Science isn't finished until it's communicated

Sir Mark Walport

Already today we are facing the consequences of climate change. Current measures to slow global warming are predicted to fail in limiting the rise of the average global temperature to 1.5°C . As a result, the ramification of these rising temperatures are expected to intensify significantly in the future. In order to solve current and inevitable future perils, we need innovative solutions. As part of the iGEM community, we are aware of synthetic biology's potential to solve those challenges and it is now time to set the course for a future harnessing those possibilities. While synthetic biology presents promising solutions, science and its applications are shaped by the surrounding framework. Deciding actors that influence that environment includes politics, societal attitudes, and public discourse, as highlighted by the science communication context paradigm suggested by Akin and Scheufler (Jamieson et al., 2017). Such frameworks are constantly shifting, with each extensive societal discussion and debate, which necessitate a comprehensive understanding of the topic.

Our educational efforts had two main focuses. First, we aimed at understanding how the public perceives synbio and how synbio projects including plants were communicated in the past, emphasizing the topic of genetically modified plants. We wanted to understand how we as a synbio community can improve our communication concerning controversial scientific topics. Second, we were committed to promoting inclusivity in science communication and education, especially for individuals who are often unintentionally discriminated against. Our mission was to enable an active participation in discussions about synthetic biology, by making science accessible to blind and visually impaired (B&VI) individuals. Ultimately catalyzing a transformation towards a more inclusive and accessible scientific community.

Our first step was to gather information on public opinion and knowledge about synthetic biology, through an extensive literature search, discussing with science communicators, and an online survey. Our research revealed an information gap related to synthetic biology, that needs to be addressed (Akin et al., 2017). Therefore, we focused our initial education efforts towards closing this knowledge gap by publishing articles on popular science platforms (see BioWissKomm) and giving lectures to inspire the new generation of biologists (see Karl-von-Frisch prize).

A solid understanding of science lays the foundation for a public discourse about scientific topics. Traditionally, scientific communication follows a one-way approach, meaning that an expert communicates their expertise to a scientifically interested audience of laypeople. This one-way approach is still relevant and necessary to bridge the information gap, for example in the form of scientific newspapers or online articles. However, the misbelief that opinions deviating from the current scientific consensus are solely based on lack of information is outdated. Because practicing only this one-way science communication, also known as the deficit model, has shown to disqualify lay people from having relevant opinions (Lakomý et al., 2019). The two-way approach of science communication emphasizes not only a communication of science but also a discourse about science, listening to ethical concerns or addressing social dimensions of scientific topics, which may not be recognized by scientists.

We followed the two-way approach and learned a lot by interacting with the public. For example, we found that a lot of people who are generally well informed about the scientific aspects of GMOs, are still rather reluctant regarding GMO use. Often, other influences like societal and economic concerns or lack of belief in the chances of GMO use are the decisive factors that shape the public opinion. Notably, this finding is supported by existing literature (Akin et al., 2017). This unfounded fact, irreversible in combination with multifactorial influences, leads to an adverse atmosphere in Europe and especially in Germany. Here an anti-GMO landscape developed and the trust towards genetic-engineering specialists is particularly low compared to other natural science experts (Renn, 2022). In order to address these trends we utilized the modern public engagement with science education approach, which emphasizes an interactive learning experience, we initiated projects aimed at facilitating a dialogue between scientists and the general public (see university summer festival). However, there is still a pressing need for the wider adoption of this approach in science communication practices.

In the realm of science communication, it is imperative that we rethink not only how we convey scientific concepts to inform and engage the public but also how we ensure that this information reaches as many individuals as possible. It is crucial to recognize that certain groups are frequently left out of these conversations due to communication methods lacking inclusivity. Even in Marburg, a city claiming to be the most blind-friendly city in Germany, we noticed that B&VI people are often excluded in science communication efforts from the university site, simply by the fact that those are not designed barrier-free.

