10. Weighing Up Benefits And Risks

10.1 Do the Benefits of Genetic Engineering Outweigh the Risks?
10.2 Who Thinks the Benefits of Genetic Engineering Outweigh the Risks?
10.3 Self-interest and Personal Approval
10.4 Summary: Benefits and Risks

10.1 Do the Benefits of Genetic Engineering Outweigh the Risks?

7a. Thinking back over the good things and the bad things 
that might come from it, over the next 20 years, do you think 
the benefits of genetic engineering are likely to outweigh the risks?

                Yes, definitely                 14
                Yes, probably                   49              
                Mixed feelings; yes and no      27              
                No, probably not                 7              
                No, definitely not               2                                                      
                                                ---
                                                100% (mean= 67)

A clear majority of Australians believe that the good will outweigh the bad, most of the rest are uncertain, and only a tiny minority believe the bad will outweigh the good. Some 14% of the public said "yes, definitely" and a further 49% said "yes, probably". Another 27% had "mixed feelings, yes and no". Only 7% said "no, probably not" and 2% said "no, definitely not". The average Australian gives genetic engineering a favorable 66 points out of 100 .

In sum, the Australian public believes that the long term benefits from genetic engineering are likely to outweigh the risks.

10.2 Who Thinks the Benefits Of Genetic Engineering Outweigh The Risks?

10.2.1 Background, Knowledge, and Risks

Background. Optimism about the benefits of genetic engineering is more or less equally widespread in all demographic groups. Multiple regression analysis shows no important differences between old and young, men and women, the well educated and the poorly educated, Catholic and Protestant, church-goers and the unchurched, or between Labor and Coalition sympathizers. There is only a marginal difference between environmentalists and others (beta=.08, .05<p<.01).

Knowledge. People who are knowledgeable about genetic engineering are a little more optimistic about its long run benefits (beta = .10). General science knowledge makes no difference.

Goals. Views about the value of the benefits involved are very important. Those (many) who are keen on the agricultural benefits from scientific research are most optimistic about using genetic engineering to achieve those goals, while the (few) who are unimpressed with scientific research are unsympathetic to genetic engineering (beta =.21). In the extreme, someone who is "delighted" about all six food and agricultural goals asked about in the questionnaire are will, on average, be 28 points more optimistic about genetic engineering than someone who thinks all six are "terrible".

Risks. Views about the possible risks of genetic engineering are also important. Those who are greatly worried about the risks are much less optimistic than those who are not very worried (beta=-.24). In the extreme, someone who thinks all three risks asked about in the survey are a "huge worry: terrible and very likely to happen" will on average be 20 points less optimistic about genetic engineering than someone who thinks all three risks are "no worry at all".

Importantly, even extreme worriers are nonetheless likely to think that the benefits of genetic engineering will slightly outweigh the costs in the long run -- their views falling, on average, between "mixed feelings" and "yes, probably" benefit.

There is also an element of irrational risk aversion: those who worry about the dangers of fluoridated drinking water are substantially less supportive of genetic engineering (beta=-.10).

Scientific World-View. Those who hold a scientific world-view -- accepting Darwin's theory of evolution and modern views about astronomy -- are also much more optimistic (beta=.17). Thus much of the opposition to genetic engineering comes from people who reject the theory of evolution and other aspects of the scientific world-view.

10.3 Self-interest and Personal Approval

• Those who expect to eat genetically engineered food are very much more likely to think the benefits will outweigh the risks (beta=.30).
• Those who expect to wear clothes made from genetically engineered cotton are somewhat more supportive (beta= .12).
• And people who themselves approve of various genetically engineered products are much more likely to think the benefits will outweigh the risks (beta=.26).

10.4 Summary: Benefits and Risks

Table 3 presents a simple, summary model compactly summarizing who thinks the benefits of genetic engineering will outweigh the risks, and who does not. The results show that Australians who see genetic engineering as promising more benefit than risk -- the majority -- tend to be those who:

• favour the goals, especially agricultural benefits;
• are less worried than the average about potential costs;
• do not particularly fear fluoridation;
• are relatively knowledgeable about genetic engineering; and
• have a scientific world-view.

• are less keen on agricultural goals than most Australians;
• are more worried than the average about potential risks;
• fear fluoridation;
• know little about genetic engineering; and
• reject Darwin's theory of evolution and modern astronomy.

 

	Standardized regression coefficient*	t-test, significance
Potential benefits	.18	t=6.6, p<.001
Rational worries about potential costs	-.18	t=-6.0, p<.001
Irrational worries (fluoridation)	-.09	t=-3.1, p<.01
Knowledge of genetic engineering	.09	t=3.1, p<.01
Scientific world-view	.14	t=4.3, p<.001
Gender (male=1, female=0)	.03	Not significant
Age (years)	.00	Not significant
Education (years)	.04	Not significant
Christian belief (5 item scale)	-.01	Not significant
Environmentalists (rating, 0 to 100)	-.07	t=2.6, p<.01

Source: International Social Science Survey / Australia. N=1378.

NOTES: * A standardized regression coefficent may also be called a "Beta" or a "B".