Biotechnology perceptions: medical vs. food
biotechnology on society. In a recent collaborative research
project, funded by the European Commission, social scientists from
16 European countries, Canada and the US explored how biotechnology
is perceived in policy making, mass media coverage and by the
public.
Governments and companies the world over are feeling the impact of biotechnology on society. In a recent collaborative research project, funded by the European Commission, social scientists from 16 European countries, Canada and the US explored how biotechnology is perceived in policy making, mass media coverage and by the public.
A key finding from researchers was that while medical biotechnologies attract widespread support and perceived risks are tolerated, agri-food applications are widely rejected.
Since 1996, there has been an increasing differentiation in the public's view of the 'red' (medical) and 'green' (agri-food) biotechnologies. The public appears unwilling to support applications with no perceived benefits.
Strongly associated with levels of support are beliefs that green biotechnologies are 'unnatural' and might lead to 'potentially catastrophic consequences'.
Researchers also found that the level of support for biotechnology varies widely across countries. The more supportive countries are Finland, the Netherlands, the US and Canada, while Greece, Austria, France and Denmark are far less supportive. In keeping with the 'red' acceptance, GM medicines are supported in all countries. By contrast the majority are opposed to GM foods in all but Finland, Spain, Canada and the US.
According to the study, a common concern among people is the unknown consequence of GM foods for future generations and the possibility of delayed effects.
Biotechnology is likened in the study to a "runaway train", on a high speed and unstoppable journey to an unknown destination, fuelled by industrial science, without brakes and ignoring the warning signals of public opinion. And while people want effective regulation, they wonder if it is possible because of the speed of scientific and technological developments, the need for international regulation and co-operation and the perceived weakness of democratic institutions in comparison to multinational companies.
The report concludes that while new legislation (2001/18/EC) may allay anxieties about regulatory issues, it is unlikely that public opinion will shift to a more positive stance until GM foods are seen to offer clear benefits.
Further information about the report cant be found on the project website.
