CropBiotech Briefs Vol. 3 No. 2

Southeast Asians show high interest in biotechnology and express strong appreciation for the role of science in the development of agriculture. In addition, they do not think that agricultural biotechnology is a risk to public health and food safety. They see the possible benefits arising from the applications of biotechnology in medicine, food, and crop production. More specifically, they believe that biotechnology will benefit agriculture and the small farmers in their own countries.

Most of the businessmen, consumers and farmer leaders in Southeast Asia agree that genetically modified (GM) food should be labeled although not all of them would be willing to pay for the extra cost involved. Thai policy makers and consumers topped the bill of those stakeholders who would be willing to pay for labeling. Majority of the stakeholders in Thailand, Vietnam, Indonesia and Malaysia expressed dissatisfaction over regulatory processes in their respective countries. The Philippine stakeholders remained divided in this issue.

Moreover, the results indicate that survey respondents consisting of consumers, businessmen, extension workers, farmer leaders, policy makers, and journalists consider university scientists and research institutes as most trustworthy. Across the five countries, the respondents believe that university scientists and research institutes tend to be highly concerned about public health and safety issues relating to biotechnology. They also think that university scientists and research institutes should be entrusted the responsibility for assessing and managing the risks relating to agricultural biotechnology.

These are some of the results of a recent survey of key stakeholders in Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam by communication researchers from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC), and the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA). The survey is based on a random sample of 2,047 respondents in five Southeast Asian countries: Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam. The following are some of the key findings of the surveys:

KEY FINDINGS

Average Factual Knowledge. Most Southeast Asian stakeholders show an average level of awareness and attentiveness to factual information on biotechnology. This was based on a pop-quiz composed of twelve statements to ascertain their objective knowledge on the topic. Businessmen (Vietnam: 62%, Thailand: 62%, Indonesia: 56.9%, Philippines: 50%), consumers (Philippines: 63.9%, Indonesia: 52%, Vietnam: 50.5%), journalists (Philippines: 59.1%, Indonesia: 54.8%, Vietnam: 50%), and extension workers (Thailand: 63.3%, Indonesia: 62.8%, Vietnam: 54%) exhibit a moderate degree of understanding of biotechnology.

High Interest in Agricultural Biotechnology. In all five countries, stakeholders generally exhibit high interest in biotechnology. Policy makers (Indonesia: 80%, Thailand: 79.1%, Malaysia: 78.6%, Philippines: 77.3%, Vietnam: 71%), farmer leaders (Indonesia: 94.1%, Vietnam: 70%), extension workers (Indonesia: 78.5%) and scientists (Malaysia: 99.9%, Vietnam: 96.9%, Thailand: 83.3%) were the top stakeholder groups that show high interest in biotechnology. These results indicate that biotechnology generates a lot of attention from stakeholders who tend to be directly involved in biotechnology and whose opinions and decisions have a significant influence on the future of biotechnology in these countries.

High Benefits, Low Risks. Southeast Asian stakeholders generally view biotechnology as having high benefits, and relatively low risks. It can be noted that those who either work directly with farmers such as extension workers, are farmers themselves such as farm leaders, or have farm-based constituencies such as policy makers, have assessed very highly the benefits that can be derived from biotechnology. Policy makers (Malaysia: 85.7%, Vietnam: 83.9%, Thailand: 83.8%, Philippines: 71.1%, Indonesia: 70%), farmer leaders (Vietnam: 88%), and extension workers (Vietnam: 86%, Indonesia: 72.6%) were the top stakeholder groups that see biotechnology as having high benefits.

Stakeholders in Malaysia, Philippines and Vietnam are rather unsure about their perceptions of the risks they tend to associate with biotechnology. Perceptions of risk assessment is practically split three ways, that is, between low, moderate, and high perceptions. Farmer leaders (Indonesia: 76.4%, Thailand: 50%) and extension workers (Indonesia: 76.5%, Malaysia: 63.1%) say that biotechnology poses low risks. High risks are associated with biotechnology by journalists from Vietnam 82%, the Philippines 73%, and Malaysia 62.9%. Survey respondents as a whole perceive biotechnology as having below moderate risks.

