“Promoting Public Awareness on Matters Relating to  
Agricultural Biotechnology in India”

  Chair: Dr. Mangla Rai

Biotechnology offers a range of potential environmental, social and economic benefits. However, modern biotechnology has been under public scrutiny and is currently the focus of intense public and political debate. In democratic societies, public perceptions can both promote and hamper commercial introduction and adoption of new technologies. The issues with regard to acceptance of genetically modified (GM) crops have at times been compounded by the lack of information on this subject amongst even the otherwise informed members of the public.

Public Awareness and Acceptance of Agro-biotechnology Applications: Some Observations

Public awareness and acceptance is one of the major hurdles for the adoption of the especially the first wave of products of agricultural biotechnology as is the case in India. Huge differences also exist in intensity of the public debate on biotechnology and its applications. In general, majority of the people around the world appear to accept biotechnology in medical applications more easily than biotechnology in the field of agriculture or food processing. In some countries, the public and the scientific community hold different views on the desired balance between the regulation of research and the freedom to investigate.  Even in some developed countries, particularly those in the European Union, commercialization of genetically modified crops have faced stiff resistance. However, public acceptance is much better in the USA, and transgenic crops and their products are more widely accepted.

Public acceptance is also greatly determined by the kind of information provided by the media to the general public and various organizations concerned about farmers.  Misinformed public debates on key issues related to crop biotechnology can result in erosion of public confidence and can create mistrust in the technology and its developers, irrespective whether the developers are from the public or private sector. Clear and understandable consumer information is a very important part of the public acceptance process. Besides media, research organizations and scientific institutions concerned with crop improvement must also take up the responsibility in bringing awareness in public about the applications of genetic engineering in agriculture, their potential benefits as well as constraints.  The media has to play a significant and a more responsible role in creating public awareness, rather than resorting to ‘sensationalism’.  A recent international conference on GM crops, held at the Chennai-based M.S. Swaminathan Research Foundation, emphasized the need for information empowerment and education at all levels, starting with the farming community.

Addressing the Factors Influencing Public Opinions on Biotechnology

Analyses of public opinion surveys in many developed and developing countries reveal that consumer acceptance of biotechnology is driven by a number of inter-related factors. The major influences on public acceptance seem to be the knowledge level, awareness of benefits, confidence and trust. Surveys have also shown that global differences in support for specific applications of agricultural biotechnology are based on factors that include a country’s culture and history, economic conditions, and government initiatives or responses related to the issue. In general, there is greater acceptance of medical applications (particularly those leading to development of medicines and vaccines) than there is for food biotechnology products. Consumer opposition to genetically modified foods is driven in part by the uncertainty about possible negative health and environmental effects.

In India, the media (newspapers, televisions, radio, internet) is often the main source of information for the consumers. The media can play a pivotal role in the public debate about agro-biotechnology by facilitating two-way communication among the various stakeholders affected by the technology. Unfortunately, lopsided campaigns by some agencies have cast significant doubt in the minds of consumers as to the need and biosafety of agricultural biotechnology. Differing views on a biotechnology may reflect different beliefs about its risks and benefits, or different evaluative criteria. In the former case, suitable communications could clarify the degree of essential conflict among the parties. In the latter case, a struggle is warranted, unless it is possible to change the technology or the distributions of its costs and benefits. We need to recognize that the debate is not always about science, and therefore, understand and manage the sources of the disagreement.

Establishing Channels of Communication with the Public

Establishing and maintaining credible and viable channels of communication with the public, and creating public trust and confidence in modern technologies such as agricultural biotechnology are indeed challenging endeavours. This warrants strong linkages and cooperation amongst various organizations and agencies, as no single organization/agency can effectively fulfil the demands. Scientific demonstrations of biosafety of transgenic crops and review by government agencies are extremely important in gaining public acceptance. What role credible experts will play in communicating the issues to the public in a realistic and effective manner can make a huge difference.  Certainly, public sector scientists will be seen as more credible than those who either have direct stakes in the development and commercialization of transgenic products or individuals who work for ‘advocacy groups’ that have blanket dislike towards genetic engineering or its products.

Launching an Integrated and Intensive Campaign

An intensive and highly integrated campaign needs to be launched, with active cooperation of various scientific organizations/institutions/universities/NGOs to generate public awareness in the country on the following specific aspects of agricultural biotechnology:

1. Concept of plant breeding, pressures on modern plant breeding and the need for novel genetic enhancement strategies, including biotechnology
2. Introduction to genetic engineering technology
3. The benefits, risks and constraints of agricultural biotechnology
4. Current status of national and global GM crops and other biotechnological applications in agriculture
5. Risk assessment procedures (regulatory mechanisms) for environmental and food safety, and related legislations
6. Social, economic, scientific, environmental and health issues which are addressed by regulatory bodies before allowing release of GM crops. 
7. Current GM products under evaluation in India under biosafety, VCU and other regulatory trials
8. Community and Farmers’ Rights and benefit sharing related to agro-biotechnological applications
9. Post-release monitoring and management of GM crops and their products, such as insect resistance management, transgene stability at the farm level, use of transgenic diagnostic kits, and maintenance of transgenic seed quality, with effective involvement of State Level and District Level Coordination Committees of the existing transgenic biosafety evaluation and management mechanism.

Strategy to enhance Public Trust and Confidence in Agricultural Biotechnology

1. Participation of the stakeholders in formulating the research agenda in agricultural biotechnology to be in congruence with the public needs
2. Assessing the potential and socio-economic benefits of products from agricultural biotechnologies vis-à-vis other available alternatives for specific objectives (for example, biofortification; biotic stress resistance etc.) in the context of the regional and national values, ethics and concerns
3. Development of biotechnological products that directly help the farmers and the society
4. Facilitating reliable and independent assessment of socio-economic impacts of agro-biotechnological products
5. Public opinion-based periodic improvisation of the existing biosafety system to enhance transparency, efficiency and trust
6. Investment in training effective spokespersons, particularly transfer-of-technology and extension personnel and public relation officials of various organizations on agricultural biotechnology applications and biosafety aspects
7. Capitalizing on the inter-ministerial and inter-organizational capabilities to form an information network to promote agricultural biotechnology

Action Plan for Getting the Message to the Public

The following means are proposed to effectively reach the public on various aspects related to agricultural biotechnology:

1. A website, maintained by ICAR (jointly contributed by ICAR/MoA, DBT/MoST and MoEF) exclusively devoted to transgenic crops and their biosafety
2. Dedicated section on agricultural biotechnology in the existing websites, such as www.icar.org, www.agricoop.nic.in etc. 
3. Effective utilization of the proposed ‘Krishi Channel’ to create public awareness and enhance people’s participation
4. Well-designed public opinion surveys and independent socio-economic impact analyses
5. Publication of well-written articles, on a regular basis, in the popular / semi-scientific journals/newsletters published by ICAR and DBT (for example, ‘Kheti’, ‘Krishi Chayanika’, Indian Farming, ICAR News, Institute / University Newsletters etc.)
6. Organization of Public Discussions / Seminars / Stakeholders’ Meetings at various nodes 
7. Publication of Information brochures and books (easy-to-understand by the public) on various related aspects