*

Comparative analysis of students’ attitudes toward implementation of genetically modified trees in Serbia

Marina Nonić (1), Uroš Radojević (2)   , Jelena Milovanović (2), Marko Perović (1), Mirjana Šijačić-Nikolić (1)

iForest - Biogeosciences and Forestry, Volume 8, Issue 5, Pages 714-718 (2015)
doi: https://doi.org/10.3832/ifor1305-007
Published: Jan 08, 2015 - Copyright © 2015 SISEF

Technical Notes

Collection/Special Issue: COST Action FP0905
Biosafety of forest transgenic trees and EU policy directives
Guest Editors: Cristina Vettori, Matthias Fladung


Genetically-modified (GM) trees represent a new frontier in biotechnology, though many environmental concerns associated to the commercial use of GM trees and their products have been recently raised. In general, GM trees involve no safety issues related to human health, therefore public attitudes toward their commercial use should depend on environmental concerns or personal philosophical viewpoints, but also on educational level and background. To assess the relevance of the educational level and background on attitudes toward acceptance of commercial GM tree cultivation, a survey was conducted in January 2014 among 400 students from the Faculty of Forestry of the University of Belgrade and from the Faculty of Applied Ecology “Futura” at the University Singidunum (Belgrade). The aim was to determine whether different educational profiles and educational level significantly affect students’ attitudes toward GM trees. Results showed no significant differences in the responses among students from both faculties. All students showed a good knowledge of GM trees and agreed that different genetic modifications of forest trees would be very important for their country. Also, more than a half of students from both faculties would agree with commercial planting of GM trees and would purchase their final products. However, 70 to 90% of students from both faculties considered the hazards associated with the commercial use of GM trees as “serious hazard” or “slight hazard”. The implication of the above results are discussed.

  Keywords


Genetic Modifications, Forest Trees, Biotechnology, Survey

Authors’ address

(1)
Marina Nonić
Marko Perović
Mirjana Šijačić-Nikolić
Faculty of Forestry, University of Belgrade, Belgrade (Serbia)
(2)
Uroš Radojević
Jelena Milovanović
Faculty of Applied Ecology “Futura”, Singidunum University, Belgrade (Serbia)

Corresponding author

 
Uroš Radojević
uros.radojevic@futura.edu.rs

Citation

Nonić M, Radojević U, Milovanović J, Perović M, Šijačić-Nikolić M (2015). Comparative analysis of students’ attitudes toward implementation of genetically modified trees in Serbia. iForest 8: 714-718. - doi: 10.3832/ifor1305-007

Academic Editor

Elena Paoletti

Paper history

Received: Apr 03, 2014
Accepted: Aug 09, 2014

First online: Jan 08, 2015
Publication Date: Oct 01, 2015
Publication Time: 5.07 months

Breakdown by View Type

(Waiting for server response...)

Article Usage

Total Article Views: 10791
(from publication date up to now)

Breakdown by View Type
HTML Page Views: 8121
Abstract Page Views: 295
PDF Downloads: 1672
Citation/Reference Downloads: 19
XML Downloads: 684

Web Metrics
Days since publication: 1906
Overall contacts: 10791
Avg. contacts per week: 39.63

Article Citations

Article citations are based on data periodically collected from the Clarivate Web of Science web site
(last update: Aug 2019)

Total number of cites (since 2015): 2
Average cites per year: 0.40

 

Publication Metrics

by Dimensions ©

Articles citing this article

List of the papers citing this article based on CrossRef Cited-by.

 
(1)
FAO (2004)
Preliminary review of biotechnology in forestry, including genetic modification. United Nations, Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome, Italy, pp. 118.
Gscholar
(2)
Häggman H, Raybould A, Borem A, Fox T, Handley L, Hertzberg M, Lu MZ, Macdonald P, Oguchi T, Pasquali G, Pearson L, Peter G, Quemada H, Séguin A, Tattersall K, Ulian E, Walter C, McLean M (2013)
Genetically engineered trees for plantation forests: key considerations for environmental risk assessment. Plant Biotechnology Journal 11: 785-798.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(3)
Harfouche A, Meilan R, Altman A (2011)
Tree genetic engineering and applications to sustainable forestry and biomass production. Trends in Biotechnology 29 (1): 9-17.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(4)
IBM (2011)
IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows verion 20.0. IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY, USA.
Gscholar
(5)
Milovanović J, Šijačić-Nikolić M (2006)
Global climate changes and forest genetic resources conservation. In: Proceedings of the International Conference “Sustainable use of forest ecosystems. The Challenge of the 21st Century”. Donji Milanovac (Serbia) 8-10 November 2006. Book of abstract, pp. 142.
Gscholar
(6)
Nonić M, Vettori C, Boscaleri F, Milovanović J, Šijacić-Nikolić M (2012)
Genetically modified trees - state and perspectives. Genetika 44 (2): 429- 440.
CrossRef | Gscholar
(7)
Nonić M, Nedeljković J, Radojević U, Vettori C, Šijačić-Nikolić M (2014)
State and perspectives of genetically modified trees in some Western Balkan countries. In: “Tree Biotechnology” (Ramawat KG, Mérillon JM, Ahuja MR eds). CRC Press (in press).
Online | Gscholar
(8)
Steinbrecher RA, Lorch A (2008)
Genetically engineered trees and risk assessment: an overview of risk assessment and risk management issues. Federation of German Scientists, Berlin, Germany, pp. 1-12.
Online | Gscholar
 

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website