@prefix dcat: . @prefix dct: . @prefix foaf: . @prefix xsd: . a dcat:Dataset ; dct:description """#Tranche 1: Project 2.6#\r \r ##One of the nation’s largest surveys on public attitudes toward new pest control technologies has shown that most New Zealanders support the need for pest control.##\r \r Carried out in 2017, the BioHeritage Challenge survey assessed the perceptions, beliefs and attitudes of 8,000 people, including about 1,000 Māori.\r \r **Highlights** \r \r The survey found that:\r \r - 84% agree pest species are a significant conservation problem \r - 14% think current pest control measures are adequate \r - 61% are aware of New Zealand’s goal to become Predator Free by 2050. \r \r **In relation to potential pest control technologies including gene drive, the survey found:**\r \r - 32% were comfortable with these developments \r - 18% felt they should never be used \r - 50% were undecided or wanted strong controls \r - 42% supported trojan female techniques \r - 52% supported a species-specific toxin. \r \r Overall, the survey findings illustrated the varying viewpoints of the New Zealand public. This highlights the importance of continuing open and transparent public discussions while inventors and scientists start the process of developing new pest control technologies.\r \r **Project Leader**\r \r - Dr Edy MacDonald, Department of Conservation """ ; dct:identifier "7a6f5d2e-dcf7-4e8f-b341-0060a79fa7e9" ; dct:issued "2024-02-27T03:08:15.822462"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:modified "2024-08-01T05:27:35.530852"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:publisher ; dct:title "Public Perceptions of New Pest Control Methods" ; dcat:distribution , , , , , , , , , . a dcat:Distribution ; dct:description """###Public Opinion Towards Gene Drive as a Pest Control Approach for Biodiversity Conservation and the Association of Underlying Worldviews###\r \r **January 2020**\r \r **MacDonald EA, Balanovic J, Edwards ED, Abrahamse W, Frame B, Greenaway A, Kannemeyer R, Kirk N, Medvecky F, Milfont TL, Russell JC, Tompkins DM. 2020. [Public Opinion Towards Gene Drive as a Pest Control Approach for Biodiversity Conservation and the Association of Underlying Worldviews](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/epdf/10.1080/17524032.2019.1702568?needAccess=true). Environmental Communication-a Journal of Nature and Culture 14(7): 904-918.**\r \r **ABSTRACT**\r \r Synthetic gene drive approaches are nascent technologies with potential applicability for pest control for conservation purposes. Responsible science mandates that society be engaged in a dialogue over new technology, particularly where there exist global ramifications as with gene drive. We hypothesize that public attitudes towards gene drive are not formed on scientific knowledge or demographics alone, but are heavily influenced by underlying worldviews, which encapsulate a broad and interactive system of attitudes, beliefs, and values. To test this, we conducted a national survey in New Zealand (n = 8199) and found that respondents clustered into four distinct segments with underlying worldviews, better able to explain attitudes toward gene drive than either the participants' scientific knowledge or other explanatory factors such demographics, political ideology or religiosity. We found that the use of gene drive for biodiversity conservation currently has moderate (32%) levels of support in New Zealand but that varied substantially across the four segments. Should gene drive become a technically viable approach for pest control, understanding the worldviews that shape public decision-making can guide a more empathetic engagement process and empower society to participate in informed decision-making about if and how gene drive should be used for conservation purposes.\r \r **KEYWORDS**\r \r synthetic biology; responsible science; values; CRISPR; invasive species""" ; dct:issued "2024-07-09T02:13:46.787289"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:modified "2024-07-09T02:13:46.787289"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:title "PAPER: Public opinion of gene drive pest control" ; dcat:accessURL . a dcat:Distribution ; dct:description """###Scientifically framed gene drive communication perceived as credible but riskier###\r \r **February 2021**\r \r **MacDonald EA, Edwards ED, Balanovic J, Medvecky F. 2021. [Scientifically framed gene drive communication perceived as credible but riskier](https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/pan3.10186). People and Nature 3(2): 457-468.