Panelists navigate the complex terrain of agricultural regulatory strategy at NCLifeSci agtech forum

IP strategy, trade secrets and the cost of transparency 

A significant portion of the discussion turned to intellectual property, particularly the tension between protecting proprietary methods and the transparency regulators require. Sloan described a nine-year process her prior company undertook to register a new class of disinfectant the EPA had never seen before. The lengthy engagement ultimately produced an unexpected competitive advantage: under the new protocol development process, the EPA was prohibited from disclosing the protocol to competitors until the product reached store shelves. 

"It allowed us around a three-year march to be the only people in market," Sloan said. "You couldn't have fast followers." 

Doyle reinforced the risks of trying to shield too much from regulators. 

"If you don't tell them, they're going to find out down the road, and it's going to cost you time and money," he said. "There are completeness checks all over the place. You have to have that investment." 

The panel agreed that getting executive teams to accept the level of disclosure regulators require is often a challenge in itself. Sloan's approach is direct. 

"Resistance is futile," she said. "You might not like it, you might not agree with it, you might not even know the logic behind it. But in the end, you have to do what is asked of you. There is no other option if you want to sell something into market." 

Resource constraints and the value of outside expertise 

The discussion of big-company versus small-company realities drew candid observations from all four panelists. Sloan, who leads a five-person startup after years at a global corporation, was clear about what small companies should not try to do alone. 

"There are people who have spent their careers getting to know the regulators that you need to know. You do not need to reinvent that wheel," Sloan said. "You need to find that person." 

Doyle described a philosophy of strict internal prioritization under resource constraints, pushing back on business teams to produce a clear business case before any regulatory work begins. For external support, he invests deliberately in relationships with top consultants. 

"You find a good consultant, treat them like gold," Doyle said. 

Kelliher noted that NC State's gene editing center has relied heavily on a single regulatory consultant with deep relationships in the field — someone who not only knows the processes but can write the dossiers and navigate international markets. 

The role of AI and North Carolina's support network 

The final exchanges touched on artificial intelligence and on the value of North Carolina's life sciences support infrastructure. Panelists agreed that AI holds real promise for speeding up regulatory work — building clearer dossiers, synthesizing data across multiple regulatory frameworks — but emphasized the need for human oversight. 

"We use AI to help us dig through data, but it's always with a human backdrop," Sloan said. "It's still hallucinating, because it's still a thing." 

Doyle noted that the EPA itself is investing in AI to improve internal processes, particularly for repeatable review tasks. 

All four panelists singled out the North Carolina Biotechnology Center as a meaningful resource in their work — both for direct support and for the connections it has helped facilitate. 

"North Carolina has a very good allied industry that supports startups, helps us find our way and navigate our way," Sloan said. "It's a really good place to start. We've been through a few other Ag states, and it just doesn't feel as if you have that same infrastructure build as you do here." 

Doyle, who noted he has no intention of leaving the state despite his company's headquarters moving to St. Louis, put it plainly. 

"This is North Carolina. I'm never leaving," he said. "I have all my connections here, and it's world class."