To clarify concerns that the public has with genetic technologies, the article presents the results of focus group interviews conducted in Denmark in 2000. The concerns of the public are divided into three ideal-typical categories: social (dealing with environmental and health risks), economic (dealing with both the threats and opportunities of the new technologies), and cultural (taking up ethical and moral concerns). Following a general discussion of why it is important to take these discourses of concern seriously, each discursive category is discussed with examples taken from the focus group interviews.
Baark, E., and A. Jamison. 1990. Biotechnology and culture: Public debates and their impact on government regulation in the United States and Denmark. Technology in Society12 (1): 27-44.
2.
Bauer, M., and G. Gaskell, eds. 2002. Biotechnology: The making of a global controversy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
3.
Coffey, A., and P. Atkinson. 1996. Making sense of qualitative data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
4.
Durant, J., M. Bauer, and G. Gaskell, eds. 1998. Biotechnology in the public sphere—A European sourcebook. London: Science Museum.
5.
Elzinga, A.1998. Theoretical perspectives: Culture as a resource for technological change. In The intellectual appropriation of technology. Discourses on modernity 1900-1990, edited by M. Hård and A. Jamison, 21-44. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
6.
Fern, F. F.2001. Advanced focus group research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
7.
Fischer, F.2003. Reframing public policy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
8.
Fukuyama, F.2002. Our posthuman future. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.
9.
Gaskell, G., and M. Bauer, eds. 2001. Biotechnology 1996-2000: The years of controversy. London: Science Museum.
10.
Gaskell, G., P. Thompson, and N. Allum. 2002. Worlds apart? Public opinion in Europe and the USA. In Biotechnology: The making of a global controversy, edited by M. Bauer and G. Gaskell, 351-375. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
11.
Grove-White, R., P. Macnaghten, and B. Wynne. 2000. Wising up: The public and new technologies. Unpublished report, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.
12.
Jamison, A., and E. Baark. 1990. Modes of biotechnology assessment in the USA, Japan and Denmark. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management2 (2): 111-127.
13.
Jamison, A., R. Eyerman, and J. Cramer1990. The making of the new environmental consciousness. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.
14.
Jamison, A., and M. Hård. 2003. The story-lines of technological change: Innovation, construction and appropriation. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management15 (1): 81-92.
15.
Kvale, S.1996: InterViews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
16.
Lassen, J., A. Allansdottir, M. Liakoupulos, A. Olsson, and A. T. Mortensen. 2002. Testing times: The reception of Roundup Ready soya in Europe. In Biotechnology: The making of a global controversy, edited by M. Bauer and G. Gaskell, 279-312. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
17.
Marris, C., B. Wynne, P. Simmons, and S. Weldon. 2001. Public perceptions of agricultural biotechnologies in Europe. Final report of the Public Perceptions of Agricultural Biotechnology in Europe research project. Available at www.lancs.ac.uk/depts/ieppp/pabe/docs.htm.
18.
Morgan, D. L.1997. Focus groups as qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19.
Nelkin, D. and S. Lindee. 1995. The DNA mystique: The gene as a cultural icon. New York: Freeman.
20.
Pilnick, A.2002. Genetics and society: An introduction. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
21.
Pline, L. C.1991. Popularizing biotechnology: The influence of issue definition. Science, Technology, & Human Values16 (4): 474-490.
22.
Shiva, V.2000. Stolen harvest. Boston: South End.
23.
Slovic, P.1999. Trust, emotion, sex, politics, and science: Surveying the risk-assessment battlefield. Risk Analysis19 (4): 689-701.
24.
Tokar, B., ed. 2001. Redesigning life? The worldwide challenge to genetic engineering. London: Zed Books.
25.
Toulmin, S.2003. The uses of argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
26.
Wynne, B.1996. May the sheep safely graze? A reflexive view of the expert-lay knowledge divide. In Risk, environment & modernity: Towards a new ecology, edited by S. Lash, B. Szerszynski, and B. Wynne, 44-83. London: Sage.
