GM Food: Public Opinion

As the Government moves towards a decision about whether GM crops should be grown commercially in Britain, a survey by MORI for the University of East Anglia shows how the British public feel about GM food and crops.

The survey was conducted immediately after the end of the GM Nation? debate. Key findings include:

• Overall opposition to GM food was found to be 36% against, while 13% supported and about two in five (39%) neither supported nor opposed GM food.
• A large majority (85%) thought that we don't know enough about the potential long-term effects of GM food on our health.
• However four in 10 or more also agreed that GM crops could hold a range of future benefits, for the environment (44%), consumers (45%), and those in developing countries (56%).
• There were very high levels of agreement (79%) that organisations separate from government are needed to regulate GM food.

Technical Details

The national survey was conducted after the end of the formal GM Nation? public debate: i.e., between 19 July and 12 September 2003. A nationally representative quota sample of 1,363 people aged 15 years and older was interviewed face-to-face in their own homes in England, Scotland and Wales. All data have been weighted to the known profile of the British population.

Topline Results

• This document shows topline findings from a survey conducted by MORI on behalf of The Centre for Environmental Risk, The University of East Anglia.
• Results are based on a representative sample of 1,363 interviews conducted among the GB general public aged 15+. This is made up of 1,017 interviews from the main sample conducted across GB, plus 151 'booster' interviews in Scotland, and 195 'booster' interviews in Wales. The total sample size in Scotland (main + booster interviews) is 265; the total sample size in Wales (main + booster interviews) is 235; and the total sample size in England is 863.
• Fieldwork was conducted by face-to-face in-home interviews between 19 July and 12 September 2003. (Fieldwork for main survey: 19 July - 26 August; fieldwork for Scottish booster: 11 August - 26 August; fieldwork for Welsh booster 11 August - 12 September).
• Results are compared to the 2002 'Attitudes to Risk Survey' (uea/MORI). This survey was carried out between 6 and 31 July 2002 and comprised 1,547 interviews in total. There were five versions of the questionnaire, each containing a 'core' section common to all, and a section about a specific risk issue. 296 interviews were conducted on the issue of GM Food.
• Where results do not sum to 100% this may be due to multiple responses, computer rounding or the exclusion of 'don't knows' / 'not stated' categories.
• Results are based on all respondents, unless otherwise stated
• The symbol * indicates a score which is less than half a per cent, but greater than zero.
• Data (for 2002 and 2003) have been weighted to the GB profile.

For some questions where we have split the sample, we were trying to test the effect of providing respondents with additional information. For instance, QB1 and QB2 are identical statements, except the former had "in the same way as the private sector does" in the statement. As the results below illustrate, mentioning the private sector in this way does not have a statistically significant impact on public opinion. Similarly, by reading out two sides of the argument about the use of providing a subsidy for private healthcare or schooling (see questions 5-8) does not seem to have a statistical impact on public opinion. As well as providing the results for each split sample, we have also combined the results for ease of reference.

Q1 I am going to read out some issues and for each one I would like you to tell me how important or not important it is to you, using the number on the scale which applies, where '4' equals very important and '0' equals not at all important. Base: All

Q1 I am going to read out some issues and for each one I would like you to tell me how important or not important it is to you, using the number on the scale which applies, where '4' equals very important and '0' equals not at all important. Base: 2002 All who took part in each version of the questionnaire; 2003 All

Q2 How concerned or not are you about the following issues? Please read out the number on the scale which applies, where '4' equals very concerned and '0' equals not at all concerned. Base: 2002 All who took part in each version of the questionnaire; 2003 All

1. This was worded as 'Genetically engineered food' in the 2002 questionnaire.

Q3 Which three things, if any, come to your mind when you hear the phrase 'genetically modified food'? Analysed by UEA

Q4-6 And do you think [first/second/third mention] is a good thing, a bad thing or neither a good nor a bad thing? Analysed by UEA

Q7 Using this card, how strongly, if at all, would you say you support or oppose genetically modified food? (2)

1. Please note the question wording was slightly different in 1996 and 1998 to 2003. In 96/98 the question wording was as follows: 'Thinking of genetically modified food or food derived from genetic engineering, what is your opinion towards the development and introduction of such food? Would you say, support it to a great extent, support it slightly, neither support nor oppose it, oppose it slightly, oppose it to a great extent, don't know'
2. MORI/Greenpeace, 1,003 adults, aged 15+, telephone, Great Britain, 13-15 December 1996
3. MORI/GeneWatch, 950 adults, aged 15+, face-to-face, in home, Great Britain, 6-8 June 1998
4. MORI Environment Tracker/ MORI Environment Research Bulletin, 2,141 adults, aged 15+, face-to-face, in-home, Great Britain, 6-10 February 2003
5. MORI Environment Tracker/ MORI Environment Research Bulletin, 1,958, aged 15+, face-to-face, in-home, Great Britain, 19-24 June 2003

Q8 And what would you say is your level of interest in the issue of genetically modified food? Base: All

Q9 On the whole, how would you describe your feelings about the following issues... Base: All 2002 (1,547); 2003 (1,363)

Q10 How would you assess the benefits, if any, of genetically modified food for:... Please read out the number on the scale that applies where 6 equals very high benefits and 0 equals no benefits. Base: 2002 All GM food respondents (296); 2003 All (1,363)

Q11 How would you assess the benefits, if any, of genetically modified food for the environment? Please read out the number on the scale that applies where 6 equals very high benefits and 0 equals no benefits. Base: 2002 All GM food respondents (296); 2003 All (1,363)

Q12 How would you assess the risks, if any, to human health from genetically modified food for... Please read out the number on the scale that applies where 6 equals very high risks and 0 equals no risks. Base: 2002 All GM food respondents (296); 2003 All (1,363)

Q13 How would you assess the risks, if any, to the environment from genetically modified food? Please read out the number on the scale that applies where 6 equals very high risks and 0 equals no risk. Base: 2002 All GM food respondents (296); 2003 All (1,363)

Q14 From what you know or have heard about genetically modified food, on balance, which of these statements, if any, most closely reflects your own opinion? Base: 2002 All GM food respondents; 2003 All

Q15 On the whole, how acceptable or unacceptable is genetically modified food to you? Base: 2002 All GM food respondents; 2003 All

Q16 To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements? Base: 2002 All GM food respondents (296); 2003 All (1,363)

Q17 To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements? Base: 2002 All GM food respondents (296); 2003 All (1,363)

Q18 How much do you agree or disagree that the following should be involved in making decisions about genetically modified food? Base: 2002 All GM food respondents (296); 2003 All (1,363)

1. New category.

Q19 Using this card, to what extent would you trust each of the following organisations and people to tell the truth about genetically modified food? Base: 2002 All GM food respondents (296); 2003 All (1,363)