Exceeding a one-way dialog, we have taken on the challenge of creating interactive learning opportunities for B&VI people. We designed and conducted an inclusive laboratory day tailored to the needs of B&VI students. In order to achieve this, we customizing a commercially available lab kit from BioBuilder to make it accessible to B&VI individuals. In addition, we adapted teaching materials for B&VI students, which included the creation of tactile figures and a multisensory learning kit. These adaptations aim to convey concepts related to gene regulation, modularity, and circuit design, ensuring at every step that the educational experience was inclusive as well as informative. However, our vision extended beyond the scope of this project, reflecting our commitment to empowering future generations of science. To ensure sustainability and independence from our direct involvement, we created a comprehensive textbook and a lab guide. The textbook includes explanations and tasks aimed at guiding users on how to use the multisensory learning kit (MuLI) and comprehend the principles of synthetic biology. This "MuLI" was made accessible to the public by the Deutsche Blindenstudienanstalt blista (German association for education of the blind). The lab guide serves as an instructional manual detailing how to set up laboratory experiments and develop education materials that are accessible for the visually impaired. Both these resources are readily accessible on our iGEM wiki page. This ensures that upcoming iGEM teams, educators, and teachers have a foundation to build upon, promoting inclusive science education. Furthermore, we established contact with BioBuilder - a company that provides molecular biology kits for teaching purposes. We adapted one of their kits with accommodations for B&VI students for our own lab day and encouraged them to create a new, more inclusive version of the kit. Our suggestions were based on the experiences we gained during the lab day with B&VI students and the lab guide we provided, which includes materials suitable for the visually impaired and tips for educators (see blista).


With the survey we aimed to understand how the public perceives synbio and how projects including plants were communicated in the past. With our insight we wanted to understand how we as a synbio community can improve our communication concerning controversial scientific topics. We used an online tool as well as a printed version of our survey to reach as broad and extensive an audience as possible. A diverse group of over 100 people spanning different ages, social backgrounds and level of education.

A pie chart that shows the results of the survey question 'Which aspects of GMOs concern you the most?'. The largest proportion (65,62%) said environmental concerns. 59,38% said biodversity and 46,88% of people that were worried around health. 26,56% of people had ethical concerns while 7,81% had no worries.
The pie chart shows the results of the question 'Do you belive in the long-term safety of GMOs?'. 40.62% said yes, while 40.62% were not sure. 18,75% of people said they wo not believe in the long term safety of GMOs.

Among other important insights, the most significant findings revolved around public concerns related to the potential impacts of GMOs. Notably, over 60% of respondents expressed apprehension, particularly regarding environmental and biodiversity concerns. In contrast, approximately 4% of respondents reported having no concerns. Additionally, more than 58% of those surveyed were unsure or had doubts about the long-term safety of genetically modified plants.

Our online survey played a pivotal role in comprehending the public's relationship with GMOs and guided the formulation of subsequent education projects. This early insight allowed us to strategically focus on specific thematic areas during the planning phase, contributing to the development of an effective education strategy.

Karl-von-Frisch Prize

Since 1993, the VBIO society (Association Biology, Biosciences & Biomedicine in Germany) has been annually honoring the top high school graduates in biology from the state of Hesse with the prestigious "Karl-von-Frisch" prize, named after the famous behavioral scientist. This award ceremony provides a unique platform where students have the opportunity to interact with leading scientists in the field of biology, often marking their first exposure to such an experience. In return, established scientists present their cutting-edge research to the laureates, offering a glimpse into their fascinating discoveries and inspiring students to pursue careers in science.

Diverse lecturers at the event provide an overview of various disciplines in biology, making it a comprehensive learning experience. Given the increasing significance of synthetic biology in both scientific advancements and everyday life, we believed it was essential for this field to be represented at the award ceremony. As the youngest speakers at the event, we were grateful for the chance to represent synthetic biology and share our research with an audience of over 200 individuals, including students, teachers, parents, and representatives from the Ministry of Culture of Hessen.

During the poster session held during the award ceremony's intermission, we had the opportunity to engage with a diverse audience. It was particularly intriguing for us to witness the public's response to our goal of advancing plant synthetic biology and to engage in lively discussions with students, teachers, and parents. This experience aligned with our mission of fostering dialogue-oriented science communication.

Overall, we were pleasantly surprised by the warm reception of our project, especially considering the reputation of GMOs in Germany. People demonstrated a solid understanding of the issues our project addressed, along with an appreciation for our original motivation and the urgency of transforming agricultural practices. They were open to rethinking approaches to future challenges, particularly within the context of synthetic biology. It was gratifying to witness the audience's fascination with the methods and possibilities of synthetic biology.

However, many of our conversation partners expressed valid concerns about GMOs and their consequences, which they struggled to assess. Many people expressed concerns about the potential impact of GMOs on natural cycles, such as the spread of modified genes in nature. Not being enlightened on those questions often led to a cautious and somewhat skeptical attitude. We recognized the need for further clarification on this topic. Lastly, we encountered a rather alarming situation when one individual accused us of being paid by pharmaceutical companies and promoting a GMO agenda in Germany. Fortunately, this was an isolated incident, but it underscored the importance of understanding the diverse opinions surrounding GMOs.
Through these various conversations and discussions, we gained valuable insights that helped us refine our science communication efforts. We are grateful for the opportunity to participate in this event and to learn from the diverse perspectives we encountered.

A scenery inside a tent. In the background people are engaged in discussion at various booths. In the front of the picture multiple persons sitting are sitting on a bench conducting a siple experiment, the extraction of DNA from Banana. Two younger children are instructed by a girl about 20 years old.


There doesn't seem to be another way of creating the next green revolution without GMOs

E. O. Wilson

With our goal in mind to address audiences with diverse scientific backgrounds, we reached out to a popular science communication platform. BioWissKomm (German abbreviation for “Bio Science Communication”) is a small company that dedicates its work to providing a platform for scientists to communicate their work to a general but scientifically interested audience. The company also offers public lab courses, seminars, workshops and science cafés and is also often invited to schools. They are also closely related to the VBIO - which is a German association of representatives across all life sciences. We gratefully took the offer of the founder and managing director, Dr. rer. nat. Wolfgang Nellen, to publish an article on the BioWissKomm blog which addresses students, teachers and anyone who wants to expand their scientific horizons.

From events such as the Karl-von-Frisch prize and the summer festival, as well as feedback from our public survey, it became evident to us that many individuals harbor reservations about genetic engineering, particularly in the realm of plant biotechnology. These reservations seem to stem from a lack of belief in the prospects of GMOs for our future agriculture. Recognising this, we took the initiative to discuss the chances and ethical implications of our project. Furthermore, we expanded the discourse to green biotechnology, GM crops, and genetic engineering, especially in the context of the looming climate crisis.

In our article, we analyzed the challenges our agriculture faces given the growing population and the rising likelihood of droughts, floods etc. due to climate change (FAO, 2017). Comparing the situation to the first “Green Revolution'' where agricultural research saved Mexico, parts of Asia and Africa from a great famine, we proposed that technological advancements in biotechnology and molecular biology provide the tools for a “Gene Revolution”. This revolution would make our plants more resistant to unstable environmental conditions, stating that we need our agriculture not only to secure availability of food calories but also tackle the problem of vitamin deficiencies and biodiversity (Fukuda-Parr, 2007, 2009). Within that scope, we introduced our aim to improve Agrobacterium mediated plant transformation as the “workhorse of plant biotechnology” and explained previous efforts to engineer plants with enhanced functions, such as natural resistances to pests and discussed the impact of such plants on lowering agriculture's contribution to global emissions (Kovak et al., 2021, 2022). Lastly, we also reviewd data on common public concerns regarding GMOs in agriculture and discussed how these beliefs are reflected in the restrictive European legislation (Bonny, 2003). Our aim was to entangle the muddled legal framework regarding GMOs in Europe and raise awareness on how it impacts the decision of European scientists and smaller companies to dedicate their research to plant biotechnology. This was especially important to us since we experienced in discussions that more elaborate critiques regarding GMO usage often address the influence of large companies rather than safety concerns.

Despite the impact of GMO usage on agriculture being extensively studied, critics are often unaware of the positive effects of GMOs on climate change (Bonny, 2003), biodiversity and the environment due to increased crop efficiency, adaptiveness to different environmental conditions and natural resistances. We hope that with our article, we were able to provide an overview about the oppurtunities of GMOs, the current legal framework in the EU and common fears associated with genetic engineering to a scientifically diverse audience. Further, we believe that addressing these concerns is a first step towards a broad societal debate on GMO usage that not only considers associated risks but also chances for economy and ecology.

Summer Festival University

Participating in the university summer festival was an incredible opportunity for us to not only showcase our iGEM project but also connect with a diverse audience, spanning different generations, academic backgrounds, and interests. Engaging with the general public is crucial because it allows us to gain insights into their concerns and perspectives. This two way dialogue is a beneficial exchange where we share knowledge and receive valuable feedback.

We organized a fun and accessible experiment: DNA extraction from bananas, which captivated both young and old alike. It was rewarding to witness even adults experiencing that "aha" moment when science becomes tangible and enjoyable for people of all backgrounds. To gauge public sentiment towards synthetic biology, an area often underrepresented in the general perception of biology, we used an interactive mind map. Visitors were encouraged to share their thoughts about synthetic biology and GMOs, fostering open discussions among and with participants. This experience was enlightening, as it exposed us to diverse opinions and constructive dialogues.

One of our key takeaways was the significance of actively engaging with the public. By listening to different viewpoints and addressing concerns about synthetic biology and genetic engineering, we took a step towards understanding skepticism surrounding these topics. This understanding is often the first step in establishing constructive dialogues and dispelling prejudices related to novel technologies.

Public engagement events like the university summer festival are not only exciting opportunities for interaction but also essential for the advancement of science and science communication. They provide a platform for meaningful discussions and open doors to finding solutions for complex challenges. This open science event was also an opportunity for us to conduct our survey to gather feedback, allowing us to continuously improve our engagement efforts.

A scenery inside a tent. In the background people are engaged in discussion at various booths. In the front of the picture multiple persons sitting are sitting on a bench conducting a siple experiment, the extraction of DNA from Banana. Two younger children are instructed by a girl about 20 years old.

Blista Project

Our Motivation

Inclusive education is not a privilege.
It is a fundamental human right.

Ban Ki-moon

The human right to education is enshrined in article 14 of the UNESCO Human Rights Declaration. We strongly believe that science education should be accessible to everyone as part of educational justice. Education serves as the foundation for understanding scientific principles, empowering individuals to actively participate in societal discussions about the possibilities, challenges, and ethical dilemmas posed by technological advancements.

However the ideal of equipping every student with scientific literacy falls apart when it comes to the education of people with disabilities. Particularly, the hands-on testing of experimental designs, a crucial component of interactive education conveying core principles of biology, often lacks accessibility. Synthetic biology, with its potential for innovation, can play a significant role in addressing this issue.

It is imperative that we rethink not only how we convey scientific concepts to inform and engage the public but also how we ensure that this information reaches as diverse an audience as possible. It is crucial to recognize that certain groups are frequently left out of these efforts due to communication methods lacking inclusivity.

Living in Marburg, a city claiming to be the most blind-friendly city in Germany, we noticed that the community of blind and vision impaired (B&VI) is often unintentionally excluded from educational efforts organized by the university, such as lab excursions, public lectures or open-house days. An educational injustice is often caused by the additional hurdles organizers and science communicators face to make these events barrier-free. Challenging this issue, we dedicated our work to making molecular and synthetic biology more accessible to B&VI.

An Interactive Laboratory Day for Blind and Visually Impaired Students

Implementing our previous findings we were committed to create an inclusive and two-way science communication. Our project embarked on a mission to bridge the gap between science and visually impaired students. To facilitate direct interaction and meaningful exchange, we set ourselves to organize a lab day with an accompanying seminar for the students of the Carl Strehl highschool Marburg, which belongs to the blista (German Institution for Education of Blind and Vision-Impaired People). We faced multiple challenges at once: The first was to design an experimental setup that did not rely on visual observation. Further challenges included the adaptation of teaching materials as we could utilize traditional teaching methods like powerpoint presentations and such. To substitute this, we needed learning materials that are as accessible as possible for the B&VI students. We first thoroughly examined the needs of our target audience. In addition to conducting literature research, we met with experts in working with B&VI students. Based on this we formulated guidelines and gathered tips for creating blind-friendly education materials guiding us throughout the project. We formulated our findings in our lab guide (see lab guide).

Adapting an Experimental Kit for Blind and Visually Impaired Students

Our quest to create an accessible lab day led us to "Eau d'e Coli," an innovative project initiated by the iGEM team from MIT back in 2006. The team engineered E. coli bacteria to emit the scent of bananas upon reaching the exponential growth phase in the presence of a specific precursor. BioBuilder, a company dedicated to science education and communication, adopted this system and created a captivating lab kit for teaching purposes, to give students an interactive introduction to the concepts of synbio. More precisely, the kit exemplifies the importance of testing different designs for the same task by providing four E. coli strains. Two of which carry designs that produce smell in the exponential phase but harbor different genetic constructs, the other strains serve as positive or negative controls. With this experimental design, the kit emphasizes the “test” phase of different designs and more generally promotes a scientific way of thinking, highlighting the importance of sufficient controls and multiple approaches to the same problem. With this kit B&VI students could utilize their sense of smell to access the changing output from bacteria depending on the growth phase. Nevertheless, we needed to adapt the complete workflow of the kit for blind people, including, the handling of lab ware and organisms, data display and most importantly lab safety. Modifications we introduced were for example the use of rubber bands to label different reaction tubes and fixing pipette tips to the sides of pipette boxes and to dispense with dangerous laboratory equipment like Bunsen burners.

Two hands are feeling a green thread that has been pinned to a woolen coordinate system. The green thread resembles the exponential phase of the growth curve. The axes of the coordinate system are labeled with very large black letters.

The students had the task of measuring the OD600 of the E. coli strain over several hours with the goal of creating a growth curve. To display the data, we used a pinboard with a coordinate system made up of wool thread. This way, students could pin individual data points to the pinboard and connect the pins by a differently textured thread to plot the growth curve in a manner suitable for B&VI. Simultaneously, students could evaluate the smell of the bacteria and compare if the perceived smell corresponded with the OD measurement. Students were divided into four groups which were handed different strains, so that they could compare the designs and discuss their observations with the genetic background of the bacteria in mind, making out which circuit was better at reporting the exponential phase.

Two hands touching a green thread on a woolen coordinate system.

Our efforts ultimately resulted in a highly positive response from the students, saying that we significantly improved the accessibility of the lab. For a comprehensive overview of our lab accessibility enhancements, please find our guide on lab accessibility hacks.

A young man with glasses is pipetting a translucent liquid from a beaker to an Erlenmeyer flask.

Creating a Innovative Multi Sensory Learning Kit

Creating educational content for the seminar tailored to the needs of B&VI students required meticulous planning and a deep understanding of their learning requirements. To achieve this, we cooperated with Dr. Tobias Manke and Tanja Schapat, both experienced teachers at the Carl Strehl School. This institution is dedicated to the education of visually impaired students and operates under the umbrella of Deutsche Blindenstudienanstalt e.V. (blista). Beyond its role in secondary education, blista offers vocational training, boarding facilities, and even houses a library for the blind, along with a Braille printing service.

In our preparation, we had to acknowledge the fact the most effective way to convey information to B&VI is through nonvisual communication. We were challenged to rephrase concepts of synthetic biology and forgo visual support, to a level of understanding that allows comprehension only through audio input. This in turn helped us to deepen our understanding and opened new strategies to convey the topic also to non-impaired people in a clear and simple manner. For the most complex concepts we used tactile illustration, we designed ourselves. Tactile images can make graphs and illustrations accessible to B&VI by using relief-like imprints on paper. Figures can be perceived through the sense of touch. Due to the intricacies of the well-thought-out design, creating tactile images involves lengthy planning, and the process of interpreting an image takes considerably more time compared to visual perception. The images also lack the ability to present dynamic processes. As a result, the use of such images is significantly restricted. To compensate for this, we thought about a more interactive and versatile approach. Our solution was inspired by alternative teaching material used at the Carl Strehl Schule. At the school they created MuLIs (multi sensory learning kits) which are designed to address multiple senses, fostering inclusive and unobstructive learning for students, irrespective of their abilities. We created our own synbio kit focusing on the “design” aspect of the engineering cycle, creating a complete engineering cycle experience.

Our MuLI basically consists of different magnets and a magnetic board. The magnets represent different genetic elements like promotor, ribosome-binding site, transcription start site, coding sequence, reporters and terminators. Different genetic parts can be distinguished through different surface and form designs. The parts can be freely arranged on the magnet board allowing for all kinds of different circuit designs, from simple ON-OFF switches to complex toggle switches. An important didactic advice we incorporated in the design was not to design the parts to function like puzzle pieces. This allows the user to make errors in the design ensuring an efficient learning experience.

A student is touching magnetic building bricks on a magnet board. The teacher reaches his hand to the magnet board to move the building bricks. Three other students are watching.

During the seminar, as part of the lab day, the MuLI helped us to introduce the function of the genetic parts to the students and explain the process of designing a synthetic circuit. After the general introduction, we were able to guide the students in reconstructing the circuits used in the BioBuilder kit, leading to a better understanding of the “design” aspect of the experiment. The MuLI was a helpful addition in the lab, allowing students to ask questions by using the board and individual genetic parts, as well as experiment with the magnets to understand circuit designs. It was a great experience to see our material in action.

Close-up of a magnetic board with magnetic building bricks on it. Two hands of different people are moving the building bricks.

From our other education projects, we knew how important it was for us as scientists to listen to the student’s opinions on moral and ethical implications of GMOs which led to an engaging open discussion towards the end of our lab experience.

