gfs survey confirms high acceptance of genome editing

gfs survey confirms high acceptance of genome editing

A large majority of the Swiss population recognises the advantages of targeted plant breeding using genome editing. This is shown by a survey conducted by gfs.bern.

Friday, October 4, 2024

On behalf of the swiss-food knowledge platform, gfs.bern has conducted a survey on the use of innovative technologies in agriculture. As with the first survey in 2021, the focus of this current survey was on targeted plant breeding using genome editing, also known as gene scissors. The survey is representative with 1060 eligible voters interviewed by the online panel «Polittrends» of gfs.bern. The survey took place from August 26 to September 6, 2024, with a sampling error of +/- 3 percentage points.

Once again, a large majority of voters recognize the advantage of targeted plant breeding using genome editing, regardless of political affiliation. Respondents place particular importance on the reduced use of crop protection products and the safeguarding of regional products. Compared to conventional breeding methods, which often rely on radiation or on the use of chemicals, the targeted introduction of mutations using genome editing scores particularly well.

The fundamental satisfaction of voters with Swiss agriculture remains high at 78 percent, with strong support across the political spectrum and among the party-unaffiliated spectrum. However, there is an exception among Green Party supporters, of whom only
37 percent express satisfaction with agriculture.

When it comes to agricultural products, the population particularly values regionality (72 percent), freshness (66 percent), taste
(47 percent) and price (45 percent). Organic production ranks only in fifth place (32 percent).

The population is very open to new production methods. The use of drones to locate and combat disease (86 percent) receives the most approval, followed by the targeted breeding of resistant plants
(74 percent). Targeted crop protection products (67 percent) and robots (67 percent) also receive good marks. However, genetically modified plants are clearly rejected (77 percent). When asked about the use of genome-edited plants, respondents indicated that they would need to know more about the technology (44 percent undecided) to be able to form an opinion.

However, after a brief explanation, a majority of respondents
(64 percent) consider the technology to be useful.

Its benefits are recognized across political lines. Genome editing also compares very favorably with traditional breeding methods which rely in part on radioactive radiation or chemicals (so-called mutagenesis). Waiting for random mutations (corresponding to traditional breeding without mutagenesis) also appears impractical to a majority of respondents.

86 percent find genome editing useful if it can greatly reduce the use of crop protection products. Nearly as many see the preservation of traditional apple varieties (85 percent) as beneficial.

Other important areas of voters include climate change adaptation, reducing food loss on the field, and enriching staple foods with essential nutrients in developing countries.

Consistently, a large majority are against general bans and believe it makes sense to assess the opportunities and risks of the technology on an individual basis (76 percent). If a genome-edited plant is no different from a conventionally bred plant, it should be approved in Switzerland (58 percent). This corresponds to a product-based approval. The proportion of the population that generally rejects human intervention in the genetic makeup of plants has decreased by seven percentage points compared to 2021. Many voters also do not want Swiss agriculture to suffer a disadvantage if EU countries allow genome editing in the future. Plant breeding using genome editing is also seen to increase the level of self-sufficiency.

In summary, openness to technology is particularly high when genome editing is associated with an ecological benefit. More than 80 percent of respondents find genome editing useful when it can be used to make crops more resistant to plant diseases. Once again, the survey refutes the argument – often put forward by technology sceptics – that consumers reject genome editing. This is clearly not the case. On the contrary, acceptance is extremely high when there is a clear benefit.

From the point of view of swiss-food, the conclusion of the 2021 survey remains fully valid: «Acceptance of new technologies can be increased with clear communication of the benefits. The population is very receptive to new technologies if their use can eliminate specific risks to regional production, the environment or health.»

PS: Political context

Federal Council decision in favour of cautious opening: Along with the extension of the GMO moratorium until the end of 2025, parliament had instructed the Federal Council to draw up a draft decree for plants from new breeding technologies. At its meeting on 4 September 2024, the Federal Council decided to instruct DETEC to prepare a consultation draft by the end of 2024 for a special law to regulate the new breeding methods. Taking into account the precautionary principle, it provides for a cautious opening to the new breeding methods that allow genetic material to be specifically modified, including in the way that it could occur naturally through the crossing of different plants. This means that these new methods are to be regulated like the most important conventional genetic engineering in plant breeding, which has been used for almost 100 years also in Switzerland – classical mutagenesis, in which random mutations are created in a plant using radiation or chemicals. In contrast to the EU's plans, the Federal Council would like to incorporate stronger control mechanisms. In doing so, it aims to take the concerns of the population into account.

Popular initiative: On September 3, 2024, a popular initiative ‘For GMO-free food (food protection initiative)’ was launched by groups critical of genetic engineering. It demands that plants bred using genetic engineering and genome editing must be labelled and must meet strict requirements regarding risk assessment, liability and coexistence with GMO-free agriculture. According to the text of the initiative, it also opposes varieties bred using mutagenesis (with the help of radioactivity or chemicals), which are already widely used in Switzerland but are not yet subject to the Gene Technology Act.

Kindly note:

We, a non-native editorial team value clear and faultless communication. At times we have to prioritize speed over perfection, utilizing tools, that are still learning.

We are deepL sorry for any observed stylistic or spelling errors.

Related articles

Openness to gene editing if it offers concrete benefits
New Breeding Technologies Knowledge

Openness to gene editing if it offers concrete benefits

The public is very open to the use of innovative technologies in agriculture. This also applies to targeted plant breeding using modern methods like gene editing.

More agrobiodiversity thanks to genome editing
New Breeding Technologies

More agrobiodiversity thanks to genome editing

It is often wrongly claimed that new breeding technologies such as genome editing restrict diversity in the seed market. A new study shows that the opposite is the case. Genome editing promotes agrobiodiversity.

Migros and the opportunities of genome editing
New Breeding Technologies

Migros and the opportunities of genome editing

The demand for new breeding technologies is growing. Experts see an urgent need for action in order to utilise technological progress without jeopardising safety. Companies such as Migros also recognise the importance of these developments and are addressing the opportunities and challenges they bring. Meanwhile, contrary to scientific findings, opponents are continuing to tell the same horror stories as they did 30 years ago.

PFAS regulation in Switzerland: Not faster, but better
Politics

PFAS regulation in Switzerland: Not faster, but better

Some people also call PFAS ‘forever chemicals’. Their use must be regulated as wisely as possible. To do this, the federal government first needs to do precise groundwork, according to Stefan Brupbacher, Urs Furrer and Stephan Mumenthaler.

In plant breeding the music plays elsewhere
Politics

In plant breeding the music plays elsewhere

Switzerland is a centre of innovation, but unfortunately this promise has not yet been kept when it comes to the more modern methods of plant breeding. Openness would be a good thing for innovative Switzerland here too.

Enabling what is inevitable
Politics

Enabling what is inevitable

The opponents of progress are once again in the starting blocks. In mid-April, critics of genetic engineering announced a popular initiative aimed at making any relaxation of the existing moratorium on genetic engineering impossible. The exact wording is not yet known, but the statements made by the exponents make it clear that the total blockade on modern plant breeding is to be enshrined in the constitution.

EU decision in favour of new breeding methods with stumbling blocks
Politics

EU decision in favour of new breeding methods with stumbling blocks

On 7 February, the EU Parliament voted in favour of approving the new genomic breeding methods in the EU. MEPs voted in favour of a corresponding proposal by 307 votes to 263 with 41 abstentions. Further deliberations will now follow.

More contributions from Politics