engaging the south african public on biotechnology

36
Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

Upload: lev

Post on 22-Jan-2016

26 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology. PUB: Strategic operating context. PUB, one of six “Biotechnology Instruments” in South Africa…. Gov Depts. NRF. SAASTA. NBN. Cape Biotech. EcoBio. Plant Bio. Biopad. Investors End users Public & public opinion. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

Engaging the South African public on

Biotechnology

Page 2: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

PUB: Strategic operating context

Page 3: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

CapeBiotech

EcoBioPlantBio

NRF

SAASTA

NBN Biopad

Gov Depts

Investors

End users

Public & public opinion

PUB, one of six “Biotechnology Instruments” in South Africa…

Page 4: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

PUB: A dynamic and innovative public communication programme aiming to:

• increase broad public awareness and clear, balanced understanding of the scientific principles and potential of biotechnology & related issues;

and

• create meaningful opportunities for public dialogue and debate around biotechnology and its applications within our society to enable informed decision making.

Page 5: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

SAASTA Mandate

To promote public awareness, appreciation and engagement of science, engineering

and technology (SET).

SAASTA is the official vehicle for facilitating the promotion of SET in SA society, and

was incorporated into the NRF in December 2002

South African Agency of Science and Technology Advancement (SAASTA),

a Business Unit of the National Research Foundation (NRF)

Page 6: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

STRATEGIC APPROACHSTRATEGIC APPROACH

SSCICIEENNCCEE

MIMISSSISIOONNSS

MuseumMuseum ZooZoo Observatory

SCIENCE AWARENESS PLATFORM

EDUCATION

SCIENCE

COMMUNICATION

School science support

Science materialsCommunication of research to

public audiences

Science and the media

SET Careers

KKNNOOWWLLEEDDGGEE

MMAANNAAGGEEMMEENNTT

Page 7: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

Why a PUB Programme? Recommendation of SA National

Biotechnology Strategy (along with 5 other biotech instruments);

Government commitment to & investment in biotechnology;

The public’s right to know; SAASTA: promote awareness, public

understanding & appreciation of SET; and High levels of ignorance of SA public (PUB

survey).

Page 8: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

PUB History & Budget

End 2002 R1,500,000 planning/stakeholder consultation

2003/4: R5,000,000 launch & implementation 2004/5: R5,000,000 full implementation 2005/6: R3,500,000 full implementation

Continued funding subject to review

Continual public & stakeholder feedback/input throughout

Page 9: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

Guiding principles Provide factual, balanced, credible information on

biotechnology; Transparency, accountability & “clean” links; Biotechnology per se - not just GM; Engagement & dialogue; Use of non-jargon language that is easy and

accessible to all; Innovative, creative communication; Actively involve the stakeholder, science & media

communities, both nationally and internationally.

Page 10: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

Challenges Diversity of South Africa in language and

culture (literacy); Transformation issues (gender, M&S…); Very wide mandate: all biotechnology to all

South Africans; Remaining neutral, factual & credible; Current confusion & polarization over specific

biotechnology areas e.g. GM; Biotechnology terminology: translation &

“translation”; and Capacity constraints (human & financial).

Page 11: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

Science Communication & PUB Team Science Communication Manager (50% PUB) Project Coordinator (50% PUB) Media Coordinator (20% PUB) Editor/Writer (10% PUB) Web administrator/graphic designer (20% PUB) PUB Project officer (100% PUB) Grants Project Officer Administrative officer (50% PUB) PUB Intern (until end March 2006)

Capacity (human & budgetary) constraints

Coordinating/facilitating role & outsourcing calls

Total capacity=3

All biotech for all South Africans

Page 12: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

The “science” of science communicationCognitive-deficit model (one-way communication)

Interactive model(two-way communication)

Downward transmission from scientist to citizen

Dialogue between scientist and citizen

Science is seen as coherent, objective, unproblematic and well-bounded

Science has problematic boundaries and may not always be able to provide answers with certainty

Science is central to decisions about practical action in everyday life

Science is often marginalised or peripheral when integrated with other relevant to everyday decisions

Science is unencumbered by social and institutional connections

Science is usually seen by laypeople as inseparable from its social and institutional connections

Uptake of science is determined by intellectual ability (i.e. you have to be ‘clever’ to understand it)

Uptake of science is influenced by trust in sources and openness in negotiations

‘Ignorance’ on the part of the public has to be remedied

‘Ignorance’ may sometimes be functional

Unscientific behaviour results from failure to apply scientific knowledge

People engage in opportunistic construction of practical knowledge well adapted to specific needs

‘Scientific thinking’ is the proper yardstick with which to measure ‘everyday thinking’

‘Everyday thinking’ and knowledge in action are more complex and less well understood than ‘scientific thinking’

Page 13: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

Information

& dialogue

Biotech in the mass media

Capacity building & networking

Themes:

Science & media interaction:•Media roundtable•Expert list•Media skills•Responsible reporting

Biotech media service:•Media monitoring/analysis•Responses/alerts•Press statements•Targeted eds & ads

•Website•Produce/distribute printed materials•Radio & TV products•Basic biotech WS•Science theatre•Innovative grants•Help desk•Public perceptions

•Role model campaign•Biotech careers•Public events/exhibits•Networking

Strategic objectives:

Page 14: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

How: Capacity building

•Interactive exhibits

•Public/academic events

•Educator workshops

•Communication training for scientists & journalists

•Role models & career profiling

Page 15: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

Exhibits: static & interactive

•DNA 50

•GM

•Forensics

•Cloning

•Biotech careers & role modelling

Page 16: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

How: Communication tools

•Science drama

•Targeted educational resources & “kits”

•Role models

•Competitions

Page 17: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

PUB Teaching Modules

Biotechnology & biodiversity; Complementary, empowering

tool; Specifies teaching outcomes; Targets Grd 9-12 & caters for range of abilities; Includes local (SA) examples; Educator training ensures skills to teach biotech

content correctly & confidently; Pilot involving 2 workshops per district in Free

State in October 2005 (350+ Gr 10 Educators); Awaiting endorsement from National DoE following

pilot evaluation; Piloting in other Provinces.

