Survey Says

Public opinion on biotechnology is no longer a secret

By Amber Lepage-Monette

When it comes to issues pertaining to science and biotechnology, the public has some very definitive views. And the Government of Canada wants to know what they are.

Following the development of the Canadian Biotechnology Strategy, the Canadian Biotechnology Secretariat launched public opinion surveys in 1999 to gauge what the layman thinks and feels about some of the latest biotech issues.

The drive behind running the surveys is simple, says John Olsthoorn, manager of communications for the Canadian Biotechnology Secretariat.

“It’s a form of citizen engagement to keep a pulse on where the public is at concerning biotechnology issues,” he says.

For the surveys, the secretariat works in collaboration with seven government departments and three agencies: Agriculture and Agrifood Canada, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (Ottawa, ON), the Canadian Institutes for Health Research (Ottawa, ON), Environment Canada, Fisheries and Oceans, Health Canada, Industry Canada, International Trade Canada, the National Research Council of Canada (Ottawa, ON) and Natural Resources Canada.

Senior communications advisors from each of these departments and agencies meet with Olsthoorn to help determine the direction the surveys will take, and what topics will be covered.

“Because we do this on behalf of a number of different federal players, we want to make sure that the issues we look at are something that are not just affecting one department, but have an impact on a number of different departments,” Olsthoorn says.

Not only do the departments and agencies help determine the topics, but they also use the results to help inform their policy-making and communications strategies.

“It’s also a good way that we can ensure that public attitudes and perceptions are taken into consideration and that the policy or even communications work is not done in isolation of where the public is at,” Olsthoorn says.

Public opinion and marketing research organizations such as Pollara Inc. (Toronto, ON), Decima Research Inc. (Ottawa, ON), Environics Research Group (Toronto, ON) and Ipsos-Reid (Toronto, ON) have assisted the secretariat in running the surveys.

For each public poll, approximately 1,000 to 1,200 respondents are randomly contacted by telephone. Additionally, the government runs focus groups in three to five cities, with two groups of about 10 people per city.

And the Answer Is

So what does the public think of biotechnology?

The most recent survey results available online were released in early June from a March 2005 survey.

The overall topic in this current survey was “emerging technologies,” and in a more in-depth manner, it asked survey respondents to share their feelings on stem cell research, nanotechnology, gene banks, pharmacogenetics, genetically modified trees and bioethics.

This recent survey, along with several others conducted in the past, polled both Canadian and U.S. citizens, Olsthoorn says, to see how Canadians and Americans differ in their thinking.

The March survey found Americans to be slightly more knowledgeable about stem cell research, thanks in part to increased media coverage of Christopher Reeve and Michael J. Fox. Approximately 61 per cent of U.S. respondents said they had previously discussed the issue of stem cell research with others, whereas only 49 per cent of Canadians answered the same. Similarly, 59 per cent of U.S. respondents said they were familiar with stem cell research, compared to 50 per cent of Canadians.

Perhaps not surprisingly, the survey also found that U.S. respondents were slightly more conservative than their Canadian counterparts when it comes to stem cell research. On a scale of one to five — one being morally acceptable and five being morally unacceptable — 32 per cent in both groups indicated that stem cell research is morally acceptable. However, 12 per cent of U.S. respondents indicated it was unacceptable, while only six per cent of Canadians felt the same.

The survey analysis indicated that through the focus groups, American respondents indicated having more religious/ethical issues with stem cell research, specifically relating to questions concerning the definition of when life begins and the use of stem cells from surplus embryos obtained through fertility clinics.

The government is very interested in collecting international data, and has been working to expand these types of comparatives studies.

As an example, a module of the March 2005 survey was included in a European barometer study that was conducted in 25 EU countries last December, Olsthoorn says.

“We have a module of questions that were the same questions asked in 25 EU countries as well as Canada and the U.S., so part of our efforts is to have a more global approach,” he says.

These comparative results are not yet available from European sources, though the data will be made publicly available once released by the European commission.

“We’re committed to making sure that anything that we commission or we do is available and accessible,” he says.

Olsthoorn says Australia is one of the countries that the government hopes to include in future studies.

“Most likely we won’t have a complete survey that’ll be asked in all these countries, but we’re looking at development modules,” he says. “So if there’s a series of questions that’s of interest to the larger community, that we can include in each other’s surveys, that is the sort of concrete approach to getting truly comparable results.”

Industry Involvement

While survey results are currently being used by government departments to help inform policy-making and communications, Olsthoorn says industry is also free to access this information.

He says that while the biotechnology secretariat has made presentations to several industry groups, many may not be aware these surveys are being conducted, and that the results are available for use.

“I think it’s an important tool for industry to be able to tap into, as we do in terms of how it informs our policy-making,” he says. “It could be important for them as they’re developing marketing strategies or product development strategies, to be aware of where’s the public (at) as they’re proceeding with the development of their products.”

One of the groups that the Canadian Biotechnology Secretariat has presented to is BIOTECanada (Ottawa, ON), a national industry association.

Cate McCready, BIOTECanada’s vice-president of external affairs, says the presentations and surveys have proven useful to the organization in two ways — gauging the public’s sentiments and understanding the government’s motivations.

“The way that we view it is having a look at what is guiding the government’s thinking, what are the principles that they’re using when they come forth with policy discussions and ideas around the technology, so that we understand what has served that decision-making processes,” McCready says.

As BIOTECanada works to ensure the public is informed about biotechnology issues, McCready says the public opinion surveys also serve them in designing their materials.

“We put a huge amount of effort into making sure that our dialogue within the public domain is one that is responsible and meaningful and fact-based,” she says. “So the work that the (secretariat) is doing in terms of tracking public opinions of Canadians on this technology is of value to us as we design those programs and initiatives.”

McCready also notes that it is helpful having access to such information, without having to do the legwork.

“We certainly don’t have the resources to do the kind of work that they’re able to,” she says. “So it can be of value to us, and is of value to us as we look at the long-term data particularly.”