Listened to, but not heard! The failure to represent the public in genetically modified food policies
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
Listened to, but not heard! The failure to represent the public in genetically modified food policies. / Lassen, Jesper.
In: Public Understanding of Science, Vol. 27, No. 8, 2018, p. 923-936.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Listened to, but not heard! The failure to represent the public in genetically modified food policies
AU - Lassen, Jesper
PY - 2018
Y1 - 2018
N2 - In the mid-1990s, a mismatch was addressed between European genetically modified food policy, which focused primarily on risks and economic prospects, and public anxieties, which also included other concerns, and there was a development in European food policy toward the inclusion of what were referred to as “ethical aspects.” Using parliamentary debates in Denmark in 2002 and 2015 as a case, this article examines how three storylines of concern that were visible in public discourse at the time were represented by the decision makers in parliament. It shows that core public concerns raising fundamental questions about genetically modified foods, and in particular their perceived unnaturalness, were not considered in the parliamentary debates. It is suggested that the failure of the parliament to represent the public may undermine the legitimacy of politicians and lead to disillusionment with parliamentary government.
AB - In the mid-1990s, a mismatch was addressed between European genetically modified food policy, which focused primarily on risks and economic prospects, and public anxieties, which also included other concerns, and there was a development in European food policy toward the inclusion of what were referred to as “ethical aspects.” Using parliamentary debates in Denmark in 2002 and 2015 as a case, this article examines how three storylines of concern that were visible in public discourse at the time were represented by the decision makers in parliament. It shows that core public concerns raising fundamental questions about genetically modified foods, and in particular their perceived unnaturalness, were not considered in the parliamentary debates. It is suggested that the failure of the parliament to represent the public may undermine the legitimacy of politicians and lead to disillusionment with parliamentary government.
KW - attitudes on genetics
KW - bioethics
KW - GM food
KW - governance of science and technology
U2 - 10.1177/0963662518766286
DO - 10.1177/0963662518766286
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 29616888
VL - 27
SP - 923
EP - 936
JO - Public Understanding of Science
JF - Public Understanding of Science
SN - 0963-6625
IS - 8
ER -
ID: 194807184