IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/agrhuv/v40y2023i3d10.1007_s10460-023-10436-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Improving the agri-food biotechnology conversation: bridging science communication with science and technology studies

Author

Listed:
  • Garrett M. Broad

    (Rowan University, Edelman College of Communication & Creative Arts)

Abstract

At a time when agri-food biotechnologies are receiving a surge of investment, innovation, and public interest in the United States, it is common to hear both supporters and critics call for open and inclusive dialogue on the topic. Social scientists have a potentially important role to play in these discursive engagements, but the legacy of the intractable genetically modified (GM) food debate calls for some reflection regarding the best ways to shape the norms of that conversation. This commentary argues that agri-food scholars interested in promoting a more constructive agri-food biotechnology discussion could do so by blending key insights, as well as guarding against key shortcomings, from the fields of science communication and science and technology studies (STS). Science communication’s collaborative and translational approach to the public understanding of science has proven pragmatically valuable to scientists in academia, government, and private industry, but it has too often remained wedded to deficit model approaches and struggled to explore deeper questions of public values and corporate power. STS’s critical approach has highlighted the need for multi-stakeholder power-sharing and the integration of diverse knowledge systems into public engagement, but it has done little to grapple with the prevalence of misinformation in movements against GM foods and other agri-food biotechnologies. Ultimately, a better agri-food biotechnology conversation will require a strong foundation in scientific literacy as well as conceptual grounding in the social studies of science. The paper concludes by describing how, with attention to the structure, content, and style of public engagement in the agri-food biotechnology debates, social scientists can play a productive conversational role across a variety of academic, institutional, community-level, and mediated contexts.

Suggested Citation

  • Garrett M. Broad, 2023. "Improving the agri-food biotechnology conversation: bridging science communication with science and technology studies," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(3), pages 929-938, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:40:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1007_s10460-023-10436-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s10460-023-10436-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10460-023-10436-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10460-023-10436-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrew Kliskey & Paula Williams & David L. Griffith & Virginia H. Dale & Chelsea Schelly & Anna-Maria Marshall & Valoree S. Gagnon & Weston M. Eaton & Kristin Floress, 2021. "Thinking Big and Thinking Small: A Conceptual Framework for Best Practices in Community and Stakeholder Engagement in Food, Energy, and Water Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-19, February.
    2. Carmen Bain & Sonja Lindberg & Theresa Selfa, 2020. "Emerging sociotechnical imaginaries for gene edited crops for foods in the United States: implications for governance," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 37(2), pages 265-279, June.
    3. Natalie G. Mueller & Andrew Flachs, 2022. "Domestication, crop breeding, and genetic modification are fundamentally different processes: implications for seed sovereignty and agrobiodiversity," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(1), pages 455-472, March.
    4. Madeleine Fairbairn & Zenia Kish & Julie Guthman, 2022. "Pitching agri-food tech: performativity and non-disruptive disruption in Silicon Valley," Journal of Cultural Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(5), pages 652-670, September.
    5. Glenn Davis Stone & Dominic Glover, 2017. "Disembedding grain: Golden Rice, the Green Revolution, and heirloom seeds in the Philippines," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(1), pages 87-102, March.
    6. Maywa Montenegro de Wit, 2022. "Can agroecology and CRISPR mix? The politics of complementarity and moving toward technology sovereignty," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(2), pages 733-755, June.
    7. Ryan, Camille D. & Schaul, Andrew J. & Butner, Ryan & Swarthout, John T., 2020. "Monetizing disinformation in the attention economy: The case of genetically modified organisms (GMOs)," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 7-18.
    8. Philip M. Fernbach & Nicholas Light & Sydney E. Scott & Yoel Inbar & Paul Rozin, 2019. "Extreme opponents of genetically modified foods know the least but think they know the most," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 3(3), pages 251-256, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mascha Gugganig & Karly Ann Burch & Julie Guthman & Kelly Bronson, 2023. "Contested agri-food futures: Introduction to the Special Issue," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(3), pages 787-798, September.
    2. Sally Murray, 2017. "New technologies create opportunities," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2017-156, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    3. Sarah Ruth Sippel, 2023. "Tackling land’s ‘stubborn materiality’: the interplay of imaginaries, data and digital technologies within farmland assetization," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(3), pages 849-863, September.
    4. Kok, Kristiaan P.W. & Klerkx, Laurens, 2023. "Addressing the politics of mission-oriented agricultural innovation systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    5. Shahida Anusha Siddiqui & Zarnab Asif & Misbah Murid & Ito Fernando & Danung Nur Adli & Andrey Vladimirovich Blinov & Alexey Borisovich Golik & Widya Satya Nugraha & Salam A. Ibrahim & Seid Mahdi Jafa, 2022. "Consumer Social and Psychological Factors Influencing the Use of Genetically Modified Foods—A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-22, November.
    6. Romain Espinosa & Jan Stoop, 2021. "Do people really want to be informed? Ex-ante evaluations of information-campaign effectiveness," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(4), pages 1131-1155, December.
    7. Robin Siebert & Christian Herzig & Marc Birringer, 2022. "Strategic framing of genome editing in agriculture: an analysis of the debate in Germany in the run-up to the European Court of Justice ruling," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(2), pages 617-632, June.
    8. Gerlak, Andrea K. & Guido, Zack & Owen, Gigi & McGoffin, Mariana Sofia Rodriguez & Louder, Elena & Davies, Julia & Smith, Kelly Jay & Zimmer, Andy & Murveit, Anna M. & Meadow, Alison & Shrestha, Padme, 2023. "Stakeholder engagement in the co-production of knowledge for environmental decision-making," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    9. Shen-Long Yang & Feng Yu & Kai Li & Ting-Ting Rao & Da-Peng Lian, 2022. "No Control, No Consumption: Association of Low Perceived Control and Intention to Accept Genetically Modified Food," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-13, June.
    10. Caroline Ritter & Adam Shriver & Emilie McConnachie & Jesse Robbins & Marina A G von Keyserlingk & Daniel M Weary, 2019. "Public attitudes toward genetic modification in dairy cattle," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(12), pages 1-15, December.
    11. Laxmi Prasad Pant, 2019. "Responsible innovation through conscious contestation at the interface of agricultural science, policy, and civil society," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 36(2), pages 183-197, June.
    12. Huaiyu Wang & Sushil Pandey & Lu Feng, 2020. "Econometric Analyses of Adoption and Household-Level Impacts of Improved Rice Varieties in the Uplands of Yunnan, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-13, August.
    13. Valerie Kilders & Vincenzina Caputo, 2021. "Is Animal Welfare Promoting Hornless Cattle? Assessing Consumer’s Valuation for Milk from Gene‐edited Cows under Different Information Regimes," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(3), pages 735-759, September.
    14. Daniel Cronan & E. Jamie Trammell & Andrew (Anaru) Kliskey & Paula Williams & Lilian Alessa, 2022. "Socio-Ecological Futures: Embedded Solutions for Stakeholder-Driven Alternative Futures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-19, March.
    15. Julie Guthman & Michaelanne Butler, 2023. "Fixing food with a limited menu: on (digital) solutionism in the agri-food tech sector," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(3), pages 835-848, September.
    16. Subir Bairagi & Marie Claire Custodio & Alvaro Durand-Morat & Matty Demont, 2021. "Preserving cultural heritage through the valorization of Cordillera heirloom rice in the Philippines," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(1), pages 257-270, February.
    17. John C. Beghin & Heidi Schweizer, 2021. "Agricultural Trade Costs," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(2), pages 500-530, June.
    18. Harashima, Taiji, 2023. "An Economic Theory of Disinformation," MPRA Paper 116177, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Daniel Velden & Joost Dessein & Laurens Klerkx & Lies Debruyne, 2023. "Constructing legitimacy for technologies developed in response to environmental regulation: the case of ammonia emission-reducing technology for the Flemish intensive livestock industry," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(2), pages 649-665, June.
    20. Douglas H. Constance, 2023. "The doctors of agrifood studies," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(1), pages 31-43, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:40:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1007_s10460-023-10436-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.