European consumers are expressing strong opposition to the introduction of genetically modified foods to their supermarket shelves.
Evidence that genetically modified (GM) crops do not always bring the promised advantages is partly the reason for the opposition, but it is rather the fear of the unknown and anxiety over long-term consequences that the scientists have not worked out.
Relatively few would express themselves in the religious tones adopted by Britain's Prince Charles when he addressed the Soil Association, representing the interests of organic farmers, four years ago, but the prince's words nevertheless struck a chord.
"Mixing genetic material from species that cannot breed naturally, takes us into areas that should be left to God. We should not be meddling with the building blocks of life in this way," he said.
In France, public opinion is extremely hostile to bio-engineered foodstuffs. One reason is certainly the influence of environmental groups and activists, such as globalization foe Jose Bove.
A more fundamental reason is that the French have a powerful and traditional attachment to what they call "terroir," a term referring to locally grown produce and regional cuisines.
The French tend to believe in the slogan "You are what you eat."
As a result, French public opinion generally supports activists like Bove who have been convicted of destroying genetically modified rice or corn grown for research.
After the French Academy of Sciences published a report last December in favor of research with genetically modified organisms, several of its members were physically threatened, insulted or otherwise harassed.
But the Academy's decision suggests that a slow change is coming. Earlier this year, the National Institute of Agronomic Research announced it was resuming experiments with genetically modified grapevines, which it had ceased in 1999 due to public pressure.
The idea is to create a vine resistant to a disease that chemicals cannot stop. If they succeed, the French may be drinking genetically modified wine in the not-to-distant future.
In Italy, recent opinion polls show nearly 70 per cent oppose GM foods. Close to half of the respondents to an official poll said they considered GM food "dangerous" while four out of five Italians said they were prepared to spend more to eat healthier food.
In the center-right government of Silvio Berlusconi, the most outspoken critic of GM is Agricultural Minister Gianni Alemanno of the post-fascist National Alliance, who has called for "zero tolerance" on GM foodstuffs imported into Italy.
There is disagreement within the government, however. According to Alemanno, his Industry Ministry colleague, Antonio Marzano, a member of Berlusconi's Forza Italia party, is more open to GM.
There are experimental GM fields, particularly in the northeast of Italy, which are regularly raided by Greenpeace activists. Last year, magistrates in Turin placed 10 producers under investigation for allegedly importing hundreds of bags of genetically modified maize seeds without labeling them adequately.
Coop, a major Italian supermarket chain, was the first to ban GM from its labeled products.
"We have a prudent approach to GM because its effects on people's health are not yet known with certainty," Coop's director of communications, Aldo Bassoni, told reporters.
According to Bassoni, the sale of Coop labelled products has risen sharply since its decision to ban GM foodstuffs.
GM seeds are currently illegal in Italy, except for experimental purposes, but will be legalized in September following an EU ruling.
In Germany, the general public is wary about GM foods, a wariness which in part is rooted in a general scepticism in wide segments of the population towards any new technological development, and in part due to health concerns.
But a kind of consensus did emerge after a 10-month public forum debate about GM foods which the Agriculture Ministry organized last year. A wide range of farming, food industry, health, consumer groups, church, environmental and science community experts took part in the debate.
Agriculture Minister Renate Kuenast, in a summary of the debate, concluded that Germans can live with a "coexistence" of natural and genetically-manipulated foods, giving consumers and farmers alike the freedom to choose.
But she said this could only be the case if there is strict adherence to the EU guidelines which dictate "clear and transparent" labeling which show whether food and animal feeds are natural or have been genetically modified.
In Britain, a recent opinion poll conducted by the respected MORI institute found 46 per cent opposed to GM foods, while 14 per cent were in favour.
MORI said that while the number opposed had been steady at around half the electorate since the issue gained prominence in 1996, the number in favour had fallen away from above 30 per cent. It attributed rising indecision to the complexity of the issue and the polarized nature of the debate.
A government report this month on the future of GM crops suggested any attempt to force the issue could result in civil unrest, recalling previous protests by Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth.
The Cabinet Office strategy unit also found there was currently no benefit to the consumer or farmer in growing GM foods because there was no market -- British supermarkets are refusing to stock GM products.
Environment Secretary Margaret Beckett acknowledged public scepticism. "As with any new technology potential benefits are also accompanied by risks and uncertainties -- and these in turn bring about the public concern," she said.
The British government is worried at indications that research and development into GM foods in Britain is falling away, with a resultant loss of jobs.
The Labour government, like others throughout Europe, does not want to be left behind in the race for new technology, but is forced to cast a wary eye over its shoulder at a sceptical electorate.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Ursula K. le Guin in The Ones Who Walked Away from Omelas proposed a thought experiment of a utopian city whose existence depended on one child held captive in a dungeon. When taken to extremes, Le Guin suggests, utilitarian logic violates some of our deepest moral intuitions. Even the greatest social goods — peace, harmony and prosperity — are not worth the sacrifice of an innocent person. Former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), since leaving office, has lived an odyssey that has brought him to lows like Le Guin’s dungeon. From late 2008 to 2015 he was imprisoned, much of this