**\r \r **ABSTRACT**\r \r Humans have caused a catastrophic decline to animal species and look to emerging technologies to stop the decline. Gene drive is a potential tool that may eradicate invasive rodents known for their devastating impact on native animals. The use of gene drive will be significantly influenced by public opinion and support, thus early dialogue with society is needed.\r Framing is a communication technique in which certain beliefs or values are emphasized that resonate with the target audience. Framing may increase how much people objectively think about new information and update their opinions; framing may mitigate emotive and polarising public opinion of contentious topics.\r Four framed articles were developed that aligned to values of four pre-identified segments (scientific, humanitarian, pragmatic and individualistic). A representative sample of New Zealanders (n = 1,600) read two frames (one aligning to their segment and one to another segment) and were surveyed. Four constructs were measured: (a) public support for gene drive for conservation gains; (b) motivated reasoning (how fixed the opinion is and thus susceptible to bias processing); (c) affective response (how emotive the topic is) and (d) risk perception (the extent the tool is perceived as detrimental to humans and nature).\r \r Our study found no evidence of motivated reasoning or heightened emotional response to the counter-aligned frames, suggesting gene drive remains a new topic to the public and entrenched opinion has not been established. While the scientifically framed article was regarded as the most objective and credible, it elicited the greatest perception of risk from the humanitarian group. While current support for gene drive is currently high amongst this group, long-term exposure to scientifically framed messages may result in reduced support and polarisation. Communicating with this group using language that recognises the sanctity of all life and humaneness of gene drive may be more effective in facilitating an open dialogue over time.\r \r Early and effective public engagement about gene drive should occur prior to entrenched public attitudes, which is the current context in New Zealand, and not wait for further technology development.\r \r *[Link to Plain Language Summary within the supporting information of this article](https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/action/downloadSupplement?doi=10.1002%2Fpan3.10186&file=pan310186-sup-0001-Summary.pdf)*\r \r **KEYWORDS**\r \r CRISPR; framing; invasive species; media frames; public engagement; synthetic biology""" ; dct:issued "2024-02-27T03:34:01.479446"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:modified "2024-02-27T03:34:01.479446"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:title "PAPER: Scientific communication perceived credible" ; dcat:accessURL . a dcat:Distribution ; dct:description """###Indigenous peoples’ attitudes and social acceptability of invasive species control in New Zealand###\r \r **December 2021**\r \r **Black A, Garner G, Mark-Shadbolt M, Balanovic J, MacDonald E, Mercier O, Wright J 2022. [Indigenous peoples' attitudes and social acceptability of invasive species control in New Zealand](https://www.publish.csiro.au/pc/pdf/PC21049). Pacific Conservation Biology 28(6): 481-490.**\r \r **ABSTRACT**\r \r *Context* \r \r In Aotearoa New Zealand, a significant threat to biodiversity, conservation efforts and Indigenous cultural identity is the unwanted introduction of invasive pests, plants and pathogens. Currently methods to control invasive species in Aotearoa New Zealand, in particular mammalian pests (i.e. possums (*Trichosurus vulpecula*)) have had decreasing public support. This has likely come about for a number of reasons, including lack of social engagement and concerns over impacts combined with an increasing distrust of top-down initiatives.\r \r *Aims and methods* \r \r We analysed opinions towards existing and emerging technologies to manage invasive species. Data were obtained from 1015 respondents who identified as Indigenous Māori from a national survey of 8199 respondents. Utilising psychological frameworks to investigate underlying beliefs of social acceptance, we analysed the responses using exploratory and latent class analysis methods to summarise the main perspectives.\r \r *Key results* \r \r Our results revealed four distinct clusters of viewpoints within Māori respondents that were explained by known (objective) and subjective scientific knowledge around pest control methods, and Indigenous community wellbeing. We also observed a general neutrality in trust towards science, but more trust in scientists than science institutions.