Public Opinion Towards Gene Drive as a Pest Control Approach for Biodiversity Conservation and the Association of Underlying Worldviews

Abstract

Synthetic gene drive approaches are nascent technologies with potential applicability for pest control for conservation purposes. Responsible science mandates that society be engaged in a dialogue over new technology, particularly where there exist global ramifications as with gene drive. We hypothesize that public attitudes towards gene drive are not formed on scientific knowledge or demographics alone, but are heavily influenced by underlying worldviews, which encapsulate a broad and interactive system of attitudes, beliefs, and values. To test this, we conducted a national survey in New Zealand (n = 8199) and found that respondents clustered into four distinct segments with underlying worldviews, better able to explain attitudes toward gene drive than either the participants' scientific knowledge or other explanatory factors such demographics, political ideology or religiosity. We found that the use of gene drive for biodiversity conservation currently has moderate (32%) levels of support in New Zealand but that varied substantially across the four segments. Should gene drive become a technically viable approach for pest control, understanding the worldviews that shape public decision-making can guide a more empathetic engagement process and empower society to participate in informed decisionmaking about if and how gene drive should be used for conservation purposes. ARTICLE HISTORY

Science-related populism: Conceptualizing populist demands toward science

“…Science-related populism, as we understand it, is not intended as an umbrella term for all forms of critique directed against science. There are many variants of criticizing science, some of which are not science-related populism—for example, concerns about the ethical, legal, and social implications of biotechnology (MacDonald et al., 2020), “counterresearch” commissioned by corporations aiming to contradict scientific findings about smoking or global warming (Oreskes and Conway, 2010) or religiously motivated objections to certain scientific fields (McPhetres and Zuckerman, 2018)—whereas other variants are , and with this article, we aim to offer a conceptual framework for them. We, therefore, propose an analytical model of science-related populism that identifies its key elements and their mutual relations, and can be the foundation for empirical analyses of its prevalence, preconditions, and impacts.…”

Conservation pest control with new technologies: public perceptions

“…Building upon the limited quantitative studies to date that explore public attitudes towards genetic tools for conservation (Kohl et al 2019;MacDonald et al 2020) and the wider use for pest control for agricultural benefits (Jones et al 2019), our study used content analysis to gain insight into New Zealanders' perceptions of novel technologies for conservation. Eleven focus groups were conducted to explore three questions with regard to gene drive and two other forms of novel technologies for comparative purposes: the trojan female technique (Dowling et al 2015) and a pest-specific toxin (Campbell et al 2015).…”

The clock is ticking: Temporally prioritizing eradications on islands

“…Prominent examples being considered in New Zealand include genetic systems (e.g., the "Trojan female" approach; Gemmell et al, 2013), species-specific toxins (e.g., the Rattus-specific toxicant As is the case with other transformative technologies throughout history, many of these new approaches have been subject to initial public skepticism and concern. Similarly to entrenched attitudes which limit existing technologies (e.g., aerially applied poison baits), programs of public engagement acknowledging and responding to underlying attitudes, social norms and behaviors will be critical to implementing transformative tools at scale (MacDonald et al, 2020). Indeed, not only will novel tools be essential to the success of PF2050, so too will be effective communication about the tools.…”