Note: I am referring only to technical biosecurity in this post, i.e. engineering, not policy roles.
I’m an engineering undergrad thinking about contributing to the engineering side of biosecurity as a career —things like developing better disease sensors and bioaerosol monitoring systems (and other work that is not molecular biology-heavy). However, when trying to assess how saturated the field is, I’ve seen some discouraging signs.
For example, engineering roles in biosecurity and pandemic prevention seem quite scarce, and among the positions that are available, many are senior-level. Even when entry-level roles do exist, applicant-to-position ratios can appear extremely high; every listing I saw on Linkedin had an applicant ratio of 300:1+. As for how saturated academia is, most opportunities seem to be for graduate students or postdocs, and even those appear to skew heavily toward molecular biology rather than engineering students. (And that’s without even getting into how difficult it is to become a professor.)
The only reason I’m still seriously considering the field is that biosecurity is a major EA cause area, so it seems that people are expecting substantial new funding to enter the field over the next several years. However, I’m not sure how realistic that expectation is, especially given how limited the current job market appears.
That leaves me with a few questions:
Based off the current job listings, it seems that the ratio of qualified applicants to available roles in biosecurity is extremely high, 50:1+ or more, both for entry-level and more senior technical positions. Is that generally true? Or am I just looking at the wrong Linkedin positions?
If so, what is the best way for someone to currently contribute to the field? Is waiting for more opportunities to open up really the only reasonable response?
Moreover, are there good reasons to believe that many more opportunities will open up soon? For example, are major philanthropists or funders beginning to pivot more seriously toward supporting biosecurity work? 80,000 Hours seems to assume that substantial funding will soon enter the field, but is that actually a realistic expectation?
Note: I am referring only to technical biosecurity in this post, i.e. engineering, not policy roles.
I’m an engineering undergrad thinking about contributing to the engineering side of biosecurity as a career —things like developing better disease sensors and bioaerosol monitoring systems (and other work that is not molecular biology-heavy). However, when trying to assess how saturated the field is, I’ve seen some discouraging signs.
For example, engineering roles in biosecurity and pandemic prevention seem quite scarce, and among the positions that are available, many are senior-level. Even when entry-level roles do exist, applicant-to-position ratios can appear extremely high; every listing I saw on Linkedin had an applicant ratio of 300:1+. As for how saturated academia is, most opportunities seem to be for graduate students or postdocs, and even those appear to skew heavily toward molecular biology rather than engineering students. (And that’s without even getting into how difficult it is to become a professor.)
The only reason I’m still seriously considering the field is that biosecurity is a major EA cause area, so it seems that people are expecting substantial new funding to enter the field over the next several years. However, I’m not sure how realistic that expectation is, especially given how limited the current job market appears.
That leaves me with a few questions: