ABSTRACT

New genetic tools can potentially mitigate the decline of biodiversity. Democratisation of science mandates public opinion be considered while new technologies are in development. We conducted eleven focus groups in New Zealand to explore three questions about novel technologies (gene drive and two others for comparison of pest control tools): (1) what are the risks/benefits? (2) how do they compare to current methods? and (3) who should be represented on a panel that evaluates the tools and what factors should they consider? Findings from the content analysis of the risks/benefits revealed three main considerations that were of social concern – Environmental, Practical, and Ethical. Most participants were self-aware of their insufficient knowledge to compare the different technologies. Unanimously, respondents wanted the available information provided throughout the tool development process and saw multi-sector panel oversight as essential. Scientists and policy makers should match the public’s willingness to engage collaboratively.

摘要

新的遗传工具可以潜在地减轻生物多样性的下降。科学的民主化要求在开发新技术的同时考虑公众意见。我们在新西兰举办了 11 个焦点小组，探讨关于新技术的三个问题（基因驱动和另外两个用于比较害虫控制工具的问题）：(1) 风险/收益是什么？(2) 它们与当前方法相比如何？(3) 谁应该被代表参加评估工具的小组，他们应该考虑哪些因素？风险/收益的内容分析结果揭示了社会关注的三个主要考虑因素——环境、实用和道德。大多数参与者都意识到他们的知识不足，无法比较不同的技术。一致认为，受访者希望在整个工具开发过程中提供可用信息，并认为多部门小组监督至关重要。科学家和政策制定者应该与公众合作参与的意愿相匹配。