Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
and other examples of cross-fertilization occurring, the probability of which corporate
and government scientists had previously discounted as being too low to worry
about. In the UK, government regulation has been perceived as inadequate, because
private profit is seemingly given precedence over food security and ecosystem safety.
Consequently, much public trust has migrated to NGOs like Friends of the Earth
and Greenpeace, whose own specific agendas are not viewed as being influenced by
commercial interests (Pilnick, 2002). European consumers have frequently responded
to NGO campaigns against the scientific evidence presented in support of GM by
not purchasing foodstuffs containing GM ingredients. For some NGO critics,
government and corporate scientists seem to deliberately come up with findings
supportive of their employer or funder, rather than making the impartial contributions
to knowledge which Wolpert (1993) and Dunbar (1995) argue true science worth
its name must do. They state that the scientific method is predominantly a dialectical
process, involving detailed hard work, the generation and testing of hypotheses,
experimentation, observation, measurement, deduction and self-criticism. Science
proceeds through very careful assessments of new ideas and findings, and only when
thorough evaluations have been completed, which may take a long time given the
complexity of the problems, will scientists confirm that their theories are well founded.
Regarding GM, in a circumspect article Professor Howard Dalton (2004: 11), the
Chief Scientific Adviser to the UK's Department for Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs (Defra), wrote:
At present, there is no scientific case for ruling out all GM crops and their
products. It would be short-sighted to decide the future of a powerful diverse
new technology on the basis of its application - and in some cases violent
opposition to that application - in only one area, and to ignore the analysis of
risks and benefits in other areas.
There are a whole host of potentially beneficial prospects for GM already in
our sights. On the other hand, there are risks in any new technology, and the
lessons of history tell us that sometimes we have rushed forward to exploit new
technologies, only subsequently to appreciate the medical, social and environ-
mental impacts that these may bring (thalidomide, nuclear energy, pesticides,
mobile phones, and so on).
The European Union has devised and implemented fairly strict regulations
concerning the assessment of possible risks and the labelling of GM produce, which
mainly relates to animal feed and foods for food processing. In 2007 the UK
Government, despite twenty years of protests and continued public scepticism, decided
to proceed with extensive commercial planting of GM crops, irrespective of the risks
and the potential negative consequences for the future of organic agriculture.
Reflexivity and the expert vs. lay knowledge divide
Professor of science studies Brian Wynne (1996) suggests that it would be a mistake
to assume that the lay public have always trusted expert opinion and that only
recently has there been any ambivalence. Ordinary people's trust in expert opinion
has often been 'virtual' or 'as-if', with the lay public forced into a relationship of
