Brussels, 02 Aug 2006

A report to the European Commission's Directorate-General for Research

George Gaskell (g.gaskell@lse.ac.uk), Associate Director of the Centre for the study of Bioscience, Biomedicine, Biotechnology and Society (BIOS) at the London School of Economics convened the group to design, analyse and interpret the Eurobarometer 64.3 on Biotechnology. The opinions expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not represent the view of DG Research.

Summary of key findings

Introduction

This is the sixth in a series of Eurobarometer surveys on biotechnology. The surveys have been conducted in 1991, 1993, 1996, 1999, 2002 and 2005. The survey is based on a representative sample of 25,000 respondents, approximately 1,000 in each EU Member State. Currently, issues such as stem cell research, the co-existence of GM, conventional and organic farming, the use of genetic information, and other innovations such as nanotechnology and pharmacogenetics are under discussion. Furthermore debates about broader issues such as the governance of science and citizen engagement continue.

This survey is intended as a contribution to the informed public and policy debate on these and related issues.

ߣߣÊÓƵ

Overview

The portrait of European citizens painted by the 2005 survey shows them to be increasingly optimistic about biotechnology, more informed and more trusting of the biotechnology system. The European public is not risk-averse about technological innovations that are seen to promise tangible benefits. While the majority are willing to delegate responsibility on new technologies to experts, making decisions on the basis on the scientific evidence, a substantial minority would like to see greater weight given to moral and ethical considerations in decision taking about science and technology and to the voices of the public. There is widespread support for medical (red) and industrial (white) biotechnologies, but general opposition to agricultural (green) biotechnologies in all but a few countries. Europeans are interested in finding out about the risks and benefits associated with stem cell research, a utilitarian approach that informs their generally supportive view of this technology. The lesson for agri- food biotechnology is that unless new crops and products are seen to have consumer benefits, the public will continue to be sceptical. Looking across public perceptions of a range of technologies, resistance to GM food is the exception rather than the rule. There is no evidence that opposition to GM food is a manifestation of a wider disenchantment with science and technology in general. Optimism about the contribution of technology to society

Europeans are generally optimistic about the contribution of technology to our way of life. An index of optimism shows a high and stable level for computers and information technology and solar energy from 1991 to 2005. Over the same period the index for biotechnology declined steeply from 1991 to 1999. From 1999 to 2005 the trend reversed, and now biotechnology is back to the same level of optimism seen in 1991. Optimism about nanotechnology has increased since 2002 ­ the ratio of optimists to pessimists is eight to one. Europeans have become less pessimistic about nuclear power, but the pessimists still outnumber the optimists, even in France.

ߣߣÊÓƵ

Nanotechnology, pharmacogenetics and gene therapy

Europeans support the development of nanotechnology, pharmacogenetics and gene therapy. All three technologies are perceived as useful to society and morally acceptable. Neither nanotechnology nor pharmcogenetics are perceived to be risky. While gene therapy is seen as a risk for society, Europeans are prepared to discount this risk as they perceive the technology to be both useful and morally acceptable.

GM food

Overall, a majority of Europeans thinks that GM food should not be encouraged. GM food is seen by them as not being useful, as morally unacceptable and as a risk for society. Looking at a section of the European public ­ the `decided' public (approximately 50 per cent) ­ who have a view on four key questions about GM food, 58 per cent oppose and 42 per cent support.

Only in Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Malta, Czech Republic and Lithuania do the supporters outnumber the opponents.

Purchasing intentions for GM food

There are mixed opinions on the acceptability of buying GM food. The most persuasive reasons relate to health, the reduction of pesticide residues and environmental impacts. Whether GM food is approved by the relevant authorities or is cheaper are not convincing reasons. Across the EU Member States the percentage of people rejecting five suggested reasons for buying GM food varies from about 5 to 55 per cent. Countries with the highest percentage of rejecters are Austria, Greece, Hungary, Germany and Latvia and with the lowest percentage of rejecters are Malta, Czech Republic, Netherlands, Spain, Belgium and Portugal. Amongst the non-rejecters, it is notable that the mean number of acceptable reasons is relatively high. It appears that once a threshold of minimal acceptability is reached, people are inclined to find a number of the reasons acceptable for buying GM foods. Industrial (white) biotechnologies

ߣߣÊÓƵ

Industrial applications of biotechnology in bio-fuels, bio-plastics and biopharming for pharmaceuticals are widely supported in Europe, with over 70 per cent of respondents supporting incentives to develop bio-fuels and plastics. More people than not say they would pay more for a vehicle that runs on bio- fuels and pay more for bio-plastics. Around six in ten approve of biopharming providing that it is tightly regulated and across the EU countries those approving of biopharming outnumber those who disapprove in all but Austria. Stem cell research

Providing it is tightly regulated there is considerable support for embryonic stem cell research across Europe, and although people tend to be more supportive of non-embryonic sources of stem cells the difference is relatively small, 59 to 65 per cent respectively. Among the countries in which approval for embryonic stem cell research is highest are Belgium, Sweden, Denmark, Netherlands and Italy. In countries where approval is low ­ the Baltic States, Slovenia, Malta, Ireland and Portugal ­ around one in three say they don't know.

While the belief of a majority of Europeans is that the embryo is human immediately after conception, a belief that is related to views on stem cell research, it is not the decisive factor. Many who believe it also say they approve of stem cell research as long as it is tightly regulated. A broadly similar pattern is seen when looking at levels of commitment to religious practices. The survey shows that the dilemma between moral/ethical versus utilitarian arguments divides the European public. Of these two positions Europeans lean towards the utilitarian view; the promised benefits for health and the alleviation of diseases tend to outweigh possible moral objections. However, with support contingent on benefits, the question is raised as to whether the projected benefits of stem cell research, widely reported in the mass media, are realistic or hyperbole; for if it is the latter support is likely to evaporate.

What do people want to know about stem cell research?

ߣߣÊÓƵ

When asked ­ if there was a referendum on stem cell research, what information would you like to hear about? ­ Europeans generally do not consider it important to be informed about scientific details, perhaps because they are content to leave these to the experts. What they want to know about are the societal consequences of stem cell research ­ the risks and benefits ­ and whether regulations and ethical oversight are sufficient.

[...]

DG Research
ndex_en.html

ߣߣÊÓƵ