It is increasingly argued that we are entering into a 'biotech century', in which biotechnology promises major advances in agricultural productivity.  The development of biotechnology is not a straightforward affair, however, and the advent of GMOs has led to public protest and consumer resistance.  This paper draws upon a comparative Australian-UK project concerned with the role of regulation and governance in mediating the debates and managing the associated risks.  Regulatory responses and the mediation of conflicts by the Australian and UK governments have been shaped by the institutional and policy environments in these two countries.  The implications of these public debates and regulatory responses for the capture of competitive opportunities are considered.  The fact that the two countries have broadly similar systems of governance and regulation reveals how alike the circumstances are in many respects.  But at the same time there are important differences in both the style and the content of the policy debates.  In both the UK and Australia, the respective central governments remain committed to a 'biotechnology future'.  Against this background, there is little doubt that the choices about biotechnology will play a defining role in shaping the future of rural places.