Assumptions of the Deficit Model Type of Thinking: Ignorance, Attitudes, and Science Communication in the Debate on Genetic Engineering in Agriculture

被引:0
作者
Marko Ahteensuu
机构
[1] University of Turku,
[2] Public Choice Research Centre (PCRC),undefined
来源
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics | 2012年 / 25卷
关键词
Deficit model; Ignorance; Attitudes; Science communication; Genetic engineering; Nanotechnology;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
This paper spells out and discusses four assumptions of the deficit model type of thinking. The assumptions are: First, the public is ignorant of science. Second, the public has negative attitudes towards (specific instances of) science and technology. Third, ignorance is at the root of these negative attitudes. Fourth, the public’s knowledge deficit can be remedied by one-way science communication from scientists to citizens. It is argued that there is nothing wrong with ignorance-based explanations per se. Ignorance accounts at least partially for many cases of opposition to specific instances of science and technology. Furthermore, more attention needs to be paid to the issue of relevance. In regard to the evaluation of a scientific experiment, a technology, or a product, the question is not only “who knows best?,” but also “what knowledge is relevant and to what extent?.” Examples are drawn primarily from the debate on genetic engineering in agriculture.
引用
收藏
页码:295 / 313
页数:18
相关论文
共 63 条
  • [1] Ahteensuu M(2009)A critical assessment of public consultations on GMOs in the European Union Environmental Values 18 129-152
  • [2] Siipi H(2003)Why are most Europeans opposed to GMOs? Factors explaining rejection in France and Europe Electronic Journal of Biotechnology 6 50-71
  • [3] Bonny S(2009)The new deficit model Nature Nanotechnology 4 609-611
  • [4] Brown S(2009)Science communication reconsidered Nature Biotechnology 27 515-518
  • [5] Bubela T(2002)Biotech remains unloved by the more informed Nature 416 261-449
  • [6] Bucchi M(2004)The scientists think and the public feels: Expert perceptions of the discourse of GM food Discourse and Society 15 433-80
  • [7] Neresini F(2008)New insights into public perceptions Nature Nanotechnology 4 79-155
  • [8] Cook G(2006)What drives public acceptance of nanotechnology? Nature Nanotechnology 1 153-328
  • [9] Pieri E(2007)Authors’ response Nature Nanotechnology 2 327-14
  • [10] Robbins PT(1989)The public understanding of science Nature 340 11-6