The Challenges of Consulting the Public on Science Policy: Examining the Development of European Risk Assessment Policy for Genetically Modified Animals

With the growing importance of public engagement in science policy making and declining levels of public trust in food production, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has attempted to embed “good governance” approaches to strengthen scientific independence and open up risk decision making, which include the use of public consultations. However, “opening up” of risk assessment policies reveals some tensions; namely, balancing the goals of scientific excellence and transparency, protecting science from interests, addressing value judgments, and limited opportunities to debate ethical and social issues. EFSA's development of risk assessment policy for genetically modified animals is used as a case study to analyze these tensions. This analysis suggests that in order to fulfill good governance commitments and maintain trust in risk governance, closer cooperation between EFSA and the European Commission is required to provide “space” for debating the broader risk management issues. This publically accessible space may be needed alongside rather than instead of EFSA's consultation.     

Public Opinion, Risk Assessment, and Biotechnology: Lessons from Attitudes toward Genetically Modified Foods in the European Union

Proponents of biotechnology argue that citizens' opposition to innovations such as genetically modified (GM) foods is rooted in emotionalism, media and nongovernmental organizations' distortions of good science, and scientific ignorance. Critics charge that this "risk management discursive" is too reductionist, exaggerates scientific capacity, inappropriately privileges scientific values over social and political values, and inaccurately captures how citizens evaluate biotechnology. This article uses ordered logit analysis applied to the responses of Europeans to a 2005 Eurobarometer survey to test the validity of these competing perspectives in the area of GM foods. Our analysis supports the arguments of those calling for the inclusion of broader discursive social, political, and cultural elements in deliberations over GM foods. Analysis also shows that citizens are less emotional in evaluating GM foods than proponents claim and supports this "new politics of knowledge" perspective, but citizens also cling more tightly to hopes that science can resolve debates with objective analysis.     

Community Narratives of Disaster Risk and Resilience: Implications for Government Policy

The paper explores how subjective risk perception intersects with government disaster management policy that is premised on an objective approach to risk assessment and mitigation. It finds that the presumption of objective risk management underpinning government policy is fundamentally at odds with community risk perceptions. This paper applies the techniques of ethnographic study to explore how communities understand and frame risk narratives. Using qualitative methods, the paper constructs the risk narratives of residents of Rocklea, Brisbane, following their experience with the 2011 Brisbane Flood. These risk narratives are considered in light of the Australian National Strategy for Disaster Resilience and recommendations are accordingly made for government disaster management policy.