Gene Campaign organizes a public discussion on a research project to assess ‘Stakeholder Perceptions of Genetically Engineered Crops and Foods in India’

The discussion organized on 7 February, 2007, at the India International Center, New Delhi was attended by a large number of research scholars, students, academics, members of civil society organizations, representatives of government departments and international organizations, who commented on the study and made suggestions to improve its design. The two and a half year research project will cover five states, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Jharkhand, Punjab and Delhi.

Gene Campaign ( Dr Suman Sahai) will conduct this study in partnership with the Central University , Hyderabad (Prof Haribabu, Dean and Head of Social Sciences) and PAEDIA, , a research and networking initiative based in Delhi, examining technology innovation and policy (Prof Amrit Srinivasan ). Other members of the research team will be Dr Shambu Prasad , specializing in Innovation Systems at the Xaviers Management Institute, Bhubhaneshwar, and Indira Ananth from the Administrative Staff College of India, Hyderabad, who has studied the processes of adoption of Agbiotechnology in India.

There is no real understanding of the level of awareness, the information and the attitudes to GE crops and foods among the major stakeholders in India like farmers, consumers, policy makers, activists, professional, home makers , media and a host of others constituting the public. Studies tracking the attitudes and perceptions to Agbiotechnology are being conducted in many developed countries but no such study has been done in India, even though India is proceeding rapidly with the adoption of Agbiotech.

In order to bridge this gap in knowledge in an important area like food which is also highly controversial and to gain a better understanding about what people really know and think about GE crops and food, Gene Campaign decided to undertake this study on stakeholder perceptions.

 At the meeting Dr. Sahai introduced the rationale of the study explaining that attitude and perception studies are extremely important for including larger societal interests and concerns in the national biotechnology development program. Since, there are no systematic surveys of public opinions and attitudes towards agbiotech in India, and public controversy grows around GE crops, it is important to study the underpinnings of this controversy and the underlying reasons for its acceptance or rejection by the public.

Dr. Amrit Srinivasan talked on the importance of understanding attitudes and perceptions. She highlighted that these are extremely complex issues, which  are clothed in cultural stereotypes, underscoring the need  to be extremely rigorous methodologically in exploring such issues. She also raised issues of trust, risk, class interests that can play a role in influencing perceptions and attitudes.

Dr. Haribabu discussed the proposed methodology for the study, which will include and compare variables like rural/urban, profession and gender. He indicated the dynamic relation between perception, attitude and subsequent action, which will be factored in while framing appropriate questions. He also presented the possible states to be covered under the study and the reasons for choosing these states.

• Speaking on the occasion, A. Indira raised issues on food security, cost and access to modern technology along with ethical and regulatory issues. She also highlighted concerns for public health and R&D issues. She particularly highlighted the failure of agricultural extension services in meeting the needs of the farmers.

• Dr  Sambhu Prasad said that the concept of risk technology is absent in India, which the present technology is engendering. He also underscored that a mere economic understanding of the technology will not necessarily help. The whole issue of political economy of scientific research should also be looked into. He also raised the issue of whether India can have a different model of biotechnology.

·         Participating in the discussion, Daniel Gustafson (Country Director, FAO) wanted to know how a study on attitudes and perceptions towards GE foods and crops could be conducted when India has only the specific experience of Bt cotton and no experience of GE foods. He also wanted to know how this study relates to the larger kind of policy process.

·        Dr. Stephen Mcgurk said that because of the complex dynamics involved in attitude, perception and action, there is a need to be hard-headed in terms of question formulation and analysis. He also wanted to know the plan of using the results. He also raised issues relating to input dealers, agricultural extension services etc. Talking about ag technology adoption in China, he said that their main concern is to what extent marginal people’s research needs actually get factored into research agendas. In fact, the research agendas in China focus mainly on the potential medium and high yield areas and not really on the real complexities of low yield areas and people living in those areas. He also raised issues of fake seeds, local IPR issues, pesticide issues related to Bt cotton etc. He, in fact, underscored that there are similarities in the types of problems faced both in India and China.

·         Two Gene Campaigners presented the operational strategy plan of the project followed by a video show on Bt cotton adoption in Vidarbha region of Maharashtra.

·         Dr. Ellie Osir of IDRC stressed on the technology and society interface. He also talked about the future possibility of undertaking a comparative study of different countries adopting the same technology, for example, India and China. He stressed on the importance of social science and natural science interface, and bio-innovations.

·         Sloppy research or sloppy regulation moulds public perception of a new technology. Making this point, Dr. Raghuram said that this should be a cause of concern.