Agriculture and Human Values 39 (1):151-164 (2022)

Abstract
Public opinion can affect the adoption of genome editing technologies. In food production, genome editing can be applied to a wide range of applications, in different species and with different purposes. This study analyzed how the public responds to five different applications of genome editing, varying the species involved and the proposed purpose of the modification. Three of the applications described the introduction of disease resistance within different species, and two targeted product quality and quantity in cattle. Online surveys in Canada, the US, Austria, Germany and Italy were carried out with a total sample size of 3698 participants. Using a between-subject design, participants were confronted with one of the five applications and asked to decide whether they considered it right or wrong. Perceived risks, benefits, and the perception of the technology as tampering with nature were surveyed and were complemented with socio-demographics and a measure of the participants’ moral foundations. In all countries, participants evaluated the application of disease resistance in humans as most right to do, followed by disease resistance in plants, and then in animals, and considered changes in product quality and quantity in cattle as least right to do. However, US and Italian participants were generally more positive toward all scenarios, and German and Austrian participants more negative. Cluster analyses identified four groups of participants: ‘strong supporters’ who saw only benefits and little risks, ‘slight supporters’ who perceived risks and valued benefits, ‘neutrals’ who showed no pronounced opinion, and ‘opponents’ who perceived higher risks and lower benefits. This research contributes to understanding public response to applications of genome editing, revealing differences that can help guide decisions related to adoption of these technologies.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s10460-021-10235-9
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 69,177
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Moral Psychology for the Twenty-First Century.Jonathan Haidt - 2013 - Journal of Moral Education 42 (3):281-297.
Dimensions of Naturalness.Helena Siipi - 2008 - Ethics and the Environment 13 (1):pp. 71-103.

View all 15 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Public Views on Gene Editing and its Uses.Hub Zwart, George Gaskell & Imre Bard - 2017 - Nature Biotechnology 35 (11):121-123.
Untangling the Promises of Human Genome Editing.Katherine Drabiak - 2018 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 46 (4):991-1009.
Human Genome Editing and Ethical Considerations.Kewal Krishan, Tanuj Kanchan & Bahadur Singh - 2016 - Science and Engineering Ethics 22 (2):597-599.
Debating Genome Editing Technologies.Lukas Kaelin - 2018 - In Matthias Braun, Hannah Schickl & Peter Dabrock (eds.), Between Moral Hazard and Legal Uncertainty: Ethical, Legal and Societal Challenges of Human Genome Editing. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. pp. 187-201.
A Path Through the Morass.Giulia Cavaliere - 2018 - In Matthias Braun, Hannah Schickl & Peter Dabrock (eds.), Between Moral Hazard and Legal Uncertainty: Ethical, Legal and Societal Challenges of Human Genome Editing. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. pp. 203-225.
Playing It Safe? Precaution, Risk, and Responsibility in Human Genome Editing.Sarah Chan - 2020 - Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 63 (1):111-125.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2021-07-03

Total views
2 ( #1,442,829 of 2,499,401 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #418,166 of 2,499,401 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes