality and maintain integrity. Incorporating zero-knowledge proofs would allow states to prove compliance without revealing private or sensitive information.
Stakeholder Resistance
A major challenge to blockchain adoption is resistance from stakeholders who fear the loss of proprietary control or the exposure of sensitive data.10,26 In the biotech and pharmaceutical industries, stakeholders often resist third-party oversight and reporting due to concerns over trade secrets and intellectual property. To overcome this resistance, solutions like permissioned blockchains or secure enclaves for data can be employed to allow only authorized participants to access proprietary or classified data.11,24
Regulatory/Legal Concerns
In national compliance, a primary challenge is the lack of uniformity in regulations. For example, countries vary in their ability to oversee biological material handling, which complicates compliance monitoring under the BWC framework.10,26 Blockchain offers decentralized monitoring, but national legal frameworks must also evolve to incorporate blockchain into existing regulations and standards. International agreements and policies should make sure that there is global interoperability of blockchain systems to facilitate cross-border cooperation in biological weapons verification. 10 Blockchain’s legal implications also involve intellectual property rights and the handling of commercial data, so it is important that governments address these concerns by creating new legal structures for digital compliance.
Scalability
Blockchain’s ability to scale with large data sets remains a challenge, specifically for tracking biological materials across different nations and labs. While solutions like sharding, which splits data across different blockchain networks, or hybrid models combining blockchain with other technologies like cloud storage or AI could improve scalability, these solutions still need to be tested in real-world applications mainly within the BWC framework. 26
Education and Compliance at the National Level
For blockchain to be effective, there needs to be widespread education on the BWC and its integration with blockchain technology. Many biological researchers, companies, and states may not be familiar with BWC protocols, so training programs and awareness campaigns will be necessary to verify that blockchain adoption is effective. Reporting burdens must also be carefully considered at the national level, where smaller labs may not have the resources to comply with stringent international standards. Blockchain’s automation features can reduce manual reporting burdens by facilitating real-time compliance checks and automated reporting. 25
While blockchain provides an encouraging avenue for strengthening the verification and transparency of biological weapons compliance under the BWC, its full potential will require overcoming the challenges mentioned above. 27 Thoughtful planning, investment in technical infrastructure, stakeholder education, and international cooperation are required to handle concerns about privacy and proprietary information. The ultimate goal is a blockchain-based solution that strikes a balance between security and transparency, supporting the BWC’s mission of preventing the proliferation of biological weapons.22,23
Proof of Concept From Parallel Industries: Successful Blockchain Implementations
How blockchain has been applied in other industries can reveal insights into its potential for strengthening verification under the BWC. Two notable sectors where blockchain has made significant impacts are the pharmaceutical supply chain and healthcare records management.
Counterfeit drugs remain a serious issue in the pharmaceutical industry. The World Health Organization estimates that approximately 10% of medical products in low- and middle-income countries are substandard or falsified. 24 To combat this issue, blockchain technology has been employed to track and verify the authenticity of pharmaceutical products throughout the supply chain. 25 One example is the MediLedger Project, 28 which involves collaboration among major pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer, Genentech, and Amgen. 26 MediLedger uses a permissioned blockchain network to ensure compliance with the US Drug Supply Chain Security Act. 29 By assigning each product a unique identifier and recording every transaction on the blockchain, MediLedger creates a transparent and unalterable ledger of drug transactions from the manufacturer to the end consumer.26-28 This system allows authorized participants to verify a product’s origin and authenticity in real time, significantly lowering the chances of counterfeit drugs entering the market. The pharmaceutical industry’s experience demonstrates blockchain’s ability to promote transparency and accountability across a complex supply chain, highlighting a clear parallel to the BWC’s goals for secure monitoring of biological materials. 21
In healthcare, protecting patient data while making it accessible to authorized users is a top priority. Traditional centralized databases are susceptible to data breaches, risking patient privacy. 19 Blockchain technology presents a promising alternative by enabling secure and private sharing of electronic health records among authorized healthcare providers and patients. 20 A notable example is the MedRec project developed by Massachusetts Institute of Technology researchers. 30 MedRec uses blockchain to create a decentralized record management system that allows patients to control their medical data while facilitating uninterrupted information sharing among healthcare providers. Each transaction such as adding a new medical record is recorded on the blockchain, securing an immutable patient’s health data history. Blockchain’s cryptographic features deliver increased security as data is encrypted, and access is granted only through private keys held by authorized users. 21 This makes certain that sensitive patient information remains confidential and tamper resistant.
