Public Perception Issues in Agricultural and Environmental Biotechnology

Introduction

The recent introduction and debate surrounding two genetically engineered food products, Flavr-Savr tomatos and BST milk (bovine somatotropin injections to increase milk production in cattle) have demonstrated the sensitivity of the general public to biotechnology-derived products. There is growing recognition of the need to accept and involve the public as a legitimate partner in the biotechnology debate. However, such inclusion needs to be preceeded by identification of the specific issues that concern the public. This study identified biotechnology issues of public concern through content analysis of opinion surveys and the popular press.

Many types of engineered crops, fruits, trees, and ornamentals are expected to be on the market by the turn of the century, and numerous environmental applications of engineered microorganisms are under development as well. Regardless of the intentions of the biotechnology sector and the potential benefits, biotechnology can also be constrained and its benefits never fully realized. The voting public, through perceptions of biotechnology, will have a great influence on which direction biotechnology will follow. Surveys have indicated that some respondents have a limited and disturbing view of biotechnology. As an example, in one survey less than 25% of the respondents felt they understood introductory science concepts, and they indicated that most of their information on biotechnology was received from television (90%) and newspaper (80%) sources.

The United States is in the process of developing a detailed biotechnology regulatory system, although it is not yet clear how comprehensive it will be. Even with this regulatory structure, substantial concerns are still frequently voiced about biotechnology applications relating to environmental impacts, agricultural uses, food safety and labeling issues, and the need for a public voice in the regulatory framework. Such concerns were readily evident in the litigation that surrounded the commercialization of Flavr-Savr tomatos and the recent agreement between the Canadian government and industry to a 12-month voluntary moratorium on the sale of the BST hormone. Unsympathetic scientific responses to these public concerns--in language often incomprehensible to the majority of citizens--have further exacerbated concerns that science, in its hubris or ignorance, will create agricultural or environmental problems that will be very difficult and costly to resolve.

Study Methodology

Five hundred and one sources (16 surveys and 485 popular press sources consisting of 264 news stories and 221 magazine articles) were examined to reveal common threads of public concern and perceived attitudes towards biotechnology. To locate sources, a string of related keywords was used to search four electronic indices covering 1987 through 1994. The indices were the Infotrac Database of Current Periodicals, The National Newspaper Index, AGRICOLA (the National Agricultural Library database), and DIALOG (a commercial index of over 400 topic-specific databases). The sources were classified by origin, either surveys or popular press, and the issues addressed in each source were sorted into eight main categories and numerically encoded (1-8) to correspond to the appropriate category. Issues were then classified into related groups within categories. Recoding of issues by a different investigator was used to check reliability in issue identification and classification.

The number of times that an issue appeared in each type of source was determined as a frequency score (represented as a percentage). Statistical analysis was performed within each main category and included the Chi-square test for goodness of fit (this determined if the collected data was "normal" and therefore adequate for evaluation), and analysis of variance with Tukeys w test to identify differences between source means.

Results and Conclusions

The public in this study comprised that segment of the population that was included as respondents in the surveys, as well as a more general public that obtained information on biotechnology from the popular press. The surveys included very comprehensive studies of over 1,000 respondents from the general public as well as specialized surveys that targeted one specific group, usually with less than 300 respondents. This study attempted to define issues from a wide section of the public by being as inclusive as possible in accessing and compiling results from surveys and the popular press.

The 501 sources yielded 596 issues because some sources (mainly surveys) addressed more than one issue. The level of agreement (reliability) based on the second encoding of issues was 88%. A list of 25 issue groups, and their frequency score by source, was developed under eight main categories (e.g., foods, animals, plants, etc.) and is presented in Table 1. None of the issues are mutually exclusive, and several could have been placed under more than one category.

The issues identified under genetically engineered microorganisms and plants appeared with low to moderate frequency (20% to 50% range) from both sources (Table 1). While there was a difference between sources on engineered plants regarding invasion of sensitive habitats (issue 6), the frequency from both sources was low. There were no differences between sources in the issues for genetically engineered animals, and the frequency for all issues ranged from moderate (42.6%) to moderately high (69.2%). The major issues in the microorganisms and plants categories were environmental effects while ethics and welfare issues were predominant in the genetically engineered animals category. Four issues were identified under engineered foods, and these appeared with a moderately high to high frequency, except for consumer acceptance, (issue 13) which had a moderately low frequency (33% to 44%). The cost and nutritional content of engineered foods (issue 10), appeared more frequently in opinion surveys than in the popular press.

Issues relating to the use of biotechnology products and ethical/moral considerations about the creation and application of biotechnology products (issues 14 & 15) appeared most frequently in surveys (Table 1). Issues of patenting and freedom of information appeared with moderate frequency while the impact of biotechnology on farming (issue 17) appeared with moderately low frequency. Risk assessment and regulatory issues appeared with with equal frequency from both sources. Public safety (issue 18) had the single highest frequency rating (78.5%) of all the issues in this study. Public input and risk acceptance appeared with moderate frequency in both sources. The impact of biotechnology education (issue 21) had a high frequency while the role of television and the press (issue 22) had a moderately high frequency from both sources. Academic responsibility to the public (issue 23) appeared more often in the popular press, and at a low frequency (26.3%) in surveys. Two international issues were identified (public safety and product availability), and appeared with equal and moderate frequency from both sources.

The approach of this project was from the public's viewpoint, and the intent was neither to advocate nor critique any one segment of biotechnology, but rather to first identify public perception issues and then provide some level of ranking that could be used to indicate importance. However, identification and ranking is only the first step in addressing these issues of importance to the public, and many (e.g., issues 8, 13, 15, and 22) will require joint consideration of both scienctific and societal values. The public has already been the focus of different biotechnology initiatives that attempt to address public concerns. Such initiatives have included adding the public as a partner in the biotechnology debate, using the media to develop public awareness, instituting nationwide biotechnology public school programs, and developing a special regulatory structure to meet legitimate public concerns.

To be most successful, such proposals should focus on issues of greatest importance to the public. Based on the results of this study those issues include: ethical and health concerns with engineered animals; value, nutrition, and safety issues with engineered foods; the application of and ethical considerations in the creation of biotechnology products; public safety and input into the regulatory process; and the impact of biotechnology education, especially the role of television and the press.

It is hoped that this study of issue identification will serve to enhance and direct dialog, in an atmosphere of mutual respect, where issues of importance to the public can be discussed, and potential solutions and specific recommendations then formulated to address these issues.

Acknowledgment

This project was supported by the National Biological Impact Assessment Program, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). The views are solely those of the authors and no official USDA endorsement should be inferred.