Communicating Risk and Safety Issues of AgBiotech to the Consumers

1. Communicating Risk and Safety Issues of AgBiotech to the Consumers C. S. Prakash Center for Plant BiotechnologyResearch Tuskegee University, Alabama, USA prakash@mytu.tuskegee.edu www.agbioworld.org

2. Why communicate? • Fate of agricultural biotechnology hinges on how it is perceived by the policy makers and the public • We can help provide information so the stakeholders can make informed choices and pave way for enabling policies

3. Why Public Anxiety with Biotech Crops? • Societal Concern About Biotech is Understandable • Strong Assurance of Safety Needed • Unfamiliar with the Technology • Benefits Not Clear • Lack of Reliable Information • Unaware of Safeguards • Negative Media Opinion • Opposition by Activist Groups • Mistrust of the Industry Scientific Community must address public concerns and communicate the value of this technology effectively

4. We need a good understanding of issues to communicate effectively • Understand the agricultural context and history • Explain the benefits of the technology • Understand the regulatory review process • Be aware of concerns and criticisms • Address arising issues rapidly

5. Genetic Modification has been practiced successfully for centuries and Crop Biotechnology is the most recent method Concerns about commercial biotech crops are based on perceptions, not on fact There are many sources but emphasis should be given to scientific and regulatory authorities Key Points

6. Understanding the rigorous biotech crop development process helps to ease concerns • Confidence in a science-based regulatory process can help to improve biotechnology acceptance • Positive economic and environmental impacts are driving biotech crop adoption • Pipeline products offer consumer benefits

7. Acceptance of science and technology • The public is often skeptical, even fearful of scientific advancements – not because those advancements are inherently risky—but because people generally are unable to critically evaluate innovation on the basis of available information • There is a growing sector of society that mistrusts science, new technology, and those that profit by innovation

8. "We've arranged a global civilization in which most crucial elements profoundly depend on science and technology. We have also arranged things so that almost no one understands science and technology. This is a prescription for disaster“ Carl Sagan “The greatest challenge facing mankind is the challenge of distinguishing reality from fantasy, truth from propaganda”Michael Crichton “… the public will always believe a simple lie rather than a complex truth"Alexis, Comte de Tocqueville, 1885-1959

9. Questions about the safety of biotech crops… • Misunderstanding of genetic modification • Process of genetic engineering with genes from various sources • Ignorance of risk assessment and regulation • Misleading information promoted by activist groups • Sensational stories in the media • Mistrust of multinational corporations • Lack of direct consumer benefits

10. Delaying technology….Consequences? Societal • Hunger / Food security • Nutrition and health • Dependence on ag chemicals • Protection of wilderness areas and rain forests • Preservation of natural resources – soil, water, and petroleum • Rising greenhouse gases / Global warming

11. Myths and Misinformation • No Benefit to the Consumer • Not Adequately Tested or Regulated • Only Big Corporations • Does Not Benefit Small Farmers • No Reduction in Pesticide Usage • May Harm the Environment • Risks are Unknown; Cannot Recall • Europeans are Not Using it • Farmers Are Rejecting It

12. Risk and Hazard • Hazard is the potential to cause harm • Risk is the likelihood of harm Sound and thoughtful risk communication can assist public officials in preventing ineffective, fear-driven, and potentially damaging public responses to controversial scientific issues

13. Risk Perception by the Public RISKS PERCEIVED TO . . . ARE MORE ACCEPTED THAN . . . be voluntary risks perceived as being imposed be under an individual`s control risks perceived to be controlled by others have clear benefits risks perceived to have little or no benefit be distributed fairly risks perceived to be unfairly distributed be natural risks perceived to be manmade be statistical risks perceived to be catastrophic be generated by a trusted source risks generated by an untrusted source be familiar risks perceived to be exotic affect adults risks perceived to affect children (Source: U. S. Dept of Health and Human Services)