Blockchain implementation in healthcare records management focuses on maintaining privacy and data security, which is similar to the trade secret concerns in biological research and pharmaceuticals.12,24 Both fields require the protection of sensitive information alongside the need for transparency and traceability. Blockchain encrypts data and allows authorized participants to verify the authenticity of transactions. 25 This offers a solution to balance these needs. In the BWC context, similar methods could help maintain the accuracy of biological data, protecting proprietary information and national security data, while allowing compliance reporting without disclosing confidential materials.
Envisioning Blockchain Implementation Within the BWC
Blockchain technology has proven effective in sectors like pharmaceutical supply chains and healthcare records, where data integrity and secure sharing are paramount. These lessons reveal how blockchain can significantly track and monitor biological materials within the BWC framework. By applying this proven technology, states parties to the BWC can address longstanding verification and compliance issues. Blockchain technology opens avenues for real-time monitoring and decentralized oversight, raising the effectiveness of verification processes. 10 Traditional BWC verification relies on periodic inspections and self-reporting, often limited by delays and inaccuracies.3,4 Blockchain, in contrast, supports continuous, real-time tracking of biological materials and laboratory processes. 12 Each transaction is immutably recorded on the ledger, providing up-to-date information accessible to authorized parties. 8 The decentralized structure reduces dependence on central authorities, decreasing data manipulation risks and building trust through shared access to verified information. 12
Although blockchain offers unique strengths, certain limitations may affect its effectiveness when used alone. For instance, scalability issues can arise as data volumes grow, and cybersecurity risks may emerge due to the decentralized nature of blockchain, where vulnerabilities in network nodes could be exploited. 22 Also, technical barriers such as the need for specialized knowledge and stakeholder resistance due to unfamiliarity with blockchain can slow adoption. 22 To undertake these challenges, a hybrid approach that combines blockchain with traditional verification methods and other technologies can help maximize the strengths of each system. Combining blockchain with existing monitoring tools and databases can improve interoperability, helping laboratories retain familiar systems while gaining from blockchain’s security and transparency features.21,22
Incorporating IoT and artificial intelligence (AI) technologies can further augment verification processes. IoT devices can automate data collection from laboratory equipment, feeding real-time information into the blockchain ledger.9,19 AI algorithms can analyze this data to detect patterns indicative of noncompliance or biosecurity risks, adding another layer of oversight. 31 Hybrid models that combine blockchain with complementary technologies may address some limitations in standalone blockchain systems. Using a mix of tools, these models could improve scalability, strengthen cybersecurity, and encourage wider stakeholder acceptance. 22 Implementing blockchain in the BWC’s verification framework requires collaboration between the public and private sectors. For states parties and international organizations, this involves adopting new technology, developing effective policies, building technical capacities, and forming international standards so that systems operate cohesively and adhere to established norms. 32 Initial steps for states parties include assessing national capabilities to identify how blockchain could improve data management, security, and compliance. Developing national policies that reflect BWC obligations, conducting pilot projects in selected laboratories, and attending to legal and regulatory requirements are all required for a successful rollout. Training and capacity-building programs, backed by adequate resources, are equally significant to preparing personnel to manage blockchain systems and encourage cooperation among stakeholders.
The adoption of blockchain introduces distinct challenges and considerations for the private sector including laboratories, supply chains, and research institutions. 23 Many private organizations may lack incentives to comply with international standards that are not mandatory for their operations.23,25 To engage these entities, policy frameworks should encourage compliance through incentives such as access to streamlined international processes, funding opportunities, and technical support. Forming private–public partnerships can help bridge gaps, providing private organizations with support for blockchain implementation and guiding their practices toward broader biosecurity goals.