Page 18: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

How: Mass Media & “round table”

Page 19: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

How: Website & Helpdesk: www.pub.ac.za

303,977 unique visits to date (since Sept 2003) and 1,934,136 accesses

Page 20: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

Engaging the public on GMOs Basics first (cells, DNA, genes…):

Resources (posters, kits, cartoons, teaching modules) Basic Biotech workshops Advertorials (i.e. paid media space) Media responses to misinformation – when possible Help desk enquiries GM advertorial (in process) Documenting the development of the GMO act (in process)

Do not prescribe a particular view – instead encourage dialogue & discussion based on all the facts – both benefits & risks, so people can make their own informed decision;

Public info needs –What the public want to know rather than what you want them to know.

Public debate v consensus: polarizes the issue further. Why not aim for consensus in the middle ground?;

Page 21: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

Challenges to GMO engagement High levels of ignorance/lack of knowledge

amongst South Africans –have to educate & raise awareness first;

Polarization of the GM issue globally (which side are you on?);

Contradictory claims adding to the confusion; Consuming, hi-input issue & keeping up-to date

full time job… Complexity & vastness of GM issue - ONE

biotech issue of “ALL Biotech to ALL South Africans”

Page 22: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

Public perceptions of Biotechnology

Page 23: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

Why measure public perceptions? Baseline to measure impact of activities; To monitor trends over time; Generate internationally complementary &

comparative data; Lack of comprehensive & less biased

surveys undertaken in SA to date; Identify gaps and information needs;and Enable tailoring of messages for specific

audiences on biotech.

Page 24: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

PUB/HSRC Survey (2004/5) High response rate (82%); Baseline to measure impact – not to

substantiate specific views; Knowledge, attitudes & judgements, trust; Mostly quantitative; Census enumerator areas/GIS – repeatable; Face to face interviews; and Language of choice.

Page 25: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

Sample specifics 7000 people aged 16+ in 500 enumerator areas; 53% formal urban; 35% tribal; 9% informal

urban; 4% rural; Race: 76% black

12% white9% coloured3% asian

Gender: 46% male & 54% female; Age: 29% 16-20

24% 21-2526% 26-60 20% 60+

Page 26: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

Knowledge

8/10 do not know or have knowledge about biotechnology (GM, GE or cloning);

What do you think about biotech…

“Fake goods that come with Nigerians & Chinese”

“something to do with brains”“Weapons of mass destruction”

“something to do with cars”

Page 27: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Per

cen

tag

e o

f re

spo

nd

ents

Ordinary &GMtomatoes

contain genes

Eating GM fruitmodif ies your

genes

Yeast brew edin beer is living

Detect Dow nssyndrome inpregnancy

GM animalslarger than

ordinary animals

Can put animalgenes in plants

True/false on factual knowledge

TRUE

FALSE

Don't Know

Page 28: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

GM foods in South Africa GM foods on sale in SA?

66% Don’t knowmaize, apples, milk/dairy, tomatoes, fruit & vegetables

Ever eaten GM foods? 62.5% Don’t know

11.5% Yes26% No

Reasons for negativity?53% no one good reason

15% unhealthy for humans11% violates religious/ethical principles

Page 29: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Per

cen

tag

e o

f R

esp

on

den

ts

Biotechnology Genetic engineering Genetic modification Cloning

Attitudes towards biotechnology: the great undecided

Undecided

Positive

Negative

Page 30: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

Vote for continuation despite lack of knowledge

Which biotechnology practices should stop or continue?

17

22 21

13

62

49

55

61

22

30

24 25

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Food (Bread & cheese) GM crops - pest resistent Medicines Biodegradable plastics

Per

cen

tag

e o

f R

esp

on

ses

Stop

Continue

Don't Know

Page 31: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Per

cen

tag

e o

f re

spo

nd

ents

Healthier Cheaper More envirofriendly

Tastier Eat eggs ofchickens fed

Behaviour: Would buy GM maize if...

Agree

Disagree

Don't Know

Page 32: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

22.69

10.42

10.63

15.64

3.72

20.77

1.42

10.46

4.24

0 5 10 15 20 25

Percentage of respondents

Universities

Consumer Organizations

Environmental Groups

Government

Religious Organizations

Media

Industry

Don't know

None

Info

rmat

ion

So

urc

e

TRUST: Who is trusted as truthful information source for biotechnology?

Page 33: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

Food labels 51% don’t read food labels – those who do

usually (23%) are more negative; Higher LSM groups more likely to read

food labels (37%) compared to moderate (21%) LSM groups;

Low percentage want GM info on labels but could be included in 21% for more ingredient info.

Page 34: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

3

1

9.5

21

1

3

1

1

21

15.6

22

0 5 10 15 20 25

Percentage of respondents

Pesticide content

GMO content

Fat content

Health benefits

Grown locally

Country of origin

Certified organic

Irradiation

Ingredients

Other

Don't know

Desired information on food labels

Page 35: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

Conclusion

If one is educated, has some form of income, has access to the internet and to reading material, is of a particular race group – then one tends to be more negative about biotechnology or have more

factual knowledge of it&

Very few people very negative

How can people have opinions on something they know nothing about?

Page 36: Engaging the South African public on Biotechnology

Thank you!

www.pub.ac.za