Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Biotechnology and Public opinion: The results of a citizens’ jury case study

Contents:

Author Info

  • Mora, C.
  • Menozzi, D.
  • Sogari, G.
  • Brennan, M.
  • Raley, M.
  • Frewer, L. J.
Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) have been a controversial topic in recent years: while the scientific community has largely accepted the validity and safety of using this biotechnology in the food industry, public opinion still shows a certain suspicion and fear. The legislator is interested in knowing how public opinion could be engaged and what policy decisions regarding the assessment of the risks and benefits of GM animals and derived products might be addressed. This paper focuses on a Citizens’ Jury event organized in Parma (Italy) in 2012 in the context of the EU project PEGASUS (Public Perception of Genetically modified Animals – Science, Utility and Society, 7th FP). The main goal of the Citizens’ Jury was to address public perspectives and demonstrate ‘best practice’ in public engagement in order to develop future policy recommendations regarding innovation in the area of GM animals. The process, the potential role of citizens’ juries as a technique for engaging with the public about the development and application of Genetically Modified (GM) animals in the food and pharmaceutical industry and significant results are presented here. In particular, two case studies have been presented: growth-enhanced GH transgenic salmon and polyclonal antibodies from transgenic rabbits.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/149921
    Download Restriction: no

    Bibliographic Info

    Paper provided by Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA) in its series 2013 Second Congress, June 6-7, 2013, Parma, Italy with number 149921.

    as in new window
    Length:
    Date of creation: Jun 2013
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:ags:aiea13:149921

    Contact details of provider:
    Web page: http://www.aieaa.org/
    More information through EDIRC

    Related research

    Keywords: Genetically modified (GM) animals; public consultations; citizens’ jury; GM policies; Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies; Research Methods/ Statistical Methods; Teaching/Communication/Extension/Profession; Q57; Q18; D11;

    Find related papers by JEL classification:

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    References

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    Citations

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aiea13:149921. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search).

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.