IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/agrhuv/v40y2023i3d10.1007_s10460-023-10436-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Improving the agri-food biotechnology conversation: bridging science communication with science and technology studies

Author

Listed:
  • Garrett M. Broad

    (Rowan University, Edelman College of Communication & Creative Arts)

Abstract

At a time when agri-food biotechnologies are receiving a surge of investment, innovation, and public interest in the United States, it is common to hear both supporters and critics call for open and inclusive dialogue on the topic. Social scientists have a potentially important role to play in these discursive engagements, but the legacy of the intractable genetically modified (GM) food debate calls for some reflection regarding the best ways to shape the norms of that conversation. This commentary argues that agri-food scholars interested in promoting a more constructive agri-food biotechnology discussion could do so by blending key insights, as well as guarding against key shortcomings, from the fields of science communication and science and technology studies (STS). Science communication’s collaborative and translational approach to the public understanding of science has proven pragmatically valuable to scientists in academia, government, and private industry, but it has too often remained wedded to deficit model approaches and struggled to explore deeper questions of public values and corporate power. STS’s critical approach has highlighted the need for multi-stakeholder power-sharing and the integration of diverse knowledge systems into public engagement, but it has done little to grapple with the prevalence of misinformation in movements against GM foods and other agri-food biotechnologies. Ultimately, a better agri-food biotechnology conversation will require a strong foundation in scientific literacy as well as conceptual grounding in the social studies of science. The paper concludes by describing how, with attention to the structure, content, and style of public engagement in the agri-food biotechnology debates, social scientists can play a productive conversational role across a variety of academic, institutional, community-level, and mediated contexts.