\r \r *Conclusions and implications* \r \r Understanding the underlying values and viewpoints associated with pest control and including these in developing engagement plans will ensure a responsible process that empowers Māori. This way forward is key to sustain pathways of engagement and positive participation in decision-making.\r \r **KEYWORDS** \r \r biodiversity, biosecurity, gene drive, Indigenous values, invasive species, technology uptake, toxins.""" ; dct:issued "2024-03-06T02:19:16.631588"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:modified "2024-03-06T02:19:16.631588"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:title "PAPER: Indigenous Perspectives on Invasive Control" ; dcat:accessURL . a dcat:Distribution ; dct:description """###Conservation pest control with new technologies: public perceptions###\r \r **January 2021**\r \r **MacDonald EA, Neff MB, Edwards E, Medvecky F, Balanovic J. 2021. [Conservation pest control with new technologies: public perceptions](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/epdf/10.1080/03036758.2020.1850481?needAccess=true). Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand 52(1): 95-107. **\r \r **ABSTRACT**\r \r New genetic tools can potentially mitigate the decline of biodiversity. Democratisation of science mandates public opinion be considered while new technologies are in development. We conducted eleven focus groups in New Zealand to explore three questions about novel technologies (gene drive and two others for comparison of pest control tools): (1) what are the risks/benefits? (2) how do they compare to current methods? and (3) who should be represented on a panel that evaluates the tools and what factors should they consider? Findings from the content analysis of the risks/benefits revealed three main considerations that were of social concern – Environmental, Practical, and Ethical. Most participants were self-aware of their insufficient knowledge to compare the different technologies. Unanimously, respondents wanted the available information provided throughout the tool development process and saw multi-sector panel oversight as essential. Scientists and policy makers should match the public’s willingness to engage collaboratively.\r \r **KEYWORDS**\r \r Collingridge dilemma; CRISPR; gene drive; invasive species; public engagement; responsible innovation; synthetic biology""" ; dct:issued "2024-02-27T03:14:18.867653"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:modified "2024-02-27T03:14:18.867653"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:title "PAPER: New technologies: public perceptions" ; dcat:accessURL . a dcat:Distribution ; dct:description """###Understanding attitudes on new technologies to manage invasive species###\r \r **June 2019**\r \r **Kirk N, Kannemeyer R, Greenaway A, MacDonald E, Stronge D. 2020. [Understanding attitudes on new technologies to manage invasive species](https://www.publish.csiro.au/pc/pdf/PC18080). Pacific Conservation Biology 26(1): 35-44. https://doi.org/10.1071/PC18080**\r \r **ABSTRACT**\r \r Invasive animal species threaten global biodiversity. In New Zealand invasive species threaten iconic native species, and scientists are seeking approval to research new technologies that might be capable of eradicating these invasive species. The aim of this research was to understand what New Zealanders with an interest in pest control consider to be the main risks and benefits of introducing new technologies to manage invasive species. We invited key informants to participate in the focus groups, selecting people with knowledge and experience of pest control issues in New Zealand. Data were collected from seven focus groups held in three locations across New Zealand. A thematic analysis of the data was then conducted in which three key themes emerged: concern about the risk of unintended consequences, the benefits of landscape-scale technologies, and New Zealand being an early adopter of new technologies. The focus groups articulated a variety of benefits from introducing new technologies – such as replacing dangerous poisons with non-toxic alternatives – but it was the risks of the new technologies that dominated the discussions. Given these results, we recommend an education and communication strategy focussed on social learning, in conjunction with a codesigned decision-making process, to help establish social licence for the application of potentially controversial technologies.\r \r **KEYWORDS** \r \r CRISPR, gene editing, pest control, pest-specific toxins, public attitudes, rats, Trojan Female Technique, wasps\r \r \r \r \r """ ; dct:issued "2024-02-27T21:07:48.939433"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:modified "2024-02-27T21:07:48.939433"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:title "PAPER: Tech Attitudes in Invasive Management" ; dcat:accessURL . a dcat:Distribution ; dct:description """###Demographic and psychographic drivers of public acceptance of novel invasive pest control technologies###\r \r **2021**\r \r **Eppink F, Walsh PJ, MacDonald E. 2021. [Demographic and psychographic drivers of public acceptance of novel invasive pest control technologies](https://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol26/iss1/art31/ES-2021-12301.pdf). Ecology and Society 26(1).**\r \r **ABSTRACT**\r \r Invasive mammals are a primary threat to New Zealand’s endemic species. In remote areas, aerial delivery of poison is the preferred method of pest management, although it faces some public backlash. Novel pest control technologies are currently being investigated as alternatives but may face similar concerns. To investigate potential social and demographic determinants of public perceptions of new methods for pest control, we conducted a national choice experiment, focused on several novel technologies: gene drives, Trojan females, and species-specific poisons. We found that preferences strongly depend on the type of technology, with Trojan female technology strictly preferred to the other two. Although several characteristics affected preferences in predictable ways—education, trust in science, and liberal political leaning increased acceptance—the same did not hold with preferences for aerial delivery. Our results are useful for targeting future engagement campaigns and leveraging existing efforts.\r \r \r **KEYWORDS** \r \r choice experiment; genetic editing; invasive species; mixed logit; pest control\r \r """ ; dct:issued "2024-02-27T21:38:48.202186"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:modified "2024-02-27T21:38:48.202186"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:title "PAPER: Pest Control Tech Acceptance Factors" ; dcat:accessURL . a dcat:Distribution ; dct:description """###Underlying beliefs linked to public opinion about gene drive and pest-specific toxin for pest control\r \r **September 2020**\r \r **MacDonald EA, Edwards E, Balanovic J, Medvecky F 2021. [Underlying beliefs linked to public opinion about gene drive and pest-specific toxin for pest control](https://www.publish.csiro.au/wr/pdf/WR19149). Wildlife Research 48(1): 30-37**\r \r **ABSTRACT**\r \r *Context* \r \r Developing a new tool for wide-scale rat eradication is necessary for significant biodiversity gains. Underlying beliefs linked to public opinion can help guide policy makers to understand public concern and inform an effective discourse.\r \r *Aims* \r \r We investigated underlying beliefs linked to levels of support for a potentially disruptive tool, gene drive, compared with a traditional stepwise tool, aerial distribution of a new pest-specific toxin.\r \r *Methods* \r \r Using the theory of planned behaviour, we surveyed (n = 1200) a representative sample of New Zealanders to assess the level of support for the tool related to attitude, normative and control beliefs.\r \r *Key results* \r \r Attitude (e.g. gene drive is good/bad and gene drive is risky/safe) and two norms (e.g. people like me and people in my household) were key contributors to level of support for gene drive. Behavioural beliefs (if scientific evidence can prove it works, concern there are unknown consequences, a humane way to rid New Zealand of rats, and gene drive goes against natural way of life) were also significant. For aerial distribution of a new pest-specific toxin, the same attitudes and normative beliefs identified for gene drive also contributed significantly to the model. Four behavioural beliefs, namely, aerial delivery could affect areas outside the target zones, if there is scientific evidence, and it is impossible to make a pest-specific toxin that would not harm our native wildlife were also significant. The impact either tool may have on biodiversity was not significant in either model.\r \r *Conclusions* \r \r Decision making about both gene drive (a disruptive technology) and aerial distribution of a pest-specific toxin (a stepwise technology) is primarily influenced by attitudes, with a few beliefs also influencing decision making. Novelty of the tool does not affect the underlying beliefs that are influencing levels of support.