Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Commentary
  • Published:

Europe ambivalent on biotechnology

Nature volume 387, pages 845–847 (1997)Cite this article

Biotechnology and the European Public Concerted Action This article has been written by an international team of researchers working as part of a Concerted Action of the European Commissions (B104-CT95-0043) administered on behalf of Directorate General XII by Andreas Klepsch. For details see box overleaf. Address for correspondence: G. Gaskell, Department of Social Psychology, London School of Economics, Houghton Street, London WC2A 2AE, UK (e-mail: gaskell@se.ac.uk). Throughout Europe, there is widespread lack of trust in the ability of governments and other public authorities to deal effectively with people's concern about biotechnology applications.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Perceived use, risk and moral acceptability as determinants of public support.
Figure 2: Who should regulate biotechnology?
Figure 3: Who can be trusted to tell the truth about biotechnology?

References

  1. Evans, G. & Durant, J. Public Understand. Sci. 4, 57–74 (1995).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering: What Europeans Think About it in 1993 (INRA (Europe), Brussels, 1993).

  3. Bauer, M. (ed.) Resistance to New Technology: Nuclear Power, Information Technology, Biotechnology (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1995).

  4. Abbott, A. Nature 386, 745 (1997).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Beck, U. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity (Sage, London, 1992).

  6. Giddens, A. The Consequences of Modernity (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1990).

Download references

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Europe ambivalent on biotechnology. Nature 387, 845–847 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1038/43051

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/43051

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing