U.S. public opinion about the safety of gene editing in the agriculture and medical fields and the amount of evidence needed to improve opinions.

Introduction: Implementation of gene editing in agriculture and medicine hinges on public acceptance. The objectives of this study were to explore U.S. public opinion about gene editing in agricultural and medical fields and to provide more insight into the relationship between opinions about the safety of gene editing and the potential impact of evidence to improve opinions about safety. Methods: Data were from two samples of U.S. respondents: 1,442 respondents in 2021 and 3,125 respondents in 2022. Survey respondents provided their opinions about the safety of gene editing in the agricultural and medical fields and answered questions about the number of studies or length of time without a negative outcome to improve opinions about the safety of gene editing in the agricultural and medical fields. Results: Results indicated that respondents in both samples were more familiar, more likely to have an opinion about safety, and more positive about the safety of gene editing in the agricultural field than in the medical field. Also, familiarity was more closely associated with opinions about safety than the strength of opinions. Discussion: These findings add to the literature examining perceptions of gene editing in the agricultural or medical fields separately. Opinions about the safety of gene editing were generally more favorable for respondents who were aware of the use of gene editing. These results support a proactive approach for effective communication strategies to inform the public about the use of gene editing in the agricultural and medical fields.

Gene editing isn't just about food: comments from U.S. focus groups.

In the United States, adult public perception of genetic modification has been well documented in the domain of agriculture and food; however, recent international news on gene editing in medical applications may present new challenges for science communicators who seek to proactively share benefits of emerging gene editing technology. While research traditionally considers perceptions of agricultural and medical applications separately, gene editing may bridge the gap between the two domains. We find that when asked about thoughts regarding gene editing, adult focus groups discussed medical applications more frequently and extensively than agricultural applications. Although, when examining the length of discussion about specific topics, designer babies, cures for disease, and food were discussed at similar lengths. Understanding audiences' current perceptions of the technology is the first step in shaping strategic communication efforts to inform public opinion. A proper understanding of the benefits and risks of new technology is central to its application.

Lean on Your Land Grant: One University's Approach to Address the Food Supply Chain Workforce during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

During the spring 2020 COVID-19 outbreak, faculty and staff within Ohio State University's College of Food, Agricultural and Environmental Sciences came together from multiple disciplines to support essential agricultural workers. Concerted leadership from administration provided a framework for this interaction to occur while faculty worked off-campus to address the many issues identified by the agricultural community, the industry sector, and other state agencies. During the onset period, much of our work was reactive; our efforts to address worker safety and health involved three primary areas within: 1) production agricultural workers, 2) produce growers and direct marketing enterprises, and 3) meat supply chain workers. Communication to target audiences relied upon our ability to convert face-to-face programming into virtual webinars, social media, and digital publications. A Food System Task Force mobilized specialists to address emerging issues, with one specific topic related to Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). As we continue to face new seasons in agriculture production, and pockets of COVID-19 outbreaks within our state, we will continue to address the dynamic needs of our food supply systems. There are implications for how we will teach the agricultural workforce within a virtual platform, including the evaluation of the effectiveness of those training programs. There are renewed opportunities to integrate health and safety content into other Extension teams who conventionally focused on production practices and farm management topics. Several research themes emerged during subgroup dialog to pursue new knowledge in workers' cultural attitude and barriers, PPE design, PPE access, and overall attitude toward COVID-19 health practices.

Classifying Residents who use Landscape Irrigation: Implications for Encouraging Water Conservation Behavior.

Large amounts of water applied as urban irrigation can often be reduced substantially without compromising esthetics. Thus, encouraging the adoption of water-saving technologies and practices is critical to preserving water resources, yet difficult to achieve. The research problem addressed in this study is the lack of characterization of residents who use urban irrigation, which hinders the design of effective behavior change programs. This study examined audience segmentation as an approach to encouraging change using current residential landscape practices. K-means cluster analysis identified three meaningful subgroups among residential landscape irrigation users (N = 1,063): the water considerate majority (n = 479, 45 %), water savvy conservationists (n = 378, 36 %), and unconcerned water users (n = 201, 19 %). An important finding was that normative beliefs, attitudes, and perceived behavioral control characteristics of the subgroups were significantly different with large and medium practical effect sizes. Future water conservation behaviors and perceived importance of water resources were also significantly different among subgroups. The water considerate majority demonstrated capacity to conserve, placed high value on water, and were likely to engage in behavior changes. This article contributes to the literature on individuals who use residential landscape irrigation, an important target audience with potential to conserve water through sustainable irrigation practices and technologies. Findings confirm applicability of the capacity to conserve water to audience segmentation and extend this concept by incorporating perceived value of water resources and likelihood of conservation. The results suggest practical application to promoting residential landscape water conservation behaviors based on important audience characteristics.