|
|
| |
| [HOME
> AROUND THE WORLD
] |
|
|
|
There have been several major surveys on attitudes to biotechnology.
Understanding, the public image of biotechnology is useful for different
groups of people. These type of studies have at least two purposes, one being
academic study, and the other being public relations for the biotechnology
industry. Both of these purposes are relevant to the formulation of policy
that will be appropriate to each country. There are few surveys looking at the
acceptance of biotechnology in developing countries. In 1993 the International
Bioethics Survey was conducted in Australia, Hong Kong, India, Israel, Japan,
New Zealand, The Philippines, Russia, Singapore and Thailand, with the aid of
collaborators. The survey finds that people have both hopes and fears about
biotechnology, in different countries we see a similarly diverse range of
opinions, and in all cases more support is given for specific applications
that are perceived to be for a worthy goal than for general questions.
|
Although
people have always faced risk, and at least in the nineteenth and twentieth
centuries, have faced technological forces which transform society,
biotechnology has more critics than most. These studies suggest many of the
claims that critics make may not represent the views of ordinary people.
Perhaps this influence is no where stronger than
in Europe, as seen in the controversy associated with the bans on the use of
BST made by genetic engineering to boost milk production, and on the US
situation where the FDA opposes labels on products associated with genetic
engineering. An educated public should assess the claims made by different
groups, depending upon the trust they have in them, and may alter its views,
as seen in a survey in Canada . There is also the continuing debate over
patenting policy. These studies must be used responsibly, rather than just
to allow better plans for the next line of commercials - public attitude
making - rather than for seeing what the public has to say.
The people were all supportive of science and technology in general, and
appeared to balance benefit and risk, showing discretion over the use of
genetic engineering for enhancement, and realistic reasoning in responses to
questions. This conflicts with the commonly held position that the public is
uneducated and naive about the application of biotechnology. That claim is
based on the argument that new technology presents novel choices - which is
wrong, the choices themselves have existed before even if the means for
effecting them were less efficient. These glimpses into the public image of
biotechnology provide much food for thought, but we recognize the image may
change.
Taking into consideration of the world
yield of maize and rice (image below respectively), it is clearly seen that
Africa is a bit behind to implementation of biotechnology even with
procession of some of the worlds richest farmlands.
Perhaps, if there is more campaign Africans
might embrace biotechnology and certainly life will be easier. |
| |
|
|
RICE PRODUCTION ACROSS THE GLOBE |
MAIZE
PRODUCTION ACROSS THE GLOBE |
 |
| |
| |
|
| |
