ArticlePlant cell reports2025
"They ignore social issues": understanding the diversity of perspectives on plant gene technologies in Indonesia.
Article in Plant cell reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- scientific, social, ecological rationality and public attitudes toward genetically modified food in China: based on the survey of urban residents in three cities of China.GM crops & food · 2026Article
- Genome editing between wonder and rejection.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genome-editing (GE) technologies are often described as a promising tool for improving agricultural crops, alongside their expanding applications in food and medical research. However, as scientific advancements in GE crops accelerate, there is growing concern that these technologies may follow a similar trajectory to genetically modified organisms (GMOs)-where innovation outpaces public engagement, potentially leading to scepticism and resistance. There are also issues with innovation occurring in domains outside of their target locale, particularly where research and development for uses in the Global South is occurring in the Global North. Thus, there is an important opportunity to conduct better community engagement and technology socialisation in diverse locales. For example, in Indonesia, where food sovereignty is a national priority, understanding public and institutional attitudes toward biotechnology is essential for shaping effective policy and regulation. This paper draws on the first qualitative exploration of Indonesia's evolving regulatory landscape for gene technologies. Through interviews and media analysis, we examine the perspectives of key stakeholders, including government agencies, NGOs, advocacy groups, and scientists. A recurring theme in our findings is the challenge of "socialisation"-the need for broader public awareness and dialogue about gene technologies, their purpose, and their potential role in Indonesia's agricultural future. We argue that meaningful engagement must occur early in the development process, within the specific social and cultural contexts of Indonesia, to ensure that biotechnology aligns with local needs and values. By integrating social perspectives into regulatory and research agendas, Indonesia can better navigate the complexities of GE crop adoption and governance.
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.