Thinking beyond the iGEM competition

Our vision extended beyond the scope of this project, reflecting our commitment to empowering future generations of science. To ensure our contributions to be sustainable and independent from our direct involvement, we worked on implementing them in iGEM-independent education efforts and programs.

Nine people sitting around a table.

Our own experiences and the positive feedback from students and educators showed that the MuLI is an innovative tool for playfully introducing students with and without visual disabilities to the principles of synthetic biology. Because of this, we developed a booklet explaining the function of each genetic part and how the individual parts can be used to assemble transcriptional units and genetic regulatory circuits. With aid of the magnetic parts, we explained modularization as a concept in synthetic biology and used the opportunity for a more general introduction to synthetic biology. To foster an engaging and interactive learning experience, we've thoughtfully integrated tasks that challenge students to apply their newfound knowledge in tackling current problems with the means of genetic engineering, encouraging deeper understanding and practical application. Because we wanted our teaching unit to be easy to integrate in the school's curriculum, we made the contents compliant with the Hessian curriculum for A level students. We are aware that curricula differ between countries. This is why the English version contains keywords that need to be understood by the students as a prerequisite for working with our learning tool. Our MuLI handbooks are freely available as preprints in German and English on our wiki page. The finished learning tool including the magnets will be published at

MuLI Handbook English version

MuLI Handbook German version

As part of our broader impact, we met with Chloe Franklin, the national education program coordinator of BioBuilder and a former iGEM participant. Her perspective as a member of the B&VI community was invaluable and we were thrilled to hear that our efforts inspired BioBuilder to adapt their kit for visually impaired and blind students. To contribute to their endeavour, we provided them with our materials, lab guides, and tactile figures. We hope this will encourage teachers for B&VI students worldwide to incorporate lab excursions into their teaching, since hands-on experiences are valuable for adopting a scientific way of thinking, which is a skill that we believe should be fostered by meaningful science communication.

Four people in a Google meetings call. Their name tags say that the people are Cloe Franklin, Simon Klute, Fiona Jäger and Nathan Trausch.


From our conversation with the students, we are convinced that educational justice can only be accomplished when it is demanded by people with disabilities who want to follow their passion into science. With our MuLI we hope to equip the basis of science educators, teachers, with a tool to dynamically explain molecular and synthetic biology to students. Furthermore, we want to introduce students to the concepts of synthetic and molecular biology and by that lay the foundation for a deeper understanding of those topics, their applications and limitations by using current real-world examples in our workbook.

Our collaboration with BioBuilders and the blista has been a remarkable success in our efforts to enhance two-way science communication. Through our laboratory day initiative, we've taken significant steps towards making practical science education more accessible for individuals with visual impairments. Our collaboration with BioBuilder and blista has not only impacted our local community but also initiated global efforts to make science education more inclusive. With our MuLI, we not only created a valuable tool for science educators to illustrate molecular biology concepts to their students but also encouraged active engagement with the learning material. Our collective efforts aim to make a meaningful contribution to science communication by promoting scientific literacy and taking important steps toward the inclusion of individuals with visual impairments in scientific discussions.


  1. Corley, E. A. (2017). Mapping the Landscape of Public Attitudes on Synthetic Biology. BioScience, biw171.
  2. Jamieson, K. H., Kahan, D. M., & Scheufele, D. A. (Hrsg.). (2017). The Oxford Handbook of the Science of Science Communication (Bd. 1). Oxford University Press.
  3. Lakomý, M., Hlavová, R., & Machackova, H. (2019). Open Science and the Science-Society Relationship. Society, 56(3), 246–255.
  4. Renn, O. (2022, August 19). Die Große Verunsicherung.
  5. Bonny, S. (2003). BIP - Why are most Europeans opposed to GMOs? - Factors explaining rejection in France and Europe.
  6. FAO. (2017). Future of Food and Agriculture—Trends and Challenges.
  7. Fukuda-Parr, S. (Ed.). (2007). The gene revolution: GM crops and unequal development. Earthscan.
  8. Fukuda-Parr, S. (2009). The Gene Revolution: GM Crops and Unequal Development. Sterling, VA: Earthscan, 2007, 248 pp., $150.00. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 91(2), 551–553.
  9. Kovak, E., Blaustein-Rejto, D., & Qaim, M. (2022). Genetically modified crops support climate change mitigation. Trends in Plant Science, 27(7), 627–629.
  10. Kovak, E., Qaim, M., & Blaustein-Rejto, D. (2021). The climate benefits of yield increases in genetically engineered crops [Preprint]. Plant Biology.
Back to top