Transparent communication strategy on GMOs: Will it change public opinion?

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Biotechnology Journal sion, that, since the public is irrational, efforts to provide information and education are a waste of time and money, or that the public cannot make “appropriate” decisions about biotechnology. The public has a much wider scope and is able to evaluate risks versus benefits. This raises or hypothesis 3: It can be concluded, that Europeans are not less innovation-friendly, however, risks are not communicated appropriately and EU-citizens react oversensitively to them. 5 Target-oriented <strong>communication</strong>s As described above, some of the main reasons for the low acceptance of GM foods in Europe are to be found in a trust gap into institutions and larger multinational companies, as well as in a low level of awareness on the perceived benefits of this new technology. In this respect, politicians play a significant role in supporting pessimistic and emotional-driven debates instead of taking an informative and educative approach, thereby fulfilling the social conscience they possess. Therefore, new <strong>communication</strong> strategies may be developed, which do address those issues. Communication experience has shown that the following factors are of significant importance: – Credibility – Translation of complex technical information into easily understandable language – Attractive, target-oriented “conditioning” of the information with options for interactive feedback – Value-free reporting – the public is capable to assess information Choosing and employing the most appropriate <strong>communication</strong> tools for a specific target group requires a clear picture of “the public”. It is, however, a rather complex entity, influenced by various factors, such as differing values, wishes, fears, social rankings, the cultural environment, ethics, buying behaviors and more. In other words: the broad “public” as such doesn’t exist, and can be divided into specific subgroups. This is an important <strong>communication</strong> issue, as some consumers actively seek information and make trade-off between risks and benefits, and others inherit attitudes or opinions passively from the environment [15]. In a specific cultural environment certain fundamental values, perceptions, preferences and behaviors are adopted, transferred to the next generation, and do evolve over time. Because of the complexity and timely alteration of these factors, market research developed various approaches for a clearer segmentation of consumers and several models based on statistical information do exist. Starting from the sociological described target groups, psychological and also recently neurobiological based differentiations are being made, leading to target group ty- 1144 © 2007 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim Biotechnol. J. 2007, 2, 1141–1146 pologies [16]. A market-research based and simplified classification is offered by Herbst [17], a scheme that discriminates the “public” into three types: Type 1. Martin, the avoider Martin, the avoider is characterized by not pro-actively searching for information and without undertaking critical analyses. He avoids theoretical controversies. Typical are pessimistic thoughts and views, such as „What can we generally eat safely nowadays?” Type 2. Svenja, the passive Hedonistic views and attitudes are characteristic for Svenja, the passive. Being 22, student and single, she wants to subsist healthy. She looks at pictures and has strong emotional reactions. She is – similar to Martin – not actively seeking information and is not greatly willing or able to estimate risks on her own. Type 3. Dörte, the active
Biotechnol. J. 2007, 2, 1141–1146 www.biotechnology-journal.com Competent in questions on foods, she is typically 32 years, mother of 2 children and is committed to feed the family the best way possible. She is well informed and is proactively seeking for information. She is interested, active and critical, and wants to assess risks independently. The different behaviors of these stereotypes lead to a distinct acquisition of information with varying depths of complexity and to a use of different media channels. This has a strong impact when developing a <strong>communication</strong> <strong>strategy</strong> towards the “general public”. For each of the three stereotypes, specific media channels need to be employed. The Dörte-type can be accessed by pull media, such as websites, and intensive consultation (dialogue). On GM foods and feeds, internet sites such as gmo-compass.org are appropriate and proven <strong>communication</strong> channels. The internet also offers a broad spectrum of additional options, including weblogs, podcasts or wikis, as suitable formats for this “<strong>communication</strong> stereotype”. By far more difficult targets are Martin and Svenja, as they do have a more passive media behavior and feel more attracted by push media and more imagery-heavy <strong>communication</strong> tools, such as TV or other advertising campaigns. We conclude from that, that more emotionallydriven outreach programs, such as “science events” might be more appropriate than pull media. This needs to be taken into account, if successful <strong>communication</strong> strategies aim at targeting Martin and Svenja (see Fig.4 ). 6 Conclusions Communications are an integral and critical step in innovation. New genetically modified plants do not possess any value, if they are rejected by the majority of the public. Past <strong>communication</strong> activities were often perceived as a one-way <strong>communication</strong> by which scientists tell “their truth” in simple educational approaches. However, this has been proved to be not appropriate and unsuccessful to inform and “convince” the general public. As described here, several factors need to be taken in consideration, when applying new <strong>communication</strong>s strategies, which include: Figure 4. Successful <strong>communication</strong> strategies need to consider the various subgroups of “the public” and should be based on the four characteristics of credibility, trust, plainness and tailored. 6.1 Increased engagement of industry and governmental organizations on issues regarding GM foods and feeds Information on biotechnology in the media are rarely proactive, rather, they usually appear in response to highly visible reports. Increased trust should be one key objective for <strong>communication</strong>s by governmental and industrial <strong>communication</strong> partners. 6.2 Focus on the benefits, rather than defending “acceptable” risks Key to acceptance is to take public concerns seriously, but at the same time communicating the benefits of the new technologies for the consumers themselves. It is therefore important to foster a “consumer benefits <strong>communication</strong> <strong>strategy</strong>”, rather than a “classical” risk <strong>communication</strong> approach. 6.3 Better definition of the target audience for a more target-oriented <strong>communication</strong> approach The general “public” is a complex entity of sub-populations, with each of them responding to different formats and styles of <strong>communication</strong>, and with varying access of information. Therefore, part of the <strong>communication</strong> <strong>strategy</strong> is to capitalize the knowledge on the audiences’ preferences and to use “tailored” <strong>communication</strong> tools. Scientists and biotechnology developers have often assumed, that the public would embrace the new technology as “obviously positive” and dismissed public concerns as irrelevant or even “incompetent”. However, it is important to seriously consider the public needs and address their concerns. It is therefore important, that industry and governmental bodies proactively seek trust and confidence from the public. Green biotech offers a tremendous amount of potential benefits, including a better sustainability of modern food production. New GM plant traits and sustainable technologies might increase the efficiency of agriculture, for example with a decreased use of herbicides or chemicals, thereby lowering CO2 emissions. This provides communicators on all levels a second chance to lift this technology towards a greater acceptance globally. If important and useful innovations are not adopted in practice, societies might experience severe disadvantages. © 2007 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim 1145
Page 1 and 2: Biotechnol. J. 2007, 2, 1141-1146 D
Page 3: Biotechnol. J. 2007, 2, 1141-1146 w

Transparent communication strategy on GMOs: Will it change public opinion?

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?