IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

(English) Stories of scientists perception of the public and their impact on the development of biotecnology research on Genetically Modified Organisms in Italy (Italiano) Storie di percezioni del pubblico e del loro impatto nelle esperienze e nei progetti della ricerca italiana sugli Organismi Geneticamente Modificati

Listed author(s):
  • Valentina Amorese
Registered author(s):

    (English) It is possible to argue that the UK represents the natural home for the modern Public Understanding of Science debate. The recent interest showed by Italian researchers towards these issues, which clearly emerges though the development of a number of initiatives including the launch of the academic journal Technoscienza and the Italian STS society (2005), shows that new room to debate these issues is gradually been developed. In this context, in light of the idea according to the relation between science and the public should be organized through the development of hybrid forum and public engagement initiatives, it makes sense to ask how scientists experience the public. In this paper I will try to address these questions, focusing on the case of Genetically Modified Organisms. Thorugh the stories proposed by eleven Italian researchers who worked on GMOs, the article explores how science experience public opinion on GMOs, and how this influenced, or failed to influence, the futures of these products. I conclude that there still exist a number of barriers that still separate science from the public and contribute to move away experience of public engagement and hybrid forums. (Italiano) Si potrebbe dire che il moderno dibattito sul Public Understanding of Science (PUS) trova la sua patria naturale in Gran Bretagna. Il recente interesse dimostrato dagli studiosi italiani verso questi temi, che traspare da iniziative come quelle proposte dalla rivista Tecnoscienza e la nascita della società STS (2005), indica che un nuovo spazio per questo genere di dibattiti si sta sviluppando anche nel nostro paese. In questo contesto, considerando che realtà come gli hibrid forum e public engagement sembrano essere quelle più adatte per impostare la relazione tra scienza società nel contesto attuale, ha senso chiedersi se e come gli scienziati percepiscono il pubblico. In questo articolo, cercherò di rispondere a questa domanda focalizzandomi sul caso delle biotecnologie agrarie e degli organismi geneticamente modificati (OGM). Attraverso le storie di undici scienziati italiani l’articolo esplora come la scienza percepisce l’opinione pubblica sugli OGM e come quest’ultima ha influenzato, o non influenzato, il futuro di questi prodotti. In conclusione, suggerisco che esistono ancora significative barriere tra scienza e pubblico che contribuiscono ad allontanare i ricercatori italiani dal pubblico e ed esperienze quali hibrid forum e public engagement dalle nostre realtà.

    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:
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by National Research Council, Institute for Research on Population and Social Policies in its series IRPPS Working Papers with number 44:2012.

    in new window

    Date of creation: 2012
    Handle: RePEc:cnz:wpaper:44:2012
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    Via Palestro, 32, 00185 - Rome

    Phone: (+39) 06 492724200
    Fax: (+39) 06 49383724
    Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

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

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

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cnz:wpaper:44:2012. 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: (Sveva Avveduto)

    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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.