Assiste-t-on (réellement) à une polarisation du débat sur les OGM ? Une perspective internationale sur la période 2000-2010

How can we explain that the use of genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) in food and horticulture is an issue in France and in Europe, where they are hardly used, and yet seems to be taken for granted in the US, where their use is widespread? Many observers see this as a sign that American consumers have accepted transgenic foods, due to a different attitude to risks, food and nature. This explanation has been discussed since with a focus on the institutional dynamics of the public debate. Our paper can be considered as an extension of these previous researches, although we criticize the ?bias assimilation and polarization hypothesis? about a public opinion split on this issue. Our data come from the 2000-2010 ISSP (International Social Survey Program) on environment. The heterogeneous choice (aka location-scale) model helps us to separate the effects of time and country. For some countries, we show a gentle increase of risk perception of GM crops (measured on a Likert scale) but a small decrease of the variance, suggesting a fall in the extremist view.