According to Covello (1983, 1992), research in the psychological sciences has identified
47 known factors that influence the perception of risk: issues like control, benefit, whether a
risk is voluntarily assumed and, the most important factor, trust. While these factors can
help explain why consumers are concerned about a potential risk such as genetically engin-
eered food, differences in perception of risk only superficially explain the visceral outrage
that has greeted the prospects of genetically engineered crops in some areas. By examining
the various social actors and their tactics of public persuasion, a general picture emerges
that helps explain the social controversy surrounding genetically engineered crops.
The current state of risk management and communication research suggests that those
responsible for food safety risk management must be seen to be reducing, mitigating, or
minimizing a particular risk. Those responsible must be able to effectively communicate
their efforts and to prove that they are actually reducing levels of risk.
Stigma is a powerful shortcut that consumers may use to evaluate foodborne risks.
Gregory et al. (1995) have characterized stigma as follows:
†The source is a hazard.
†A standard of what is right and natural is violated or overturned.
†Impacts are perceived to be inequitably distributed across groups.
†Possible outcomes are unbounded (scientific uncertainty).
†Management of the hazard is brought into question.These factors of stigmatization certainly apply to the products of agricultural biotechnology.
Stigmatization is becoming the norm for food and water linked to human illness or even
death. The challenge then is, how to reduce stigma? The components for managing the
stigma associated with any food safety issue seem to involve all of the following factors:
†Effective and rapid surveillance systems
†Effective communication about the nature of risk
†A credible, open, and responsive regulatory system
†Demonstrable efforts to reduce levels of uncertainty and risk
†Evidence that actions match wordsAppropriate levels of risk management coupled with sound science and excellent com-
munication about the nature of risk are required to further garner the benefits of any tech-
nology, including agricultural biotechnology.
The products of agricultural biotechnology began reaching mainstream status at the same
time that the North American public was being exposed to massive amounts of microbial
food safety information, beginning with the Jack-in-the-Box restaurantEscherichia coli
O157:H7 outbreak of 1993 (Powell and Leiss 1997) leading to an unprecedented interest
in the way food is produced. Consumer concerns about food safety—such as mad cow
disease,E. coliO157:H7, and salmonella—have been pushed from the supermarket all
the way back to the farm, such that any and all agricultural practices are coming under
public scrutiny. This trend continues today and is reflected in increased sales of organic
foods, books like the100-Mile Diet(Smith and Mackinnon 2007) and the growth of
community-shared agriculture (CSA), as individuals seek to exert more control over the
food that nourishes their bodies and souls.
346 WHYTRANSGENICPLANTS ARE SO CONTROVERSIAL