ArticlePloS one2024
New genomic techniques, old divides: Stakeholder attitudes towards new biotechnology regulation in the EU and UK.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- What farmers think about using crop biotechnology to boost photosynthesis in rice and potato.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- CRISPR/Cas9-mediatedFrontiers in plant science · 2026Article
- How the proposal for a new regulation for new genomic techniques affects the European Union's food system sustainability objectives.NPJ sustainable agriculture · 2026Review
- Preventive Immunology for Livestock and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases in the One Health Era: From Mechanistic Insights to Innovative Interventions.Veterinary sciences · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The European Union and United Kingdom are in the process of establishing new regulation regarding the use of new genomic techniques in crop and animal breeding. As part of this process, consultations have been launched to understand the views of stakeholders towards the use of new genomic techniques in plant and animal breeding. The responsible research and innovation framework emphasises the importance of dialogue between technology developers and stakeholders, including the public, but what are the opinions of stakeholders towards the regulation of NGTs in Europe and do they view these consultations as opportunities to engage with technology governance? We conducted semi-structured interviews with experts from a range of agri-food stakeholder groups in the European Union and United Kingdom to understand current attitudes towards new biotechnology regulation, how they viewed the process of consultation in both places and what influence they felt they had in shaping regulations. We found that the discussion is similar in both EU and UK, with predictable and fixed opinions determined by attitudes towards the perceived risks associated with direct mutagenesis. Both UK and EU consultations were considered to have the same weaknesses and stakeholders discussed a desire for more dialogic forms of engagement. We highlight several options for new forms of involvement in biotechnology regulation by exploring relevant responsible research and innovation literature.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.