International organizations like the World Health Organization are central to supporting these efforts by providing technical guidance, creating best-practice guidelines, and facilitating cross-country coordination through workshops and conferences. 33 They can also mobilize financial and technical resources to support capacity building in developing countries and advance research and development into blockchain applications for biosecurity.32,33 Setting up international standards through organizations such as the International Organization for Standardization can create a standardized framework for BWC-related blockchain use, promoting consistency, reliability, and cross-border interoperability. Regular updates to these standards will help keep pace with technological advancements and the evolving biosecurity landscape. 11 These steps can support the BWC in incorporating blockchain effectively, strengthening its verification processes, and contributing to a more secure global biosecurity environment that includes both public and private sectors.
Benefits and Challenges
Over the next half-century, blockchain technology is expected to advance significantly, potentially reshaping verification mechanisms under the BWC. Innovations in scalability like sharding techniques and layer-2 solutions—secondary frameworks built on top of the primary blockchain to increase processing speed—will allow blockchain to manage large amounts of data with greater speed and efficiency. 34 New consensus models such as proof of stake and proof of authority will likely replace the energy-heavy proof of work model, creating a faster and more sustainable system. 35 Further, developments in quantum-resistant cryptographic algorithms will strengthen security against future quantum computing threats, helping maintain the reliability and durability of blockchain systems. 36 As interoperability protocols mature, integration between blockchain networks and legacy systems will allow standardized data sharing and communication across BWC member states. 37 As blockchain technology progresses, the BWC will benefit from adaptive strategies to stay flexible and resilient. This involves setting up working groups to monitor technology trends, designing policies that permit incremental updates, and developing modular verification protocols. Research collaborations and capacity-building efforts will be necessary steps toward fully utilizing blockchain’s potential within the BWC.21-23
Combining blockchain with emerging technologies such as AI and IoT could create sophisticated, comprehensive verification systems. AI algorithms can analyze blockchain data to spot patterns related to noncompliance. At the same time, IoT devices like laboratory sensors could generate real-time data on biological material handling and conditions.9,31 This consolidation increases traceability and accountability while reducing risks of unauthorized material use. In the long run, a connected verification ecosystem merging blockchain’s secure ledger with AI’s analytics and IoT’s real-time data could yield unparalleled oversight, supporting the BWC’s mission to prevent the spread of biological weapons. Achieving this vision will require dedicated efforts from BWC member states, international bodies, and industry partners to navigate future challenges and shape a biosecurity framework ready for the next 50 years.
Conclusion
This study demonstrates how blockchain technology’s decentralized, tamper-resistant, and transparent design can help meet the BWC’s ongoing verification challenges. Biological weapons represent a significant threat with the potential for mass casualties, rapid spread, and severe global health impacts.38-40 Unlike nuclear or chemical weapons, biological agents can replicate and evolve, complicating containment if a breach occurs.41,42 Effective oversight is significant as insufficient verification increases the risk of hidden development and misuse of biological agents. 42
Blockchain’s real-time tracking capabilities, secure record-keeping, and automated compliance through smart contracts provide solutions to issues of data integrity, traceability, and trust among member states. 41 This path could fill critical gaps in verification caused by technical, political, and resource limitations, building transparency and cooperation to help prevent the spread of biological weapons. Combining blockchain with technologies like AI and IoT could further strengthen the system’s adaptability to emerging biosecurity threats and technological advancements.9,31,41
Given these findings, BWC member states and international organizations should consider incorporating blockchain into their verification frameworks. This process will require technological updates, supportive policy development, skill-building programs, and global standards to maintain interoperability and compliance. By moving forward with these measures and building collaboration, the global community can reinforce the BWC’s role in protecting public health and keeping the convention resilient in an increasingly complex and technology-driven world.
Footnotes
Acknowledgments
We acknowledge and appreciate the team’s collective effort and commitment to this project.