20 pages., Online via UI e-subscription, This article centered on the representation of food additives as a matter of key importance to the public's conceptualization of them. Findings from a systematic qualitative study of the magazines of two Belgian consumer organizations revealed that additives were seen as providing no benefits to consumers, for they could be used to reduce the quality of both the ingredients and the production process. They were perceived as a means of deceiving the public, with portrayal of consumers as powerless in the struggle for control over the types and amounts of additives they ingested. In turn, the limitations were seen as a failure of government and scientific institutions to provide the necessary protection.
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 151 Document Number: D06776
Notes:
Online via Pew Research Center. 8 pages., "Scientists and the American public are often far apart when it comes to views about science-related issues."
Wimberley, Ronald C. (author) and Thompson, Alton (author)
Format:
Book chapter
Publication Date:
2002
Published:
USA: Praeger, Westport, Connecticut.
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Document Number: C37084
Notes:
See C37075 for original, Pages 117-124 in Ronald C. Wimberley, Craig K. Harris, Joseph J. Molnar and Terry J. Tomazic (eds.), The social risks of agriculture: Americans speak out on food, farming and the environment. Praeger, Westport, Connecticut. 163 pages.
Gaskell, George (author), Bauer, Martin W. (author), Allum, Nicholas C. (author), Jackson, Jonathan (author), Howard, Susan (author), Lindsey, Nicola (author), and Methodology Institute
Format:
Research report
Publication Date:
2003-07
Published:
UK: London School of Economics. London WC2A 2AE
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 126 Document Number: C18505
Notes:
20 pages; Research from the project "Life Sciences in European Society" supported by the EC Directorate for General Research
UK: Social Science Research Unit, Food Standards Agency, United Kingdom.
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 175 Document Number: C29999
Notes:
6 pages., Study conducted by Brook Lyndhurst Ltd for the Food Standards Agency. Findings revealed the UK public "wary, uneasy and uncertain about emerging food technologies" such as nanotechnologies, animal cloning and synthetic biology. Full report (89 pages) available at http://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/emergingfoodtech.pdf
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 163 Document Number: C26955
Notes:
Online from V-Fluence web site via PR Reporter. 3 pages., "Words like 'frankenfoods' and 'genetic engineering' scare consumers and deny them the facts about agricultural biotechnology and food safety, the author writes."
James F. Evans Collection, Research directors at American land-grant universities are optimistic regarding the future of agricultural biotechnology and expect the ongoing "biotechnology revolution" to benefit the public, including consumers and farmers. Unresolved public policy questions involving biotechnology do concern many of the research administrators who responded to an opinion poll, but the prevailing attitude appears to be on of confident expectation that solutions will in time emerge for all outstanding biotech problems. Asked about "biotechnology's ethical questions," a majority of the respondents that U.S. land-grant institutions are well equipped to deal with such questions. The respondents said biotechnology may pose environmental risks, but they did not expect biological catastrophes to occur. They said biotechnology could be used to foster low-input methods of agricultural production, and they were in favor of pursuing biotech research that might improve agriculture's sustainability. (original)
