Hostname: page-component-7b9c58cd5d-wdhn8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-15T19:38:13.691Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Public, the Media and Agricultural Biotechnology. Edited by D. Brassard, J. Shanahan and T.C. Nesbitt. Wallingford, UK: CABI (2007), pp. 405, £75.00. ISBN 978184593.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2008

Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Type
Book Review
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

This book contains 16 chapters in three parts that cover public opinion about agricultural biotechnology around the world; theoretical perspectives and communication about agricultural biotechnology; and practical experiences in international settings.

Agricultural biotechnology and its acceptance by the public are both complex subjects. The book is a credible attempt to give readers an insight into public acceptance or rejection of the technology. It is timely since the debate will continue between scientists, regulatory authorities, policy makers, multinationals, NGOs, governments, farmers and consumers.

It is not surprising that certain themes are repeated in many of the chapters. However, to the uninitiated those dealing with the theories of opinion formulation are interesting. The issues around who we trust are complicated, especially when the values of certain pillars of the media establishment are currently being questioned. What is clear is the need for reliable authoritative information from credible sources, together with unbiased media reporting. Strong regulatory frameworks as well as consumer choice and therefore labelling are key.

The book does not provide unbiased, factual evidence on the benefits of the first generation products of this technology to farmers. It is likely that the debate will change as second generation products providing direct consumer benefits emerge.

This book will be of value not only to those directly involved in this powerful technology but also to those interested in the current debate.