Suchergebnisse

Genetic engineering has the potential to become a key technology of the 21st century. However, the introduction of genetic engineering is socially controversial and is met with mistrust, concern and rejection from the population in a number of applications.
The research project consists of several parts. On the one hand, it is a media content analysis in which the thematization and framing of genetic engineering is examined in daily newspapers and television broadcasts. On the other hand, public opinion on genetic engineering is collected by means of standardised surveys (Eurobarometer). The data from this survey is available on FORSbase. These two methods are supplemented by in-depth qualitative procedures in focus groups through in-depth interviews. Finally, the results of the study are to be verified and diffused in round tables with key actors. By using several instruments - method triangulation - the complexity of the topic and the dynamics of public opinion formation can be taken into account. In addition, this sophisticated design makes it possible to develop methodical innovations at the intersections between the various components.
Switzerland is a particularly interesting field of research for such an investigation, since in this country there is an intensive public discussion of genetic engineering in international comparison. At the same time, intensive media coverage and a high level of public knowledge interact with a pronounced degree of ambivalence or scepticism towards genetic engineering. The project aims to examine the significant cultural differences between German and French-speaking Switzerland by consistently parallelizing the methods.
The project is conceived as a continuation and deepening of a European comparative, interdisciplinary project in which the applicants have already participated in a first phase (see project nr. 6332). The integration into this international framework guarantees the intercultural comparability of the data as well as a longitudinal perspective. This study can make an important contribution to basic research on processes of opinion- and confidence-building in the dynamic field of future technologies. In addition, this project aims to gain insights that will be of importance for the communicative practice of science and journalism, but also for politics and business in the field of risk communication via genetic engineering.
The representative surveys on the level of knowledge and the attitudes of the population towards genetic engineering were carried out analogously to the two so-called Eurobarometer surveys, which were carried out in a first wave in October/November 1996 and for the second time in the winter of 1999 in 15 European countries.
Unfortunately, for financial and logistical reasons, the field work in Switzerland could only be carried out six months later between 20 May and 10 June 1997 and the second time - three years later - between the end of May and mid-June 2000.
In contrast to the international Eurobarometer Survey, in the first Swiss survey the media coverage of the "Dolly" case, critical of genetic engineering, on the one hand, was noticeable. On the other hand, it played an important role that the Swiss population had to vote on the so-called "Gene Protection" initiative on June 7, 1998, and media coverage was therefore already very intensive a year earlier.
The situation before and during the second survey, on the other hand, was completely different, as the "gene protection" initiative had been rejected with a two-thirds majority a year earlier and genetic engineering was therefore only given a rather low priority by the media.
The Swiss Eurobarometer Surveys are a personal survey of two representative samples of approximately 1000 citizens aged 18 and over. Because of the three language regions, three questionnaire variants had to be used, but they were largely identical to the Eurobarometer questionnaires of Germany, France and Italy. In addition, however, some new questions were included in the Swiss questionnaire. The two surveys also differ in that in the second wave, in coordination with the international project, certain questions were asked anew and others from the first wave were no longer used.
FORS archives the data of both Eurobarometer surveys. This document refers to Eurobarometer 2000 and the data from the 1997 survey are archived and described under FORSbase nr. 6332.

The structure and origins of attitudes to genetic engineering have so far hardly been systematically investigated in Switzerland. In Switzerland, too, the future of genetic engineering procedures appears to depend on consensus among the population. The vote on the gene protection initiative and the media campaigns that preceded it made it clear that there can be no talk of consensus. Rather, there are deep, almost unbridgeable gulfs between proponents and opponents of this new technology.
At the scientific level, the opinion polls carried out so far and the rare qualitative studies on the attitudes on this issue are far from sufficient to understand the motives of the advocates and opponents of genetic engineering and to understand the dynamics of opinion-forming both among politicians and among the population in this area. In addition, longitudinal studies on both the policy process and media coverage of genetic engineering are lacking.
For this reason, the IPMZ - Institute for Journalism and Media Research at the University of Zurich initiated a research project in 1996 which, supported by a group of researchers from different disciplines and institutions, tried to shed light on the phenomenon of "genetic engineering in the field of tension between politics, media and the public" from different perspectives and on the basis of four interlinked subprojects. Hypotheses, theoretical perspectives and methodical access should be mutually coordinated.
In detail, the subprojects (1) are a policy analysis of genetic engineering policy in Switzerland, (2) a content analysis of media coverage of genetic engineering over the last 25 years, (3) supplemented by a qualitative content analysis of the media response to the "Dolly" case and (4) a representative survey of the Swiss population on genetic engineering in spring 1997 (Eurobarometer 1997). Only the data of the representative survey is archived at FORS.
The Swiss project "Genetic engineering in the field of tension between politics, media and the public" is not only transdisciplinary in concept, but also international and comparative, as it is part of the concerted action "Biotechnology and the European Public", in which researchers from 15 countries work on the topic under the direction of a team of researchers from the "Science Museum" and the "London School of Economics". The common basis is the Eurobarometer Survey conducted in these countries as well as the jointly conceived and coordinated policy studies on the regulation of genetic engineering and content analyses of media reporting in the various European countries, but also in the USA and Canada.
The goal of the international project can be summarized as follows: "A cross-national comparative analysis will identify why, in different countries and at different times, particular issues and concerns have characterized public debate and public policy making. This will lead to a European comparative perspective on the evaluation and interpretation of the Eurobarometer survey. The practical implications of public perceptions for European biotechnology policy-making will be drawn out for the benefit of the scientific, industrial and policy-making communities."

An Hand des algerischen Beispiels wird eines der großen kulturellen Probleme der modernen arabischen Gesellschaft angesprochen: Die Ungleichheit der Teilhabe an modernem Wissen auf Grund unterschiedlichem, gesellschaftlich bedingtem Zugang zu den Vermittlungsprozessen dieses Wissens. (DÜI-Mey)

"Wissen ist Macht" ist eine Binsenweisheit, die sich durch die mehr als dreitausendjährige Geschichte der Aufzeichnung und Bewahrung von Wissen und Informationen zieht. Richard Ovenden, Bibliothekar der altehrwürdigen Bodleian Library in Oxford und profunder Kenner der Buchgeschichte, beschreibt in 14 Kapiteln Schlüsselereignisse in der Geschichte von Archiven und Bibliotheken aus der Zeit der Assyrer bis in die heutige Zeit der digitalen Informationsflut, die einerseits das Sammeln und Vermehren von Wissen und Informationen, andererseits die machtpolitischen, privaten oder von Interesselosigkeit und Vernachlässigung beherrschten Motivationen des Angriffs auf dieses Wissen sowie die Formen des Informationsmissbrauchs dokumentieren. Die einzelnen Ereignisse sind lebendig und spannend geschrieben, gut recherchiert und umfangreich (auf 74 Seiten) dokumentiert. Im Schlusskapitel formuliert der Autor ein leidenschaftliches 5-Punkte-Manifest, "warum wir immer Bibliotheken und Archive brauchen werden". - Zeitlich und thematisch umfassend, ein Muss für Bestände jeder Größe, derzeit ohne Vergleichstitel. (1)