Public understanding and perception of and attitude towards agricultural biotechnology in the Philippines

Findings indicate that Philippines stakeholders were mostly male, married, between 31 to 50 years old, and were holders of bacca laureate degrees. Many were rural dwellers and were mostly Roman Catholics. In terms of world views and values, the religious leaders exhibited a more conservative stand. They agreed that 'the use of biotechnology in food production is against my moral values,' while majority of the other stakeholders thought otherwise. Together with policy makers, the religious leaders also strongly supported the statement that 'until we know that genetically altered foods are totally safe, those products should be banned.' On the other hand, the journalists and scientists were more open and optimistic about the biotechnology with many disagreeing that 'genetic manipulation takes mankind into realms that belong to God and God alone. 'Stakeholders generally disagree with the statements that 'we have no business medaling with nature, and that regulation of modern biotechnology should be left mainly to the industry.' However, they held similar views in terms of willingness to pay for labeling of genetically modifies foods and the belief that genetic engineering could lead to nutritious and cheaper foods. Filipino stakeholders had generally low exposure to sources of information on agricultural biotechnology. If ever they did access sources of information, they used multiple sources, combining both mass media and interpersonal sources. Policy makers had the highest mas media usage, and the highest use of printed materials. Among interpersonal sources, consumers and extension workers were the most popular. Significant sources of information were the religious leaders, NGOs, websites, print materials, food regulators, seminars and public forums, and agricultural biotechnology companies. University-based scientist were the most trusted source of information by the different stakeholders in this study. This total trust was highest among the farmer leaders and community leaders, policy makers, religious leaders, and the consumers. All the stakeholder groups rated their understanding of science as adequate and claimed knowing only 'some' in terms of the uses of biotechnology in food production. Food characteristics were deemed very important in biotechnology by the stakeholders. Religious leaders appear to be highly concerned with food characteristics compared to other stakeholders. There was a general tendency also to perceive the benefits of agricultural biotechnology in food production as either moderately or very beneficial by most of the stakeholders. On the while, all stakeholder group had favorable perceptions about agricultural biotechnology. Stakeholders perceived the international research institutions like International Rice Research Institute [Los Baños, Laguna, Philippines] and International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center [Mexico] as very concerned about public health and safety on agricultural biotechnology. Those perceived as concerned (but not only concerned) were the university-based scientists, and government research institutions. On the whole, science has been perceived by stakeholders as an important part of agricultural development. Those who were very interested in the issue of biotechnology in food production were policy makers, scientists, and the journalists. Stakeholders had a generally favorable attitude towards agricultural biotechnology. They felt that generally altered foods should be labeled. Food safety and environmentally impacts were two important issues that policy makers and scientists should consider when making decisions about agricultural biotechnology. Socio-demographic characteristics were found to relate significantly with stakeholders understanding and perception of, and attitude towards biotechnology. Respondents who are older and with higher education tend yo display a higher level of understanding, a more positive perception, and a more favorable attitude towards agricultural biotechnology. Specifically, stakeholders agreed that the government is ensuring safety of the food people eat. Views and values were also found to be more significantly related with perception and attitude than with understanding of biotechnology. Those who hold the view that the use of biotechnology in food production is against their moral values tend to have a negative perception that only large agricultural companies benefit from biotechnology. Stakeholders generally had a low level of exposure to information sources in biotechnology. Information sources tend to relate positively with level of understanding and attitude towards agricultural biotechnology regardless of whether these are mass media or interpersonal sources. They, however, create varying perceptions (both positive and negative) regarding agricultural technology. The only source which consistently leads to positive behavior towards agricultural biotechnology is the group of experts professionals or scientists.