\r \r *Implications* \r \r Public engagement that acknowledges and responds to these underlying beliefs, rather than a traditional campaign based on biodiversity and environmental gains, may be more effective at creating a constructive dialogue about if and how these tools should be used, and to avoid replicating the polarised debate about 1080.\r \r **KEYWORDS**\r \r conservation, genetics, human dimensions, invasive species.\r \r """ ; dct:issued "2024-02-27T19:33:35.483265"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:modified "2024-02-27T19:33:35.483265"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:title "PAPER: Beliefs and Gene Drive" ; dcat:accessURL . a dcat:Distribution ; dct:description """#Public Perceptions of New Pest Control Methods#\r \r One of the nation’s largest surveys on public attitudes toward new pest control technologies has shown that most New Zealanders support the need for pest control.\r \r Click here to view website: https://bioheritage.nz/research/public-perceptions-of-new-pest-control-methods/ \r \r NOTE: this website will cease in 2027\r """ ; dct:format "PDF" ; dct:issued "2024-03-11T03:17:10.120106"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:modified "2024-03-11T03:17:10.120106"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:title "WEBSITE: Public Perceptions" ; dcat:accessURL ; dcat:byteSize 184054.0 ; dcat:mediaType "application/pdf" . a dcat:Distribution ; dct:description """###Trust in science and scientists: Effects of social attitudes and motivations on views regarding climate change, vaccines and gene drive technology###\r \r **January 2023**\r \r **Dixson HGW, Komugabe-Dixson AF, Medvecky F, Balanovic J, Thygesen H, MacDonald EA. 2022. [Trust in science and scientists: Effects of social attitudes and motivations on views regarding climate change, vaccines and gene drive technology](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/epdf/10.1080/21515581.2022.2155658?needAccess=true). Journal of Trust Research 12(2): 179-203.**\r \r **ABSTRACT**\r \r Trust in science and scientists (TSS) is an increasingly important topic with respect to how science is applied within society. However, its role regarding specific issues may vary depending upon other psychosocial factors. In this study, we investigated how trust interacts with social attitudes and motivations to shape\r views on scientific issues in New Zealand (N = 8,199; 74.7% New Zealand European, 55.1% female). The study went beyond TSS by including broader institutional trust alongside measures relating to support for inequality, status quo preservation and fear of the unknown. We focused on their effects on three issues: vaccines, climate change and genetic technology (gene drive). Although\r TSS was strongly associated with lower vaccine skepticism (B = -0.497, p < 0.01), and moderate support for gene drive (B = 0.231, p < 0.01), it had no meaningful effect on climate skepticism. Furthermore, trust differentially mediated the relationship between social motivations and responses to all three issues. Trust in science and scientists is therefore unlikely to represent a one-size-fits-all variable. We conclude that future research should consider what effects trust in institutions and TSS have with social attitudes and motivations over a range of technologies\r across the sciences.\r \r **KEYWORDS**\r \r Trust; attitudes; motivations; science; scientists; climate; vaccines; gene drive""" ; dct:issued "2024-02-28T02:03:29.356224"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:modified "2024-02-28T02:03:29.356224"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:title "PAPER: Trust in Science" ; dcat:accessURL . a dcat:Distribution ; dct:description """###A systematic literature review of attitudes to pest control methods in New Zealand###\r \r **January 2017**\r \r **Kannemeyer R. 2017. A systematic literature review of attitudes to pest control methods in New Zealand. Landcare Research Contract Report. 49 p. **\r \r **ABSTRACT**\r \r This systematic literature review on attitudes to pest control methods in New Zealand has been funded as part of New Zealand’s Biological Heritage National Science Challenge (NZBHNSC) Programme 2: Reducing risks and threats. The review meets milestones 1.1 and 2.1 in the contestable-funded Challenge Project 2.6: Exploring New Zealand’s social licence towards novel pest control technologies.\r """ ; dct:format "PDF" ; dct:issued "2024-07-16T21:20:01.419694"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:modified "2024-07-16T21:20:01.419694"^^xsd:dateTime ; dct:title "REPORT: Pest control attitudes literature review" ; dcat:accessURL ; dcat:byteSize 831608.0 ; dcat:mediaType "application/pdf" . a foaf:Organization ; foaf:name "Challenge Inventory" .