PERSPECTIVES of GMOs into the environment and the mar- keting of GM products 3,4 . This has been in response to public concerns over the potential environmental consequences of introducing some GM cultivars, and the desire for the con- sumer to be able to choose between GM and non-GM products in the supermarket.It is now anticipated that Europe is in a position to restart the regulatory process. In a recent report 5 , the European Union not only recog- nizes that “biotechnology has the potential to deliver improved food quality and environ- mental benefits…”, but also states that there is a need for these benefits to be realized in and for Europe. The United Kingdom government ann- ounced last year that before the regulatory process is restarted, there should be a national dialogue on genetic modification. This was carried out during the summer of 2003,‘at arm’s length’ from the government, by an independent steering board. The main period of public deliberation lasted six weeks dur- ing June and July 2003. Here, we discuss the national and international context in which this debate arose, and take an initial look at what we can learn from this first exercise in public deliberation on scientific issues in the United Kingdom. GM technology is only one of many new technologies that will have significant effects on society; nanotechnology and advances in biomedical science are other examples that have the potential to affect everyday lives. Ultimately, the success of such developments will depend on public support,and on policy makers and scientists understanding the atti- tudes of the society in which the science oper- ates. This first United Kingdom exercise in public consultation, its successes and its fail- ures, will therefore have much to teach us about how to effectively engage with the public on scientific developments in the future. What role is there for public debate? Given that the regulatory system is science based, what role is there for public debate? The recommendation for a national debate in the United Kingdom came from the Agri- culture and Environment Biotechnology Com- mission (AEBC), and arose from a report on the farm-scale evaluations (FSEs) 6 . This series of experiments, the results of which will be published in the autumn of 2003, investi- gated the potential effects of the manage- ment of four GM herbicide-tolerant crops on farmland biodiversity compared with the management of equivalent conventional crops. It was one of the largest ecological experiments ever undertaken to investigate the potential effects of changes in land use before the changes have taken place. The results will contribute one piece to the ‘multi- disciplinary jigsaw’of evidence on the poten- tial consequences of the commercialization of GM crops. However, these experiments also became a focus for wider concerns about GM technology in the United Kingdom, and highlighted the lack of a framework within which there could be effective dialogue Science communication is developing a new approach that promotes dialogue between scientists and the public. A recent example is the debate on the possible introduction of genetically modified crops into the United Kingdom. As this exercise in public engagement draws to a close, we consider the context in which this debate has taken place, and the challenges of developing such interactions between science and society. The first genetically modified organisms (GMOs) were created in the early 1970s using recombinant DNA technology, and the first GM plants were produced in 1983. By the late 1980s, GM crops were on sale in China (virus resistant tobacco and tomato),but they did not become widespread in the United States until 1994. Early examples were the ‘FlavrSavr’ tomato, insect-resistant corn that was intro- duced in 1995 and herbicide-tolerant soybean that was introduced in 1996. Between 1996 and 2002, the global area of cultivated GM crops increased 35-fold from 1.7–58.7 million hectares 1 . The first generation of GM crops are relatively unimaginative, with 98% containing transgenes for herbicide tolerance or insect resistance, but future crops are likely to be more diverse 2 . In contrast to some parts of the world, Europe has not embraced the commercial growing of GM crops. In fact, the progress of GM crops through the European Union regu- latory system largely halted in 1998, since when there has been a comprehensive review of all regulations that pertain to the release NATURE REVIEWS | GENETICS VOLUME 4 | OCTOBER 2003 | 819 The GM public debate: context and communication strategies Rosie Hails and Julian Kinderlerer SCIENCE AND SOCIETY “…the science behind GM is highly technical, but it is not necessary for members of the public to have in-depth knowledge of the science to form an opinion on the social and ethical implications.”