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

(English) Comparative analysis of two case studies on Genetically Modified Organisms research in Italy and the UK (Italiano) Analisi comparativa di due casi di studi di progetti di ricerca sugli Organismi Geneticamente Modificati in Italia e Inghilterra

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

    (English) This paper explores two research projects, the Farm Scale Evaluation (FSE) in the UK and GMOs in Agriculture in Italy. It asks what political, social or economic factors contributed to scientific responses to negative public opinion. The data I use for this paper range from mass media reports, government documents, scientific papers, websites and interviews with journalists and researchers. Comparing these two case studies, I contend that there are six main factors that influence scientists’ listening capacity. These include government, position and culture of science, private companies, types of publics, mass media and PUS academic debate. Finally, I contend that, as Wynne (2006) suggests, discourses of communication between science and society are positioned in close relation with the local cultures of science and policies. (Italiano) Questo articolo esplora due casi di studio di progetti di ricerca, Farm Scale evaluation e OGM in Agricoltura, sugli Organismi Genticamente Modificati, e si domanda quali fattori politici, sociali ed economici hanno contribuito a costruire le risposte della scienza alla resistenza del pubblico verso gli OGM. I dati che vengono utilizzati includono, articoli di giornale, documenti governativi, articoli accademici, siti web e interviste con giornalisti e ricercatori che hanno partecipato direttamente o indirettamente a questi progetti. Paragonando questi progetti emergono sei fattori dominanti che sembrano maggiormente influire sulla capacità degli scienziati di ascoltare il pubblico. Questi includono: il governo, la posizione della scienza nel contesto culturale italiano, le aziende private, i tipi di pubblico, il ruolo dei mass media nella comunicazione scientifica, e la natura del dibattito relativo al Public Understanding of Science. In conclusione, come suggerisce Brian Wynne (2006), i discorsi relativi alla comunicazione della scienza si collocano in stretta relazione alla cultura locale relativa alla comunicazione e politica della scienza.

    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 45:2012.

    in new window

    Date of creation: 2012
    Handle: RePEc:cnz:wpaper:45:2012
    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:45:2012. 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.