Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
risks revealed in the risk assessment. Policy makers and risk managers, in
interaction with all parties affected by the decision - monitor the impact
of those actions.
Effective Risk Communication
Periodic survey studies, such as the Eurobarometer, provide informa-
tion that contributes to the policy debate.
76
The surveys play an impor-
tant role in shaping public discussion of GM applications, but are unable
to illuminate complex ethical considerations and worldviews.
77
Focus
groups on GMOs might produce more nuanced explanations.
78
For
example, a Danish method of deliberation, the “consensus conference,”
provides a forum for dialogue between a panel of scientists and a panel
of citizens.
79
Consensus conferences attempt to bridge the gap between
experts' knowledge and laypeople's understanding of a risk. However,
the group discussion approach can lead both sides to adhere to their orig-
inal positions, undermining the potential of group discussions.
80
Promis-
ing results in negotiation between citizens and (local) political councils
have been reached with techniques for stakeholders management. This
method could be adapted to the purpose of the decision-making process
for GMO crops and foods. If wisely used, the Internet provides a promis-
ing new platform that may be part of an approach for public consultation
and communication.
76
G. Gaskell, Science Policy and Society: The British debate over GM Agriculture, 15
Current Opinion in Biotechnology
241-245 (2004).
77
H. Dietrich, & R. Schibeci, Beyond Public Perceptions of Gene Technology: Com-
munity Participation in Public Policy in Australia, 12
Public Understanding of Science
381-401 (2003).
78
E. F. Einsiedel & J. Medlock, A Public Consultation on Plant Molecular Farming, 8
AgBioForum
, 26-32 (2005).
79
E. F. Einsiedel et al., Publics at the Technology Table: The Consensus Conference in
Denmark, Canada, and Australia, 10
Public Understanding of Science
83-98 (2001).
80
G. Rowe & L. J. Frewer, Public Participation Methods: A Framework for Evaluation,
25
Science, Technology and Human Values
3-29 (2000).
