Introduction

The manner in which the public perceive any new technology, including biotechnology, will have important influences on the timing and direction of innovation, and in the rate of uptake or degree of discrimination against the technology, its products and services. Public perception will also be influenced by geographical location, which will reflect several variables, for example, economic affluence, level of education, cultural and religious values and tradition, together with social and institutional ways of participation.

In the industrialised world public policy-makers on biotechnology have been influenced by the concerted interests of governments, industries, academia and environmental groups. Nationally and internationally such policies are being developed within a climate of tension and conflicting aims.

At the early stages of recombinant DNA research, a small group of well recognised molecular biologists met in the early 1970s to express their concern over the safety of this new technology. In a well publicised meeting, the famous (or infamous) Asilomar Conference, in California, they focused on the potential, but highly speculative, risks associated with recombinant DNA (rDNA) technology and how they should be managed. Unfortunately, this generated huge public concern arising from the alarmist media coverage, e.g. Frankenstein foods, Andromeda strains, etc. Following on from this conference and the continued huge media hype, the National Institute of Health (NIH) in the USA published Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant DNA Molecules, which sent out a powerful message to the scientific community and federal government departments that the NIH were seriously concerned about the speculative risk scenarios.