Abstract
In a 1991 survey, we assessed how genetic engineering scientists in Europe viewed the influence of public attention on their field. In almost every respect, by far the most negative responses came from scientists in West Germany: only 10% perceived public attention as beneficial and 63% perceived it as harmful; more than 90% worried that Germany could lose its competitive edge in this field; and more than 70% viewed national regulations as too strict. Open-ended comments from researchers reinforce the negative German picture. Major complaints include ill-trained, incompetent local enforcement offices often using delaying tactics to avoid making decisions; unnecessary compulsory courses; massive bureaucracies; endless paperwork; and mandatory `safety offices' that only generate more paper. Scientists and journalists point to three causes for public opposition: one-sided media coverage, sensitivity to World War II history (eugenics), and powerful activist opposition. The `Eurobarometer' 1991 and 1993 surveys of the public show that German scientists' perceptions of the public attitude are based on reality: public acceptance is low, and has been deteriorating further since 1991. Although the national German laws regulating biotechnology have now been relaxed, it remains to be seen whether the attitude of the public, as well as local and state-level regulations, will follow the same trend. To improve public acceptance, German genetic engineering scientists may need to make a long-term commitment to communication and education about all aspects of their field, including risks. Although there is no guarantee that this will bring quick results (it apparently has not done so in the Netherlands, for instance), cases such as Denmark suggest that it may improve acceptance in the long term.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.