Suggested Citation

  • Garrett M. Broad, 2023. "Improving the agri-food biotechnology conversation: bridging science communication with science and technology studies," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(3), pages 929-938, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:40:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1007_s10460-023-10436-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s10460-023-10436-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10460-023-10436-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10460-023-10436-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrew Kliskey & Paula Williams & David L. Griffith & Virginia H. Dale & Chelsea Schelly & Anna-Maria Marshall & Valoree S. Gagnon & Weston M. Eaton & Kristin Floress, 2021. "Thinking Big and Thinking Small: A Conceptual Framework for Best Practices in Community and Stakeholder Engagement in Food, Energy, and Water Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-19, February.
    2. Ryan, Camille D. & Schaul, Andrew J. & Butner, Ryan & Swarthout, John T., 2020. "Monetizing disinformation in the attention economy: The case of genetically modified organisms (GMOs)," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 7-18.
    3. Carmen Bain & Sonja Lindberg & Theresa Selfa, 2020. "Emerging sociotechnical imaginaries for gene edited crops for foods in the United States: implications for governance," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 37(2), pages 265-279, June.
    4. Natalie G. Mueller & Andrew Flachs, 2022. "Domestication, crop breeding, and genetic modification are fundamentally different processes: implications for seed sovereignty and agrobiodiversity," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(1), pages 455-472, March.
    5. Madeleine Fairbairn & Zenia Kish & Julie Guthman, 2022. "Pitching agri-food tech: performativity and non-disruptive disruption in Silicon Valley," Journal of Cultural Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(5), pages 652-670, September.
    6. Glenn Davis Stone & Dominic Glover, 2017. "Disembedding grain: Golden Rice, the Green Revolution, and heirloom seeds in the Philippines," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(1), pages 87-102, March.
    7. Maywa Montenegro de Wit, 2022. "Can agroecology and CRISPR mix? The politics of complementarity and moving toward technology sovereignty," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(2), pages 733-755, June.
    8. Philip M. Fernbach & Nicholas Light & Sydney E. Scott & Yoel Inbar & Paul Rozin, 2019. "Extreme opponents of genetically modified foods know the least but think they know the most," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 3(3), pages 251-256, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mascha Gugganig & Karly Ann Burch & Julie Guthman & Kelly Bronson, 2023. "Contested agri-food futures: Introduction to the Special Issue," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(3), pages 787-798, September.
    2. Hirt, Léon F. & Sahakian, Marlyne & Trutnevyte, Evelina, 2022. "What subnational imaginaries for solar PV? The case of the Swiss energy transition," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    3. Sally Murray, 2017. "New technologies create opportunities," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2017-156, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    4. Glover, Dominic & Kim, Sung Kyu & Stone, Glenn Davis, 2020. "Golden Rice and technology adoption theory: A study of seed choice dynamics among rice growers in the Philippines," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    5. Sarah Ruth Sippel, 2023. "Tackling land’s ‘stubborn materiality’: the interplay of imaginaries, data and digital technologies within farmland assetization," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(3), pages 849-863, September.
    6. Kok, Kristiaan P.W. & Klerkx, Laurens, 2023. "Addressing the politics of mission-oriented agricultural innovation systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    7. Caroline Hambloch & Kai Mausch & Costanza Conti & Andy Hall, 2023. "Simple solutions for complex problems? What is missing in agriculture for nutrition interventions," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 15(2), pages 363-379, April.
    8. William Lacy, 2023. "Local food systems, citizen and public science, empowered communities, and democracy: hopes deserving to live," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(1), pages 1-17, March.
    9. John C. Beghin & Christopher R. Gustafson, 2021. "Consumer Valuation of and Attitudes towards Novel Foods Produced with New Plant Engineering Techniques: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-17, October.
    10. John C. Beghin & Heidi Schweizer, 2021. "Agricultural Trade Costs," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(2), pages 500-530, June.
    11. Shahida Anusha Siddiqui & Zarnab Asif & Misbah Murid & Ito Fernando & Danung Nur Adli & Andrey Vladimirovich Blinov & Alexey Borisovich Golik & Widya Satya Nugraha & Salam A. Ibrahim & Seid Mahdi Jafa, 2022. "Consumer Social and Psychological Factors Influencing the Use of Genetically Modified Foods—A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-22, November.
    12. Romain Espinosa & Jan Stoop, 2021. "Do people really want to be informed? Ex-ante evaluations of information-campaign effectiveness," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(4), pages 1131-1155, December.
    13. Weston M. Eaton & Kathryn J. Brasier & Mark E. Burbach & Stephanie Kennedy & Jodi L. Delozier & Sara Esther Bonilla Anariba & Hannah T. Whitley & Walt Whitmer & Nicole Santangelo, 2023. "A new approach for studying social, behavioral, and environmental change through stakeholder engagement in water resource management," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 13(3), pages 389-403, September.
    14. Robin Siebert & Christian Herzig & Marc Birringer, 2022. "Strategic framing of genome editing in agriculture: an analysis of the debate in Germany in the run-up to the European Court of Justice ruling," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(2), pages 617-632, June.
    15. Gerlak, Andrea K. & Guido, Zack & Owen, Gigi & McGoffin, Mariana Sofia Rodriguez & Louder, Elena & Davies, Julia & Smith, Kelly Jay & Zimmer, Andy & Murveit, Anna M. & Meadow, Alison & Shrestha, Padme, 2023. "Stakeholder engagement in the co-production of knowledge for environmental decision-making," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    16. Shen-Long Yang & Feng Yu & Kai Li & Ting-Ting Rao & Da-Peng Lian, 2022. "No Control, No Consumption: Association of Low Perceived Control and Intention to Accept Genetically Modified Food," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-13, June.
    17. Caroline Ritter & Adam Shriver & Emilie McConnachie & Jesse Robbins & Marina A G von Keyserlingk & Daniel M Weary, 2019. "Public attitudes toward genetic modification in dairy cattle," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(12), pages 1-15, December.
    18. Sara Maestre-Andrés & Stefan Drews & Ivan Savin & Jeroen Bergh, 2021. "Carbon tax acceptability with information provision and mixed revenue uses," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-10, December.
    19. Ethan A. Meyers & Martin H. Turpin & Michał Białek & Jonathan A. Fugelsang & Derek J. Koehler, 2020. "Inducing feelings of ignorance makes people more receptive to expert (economist) opinion," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(6), pages 909-925, November.
    20. Karly Burch & Julie Guthman & Mascha Gugganig & Kelly Bronson & Matt Comi & Katharine Legun & Charlotte Biltekoff & Garrett Broad & Samara Brock & Susanne Freidberg & Patrick Baur & Diana Mincyte, 2023. "Social science – STEM collaborations in agriculture, food and beyond: an STSFAN manifesto," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(3), pages 939-949, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:40:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1007_s10460-023-10436-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.