Positive Attitude Towards Biotechnology. Southeast Asians tend to exhibit positive attitudes towards biotechnology, and certainly do not show the kind of skepticism, distrust, or hostility that appear to characterize other public discussions on biotechnology. Farmer leaders (Indonesia: 84.6%, Vietnam: 84%, Philippines: 79%, Malaysia: 74.6%) have a very positive attitude towards biotechnology. It should also be noted that consumers (Philippines: 82.8%, Vietnam: 73.7%, Thailand: 70%), extension workers (Vietnam: 84%, Thailand: 78.3%, Indonesia: 76.4%), policy makers (Thailand: 88.4%, Vietnam: 87.2%, Malaysia: 74.9%) and businessmen (Indonesia: 76.4%, Philippines: 74.1%, Malaysia: 72.6%) are in support of biotechnology.

OTHER KEY FINDINGS FROM THE SURVEY

Labeling GM Foods. Consumers (Philippines: 95.3%, Thailand: 95%, Malaysia: 90.1%, Indonesia: 89%, Vietnam: 88.9%) prefer that GM food should be labeled. Farmer leaders in Malaysia 61.7%, Vietnam 50%, and the Philippines 50.9% say that they are willing to pay extra cost for labeling GM food. The same is true for the policy makers in Thailand 81.4% and Malaysia 53.6%.

Banning of GM Food. Policy makers (Indonesia: 86.6%, Malaysia: 75%, Philippines: 75.3%, Thailand: 62.8%) were not in favor of contributing their own resources (time and money) to ban GM food. On the other hand, farmer leaders (Thailand: 50%, Vietnam: 50%) and journalists (Thailand: 50%, Vietnam: 50%) were willing to provide resources to ban GM food.

Agricultural Biotechnology Benefits Small Farmers. There is a wide appreciation among Southeast Asian stakeholders about the benefits of agricultural biotechnology to small farmers. Farmer leaders (Vietnam: 82%, Thailand: 64%, Indonesia: 56.8%), policy makers (Indonesia: 80%, Philippines: 79.4%, Malaysia: 71.4%), extension workers (Vietnam: 86%, Philippines: 77.2%, Indonesia: 70%) and consumers (Philippines: 69.8%, Malaysia: 62.2%, Thailand: 60%) show the most appreciation. Similarly, policy makers (Vietnam: 90.3%, Malaysia: 85.7%, Indonesia: 83.3%, Thailand: 81.4%, Philippines: 78.4%) have very positive thoughts about the value of agricultural biotechnology in their respective countries.

Current Biotechnology Regulations are Sufficient. A considerable percentage of stakeholders in Thailand (journalists: 65.6%, consumers: 60%, businessmen: 58%, extension workers: 55%, farmer leaders: 50%), Vietnam (policy makers: 71%, farmer leaders: 64%, journalists: 60.7%, consumers: 52.5%), Indonesia (journalists: 77.4%, businessmen: 60.8%, extension workers: 54.9%, consumers: 51%) and Malaysia (journalists: 66.6%, businessmen: 55.7%, policy makers: 53.6%, consumers: 51.3%) have expressed reservations about their countries’ ability to regulate biotechnology. However, Indonesian policy makers (85.4%) and farmer leaders (80.4%), and Malaysian farmer leaders (59.6%) believe that current biotechnology regulations are adequate within their respective countries.

The UIUC-ISAAA study hopes to establish a clear profile of each stakeholder that can be useful for extension educators, communication planners, and other decision makers involved in agricultural biotechnology. The survey results are reported and analyzed in individual country monographs which are now available online at http://www.isaaa.org/kc/Publications/htm/articles/survey.htm. A separate and integrative publication, which further examines in detail the similarities and differences between stakeholders
across countries, will be released in a separate monograph.

Dr. Napoleon K. Juanillo, Jr., Professor, College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, is the author/ principal investigator of the study. The Biotechnology Information Centers (BICs) of the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications (ISAAA) in South East Asia and ISAAA’s partner organizations in each of the five countries carried out the country surveys. Funding for this research endeavor was largely provided in part by ISAAA, and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC). Partial funding came from the Hewlett Foundation, and the Illinois Council on Food and Agricultural Research.

Research contributions were also made by the University of Illinois Agricultural Experiment Station; the Cooperative State Research, Education, and the Extension Service (CSREES); the US Department of Agriculture; and the Illinois Council on Food and Agricultural Research (C-FAR). Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in the five country monographs are solely those of the author/principal investigator, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations involved in the study.

Copyright © 2004. CropBiotech Net.