Loss of Agro‐Biodiversity, Uncertainty, and Perceived Control: A Comparative Risk Perception Study in Austria and China

Markus R. Schmidt and Wei Wei

Risk Analysis, 2006, vol. 26, issue 2, 455-470

Abstract: The biogeographical centers of origin of important food crops—called Vavilov centers—are considered to be crucial sources of genetic diversity for present and future crop‐breeding programs and thus for human food safety worldwide. Global environmental change and more intensified modes of crop production may cause genetic erosion (loss of traditional crop varieties and loss of crop wild relatives), especially in Vavilov centers. The present study focused on how the risk of genetic erosion (or loss of agro‐biodiversity) is perceived in comparison to 16 other risk topics by experts and lay people in Austria and China. The most striking result was that genetic erosion was perceived to be an exceptionally unknown and uncertain risk topic, given that only genetically modified organisms (GMOs) were perceived as being even more uncertain. As a consequence of the high uncertainty, the idea of applying the precautionary principle to further prevent genetic erosion is discussed. An unprecedented finding—one that differs from Austrian participants—is that the Chinese have a higher perceived control over all risk topics. The increased perception of controllability in China is discussed in light of the theory of reflexive modernization. This theory strives to explain the increased critical attitude in Western countries such as Austria toward scientific innovations and toward the idea that everything can be calculated and mastered at will. By revealing different notions of risk perception, this research also provides additional scientific input to risk communication efforts for public education.

Date: 2006
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00744.x

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wly:riskan:v:26:y:2006:i:2:p:455-470

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Risk Analysis from John Wiley & Sons
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().