14. Myths of Risk Communication • Myth: Risk communication is more likely to alarm than calm people. • Truth: Not if done properly. Educate and inform, don’t simply alert and alarm • Myth: Communication is less important than education. If people knew the true risks, they would accept them. • Truth: Education is achieved through effective communication. • Myth: Many issues that arise in times of crisis are too difficult for the public to understand. • Truth: No, they aren’t. Part of your job is to help the public understand these issues no matter how complex they may be. • Myth: Risk communication is not my job. • Truth: Yes, it is. As a public servants or scientists, you have a responsibility to the public. • Myth: If we listen to the public, we may divert limited resources to concerns that are not a great threat to public health. • Truth: The better informed people are, the more likely it will be that the public’s and your opinions on priorities are aligned. (Source: U. S. Dept of Health and Human Services)

15. Seven Cardinal Rules of Risk Communication • 1. Accept and involve the public as a legitimate partner. • 2. Plan carefully and evaluate your efforts. • 3. Listen to the public's specific concerns. • 4. Be honest, frank, and open. • 5. Coordinate and collaborate with other credible sources. • 6. Meet the needs of the media. • 7. Speak clearly and with compassion. Source: Seven Cardinal Rules of Risk Communication. Vincent T. Covello and Frederick H. Allen. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, April 1988, OPA-87-020.

16. Towards Informed Decision-Making • Workshops and Forums • Liaison With Policy Makers • Media Forum • Dialog Among Relevant Stakeholders • Regional Networking • Sharing of Information

17. What Can Scientists Do? • Write Commentaries, Op-Eds • Regulatory and Legislative process • Public Forums; Community • Respond to Misinformation • Letters to The Editor • Network with Reporters • Return Phone Calls ASAP • Refer to Other Experts • Keep it Simple and Focused; Avoid Misquotes • Power of Metaphors

18. Art and Science of Communicating • Place the issue in context • Story telling • Use Examples that they can relate • Power of metaphors • Respectful of audience • Use humor but in a measured manner • Avoid negative terms (GMO; Contamination)

19. Which maize do you want to feed your Children?

20. Communicating… • Be Straightforward • Keep it Simple • Sound bites - Media loves them • Be quick to respond • Use trustworthy, well known public figures • Show passion, excitement and conviction (Countering emotion with reason)

21. Communicating…. • Build on concerns, knowledge and values of the audience • Not one-way communication but interaction • Network with journalists

22. How Can We Move Ahead? • Honest Open Communication • Transparency • Building Trust in Regulation • Education of Issues • Insist on the facts • Informational, not advocacy • Work through credible alliances • Communicate benefits and safety • Build trust in the technology • Address questions/concerns

23. Communication approaches That don't generally work • Emphasizing the long-term benefits of basic research • Presenting information in a marketing-style format • Highly technical presentations • Utilizing poorly delivered or prepared material • Being overly generalized or overly specific • Inability of speaker to respond effectively to concerns (Source: Dr. Martina McGloughlin, UC Davis)

24. How much trust would you have in statements How much trust would you have in statements about food biotechnology made by…? about food biotechnology made by…? American Medical Association 87% 3 7 % 5 0 % American Academy of Pediatrics 86% 3 6 % 5 0 % Farmers and farm groups 85% 3 0 % 5 5 % American Dietetic Association 84% 2 9 % 5 5 % Environmental Protection 84% 2 9 % 5 5 % Agency Food and Drug Administration 83% 3 0 % 5 3 % Independent researchers and 83% 2 8 % 5 5 % scientists Department of Agriculture 82% 3 0 % 5 2 % Environmental groups like Sierra Club 67% 1 6 % 5 1 % Consumer advocates such as 65% 1 6 % 4 9 % Nader 62% 1 3 % 4 9 % Greenpeace Grocers and grocery stores 61% 9 % 5 2 % 53% Food manufacturing companies 7 % 4 6 % A lot Some Source: KRC Research , September 1999

25. History of Technology Adoption • Resistance to Innovations Related to Food • Pasteurization, Canning, Freezing, Microwave • Certain Innovations Not Readily Accepted • Recalcitrance to Adopt (Dvorak v/s QWERTY) • Entrenched Economic Interests (Metric in US) • Ideology & Politics (Plant Breeding- Soviet Lysenko) • Exaggerated Notions of Risk (Food Irradiation) • Initial Scare and Misinformation (Saccharine, MSG) • Ill Timed Introduction • Conflict with Societal Values and Beliefs Change is Inevitable, Progress is Optional

26. More Information… www.agbioworld.org