were organized across the country by local authorities and network groups. The
debate generated a great deal of voluntary activity that deepened and multiplied as
it got under way. The number of local meetings increased each week of the debate,
involving thousands of people across the country. By the end of the process,
an estimated total of over 600 regional, county and local meetings were held.
As expected, sharp differences emerged in perspectives on the need for GM and
what benefits and costs it brought.
issues directly related to GM technology but on a range of broader social and polit-
ical issues. The mood was said to range from caution and doubt, through suspicion
and scepticism, to hostility and rejection. The belief was strongly expressed that
GM technology and GM food carried potential risks. A majority rejected any
suggested benefits from GM, except to the companies that promoted it. Parti-
cipants felt uninformed about GM, were unable to express an opinion on partic-
ular GM issues, and thus had little confidence in their own power to influence
decisions about GM.
their concerns. In particular, they were concerned that not enough was known
about the long-term effects of GM on health. Thirdly, there was little support
for the early commercialization of GM crops. Just over half of the participants
never wanted to see GM crops grown in the UK `under any circumstances'.
Almost all the remainder wanted the potential risks to the environment and
human health reduced to `an acceptable level' before commercialization took
place. Fourthly, there was widespread mistrust of government and multinational
companies about their motives, intentions and behaviour in taking decisions
about GM. Concern was expressed that government may not have adequate know-
ledge and advice to help take the right decisions and could be too close to produ-
cers' interests. Companies were motivated overwhelmingly by profit than meeting
society's needs and had the power to make their interests prevail over the wider
public interest.
on the potential role of GM for developing countries. While there was an initial
assumption that GM technology might help developing countries produce more
food and offer them medical, social and economic benefits, there was a clear diver-
gence between the majority, who felt that the potential benefits would not actually
materialize and that there were better and more important ways to promote devel-
opment, including fairer trade, better distribution of food, income and power, and
better government, and the minority, who felt benefits would accrue especially
after people got more engaged in GM issues. Finally, the debate was welcomed and
valued. Participants expressed appreciation for the opportunity both to express
their own views and to hear those of others.