Team:Marburg/Human Practices/KiJuPa
KiJuPa
On the 25th of June we met with the parliament of the children and young people (KiJuPa) of Marburg. This parliament is a rare possibility for political participation of young people which does not exist in many other cities in Germany. Children from the first to the last grade of all kinds of schools can get elected as representatives for their classmates. One specialty of the KiJuPa Marburg is its right to speak at the city council meeting. There it can submit suggestions for investments of the city Marburg, like an additional traffic light to make their way to school safer.
The world is changing rapidly, new innovations are being developed to face the problems of both presence and future. Decisions in politics are being made depending on the demands of the people who have elected them. Yet, the one group that will experience the most impact of our decisions of today is not even allowed to vote: Our future generation, the youth.
One classic approach when talking with people about GMOs and their future use is reaching out to adult people, hearing their opinion. But the future of GMOs will one day be defined by the upcoming generations, which raises the necessity to introduce them to the topic with an educated outlook
To face this issue, we reached out to the KiJuPa Marburg which members represent the under eighteen people of Marburg. They showed major interest in attending a discussion round with the iGEM team Marburg. Related to our own field of research, the overall theme was the use of genetic engineering in agriculture. We wanted to learn from their perspective and also whether or not an interest in further education about genetics would arise.
Our meeting with the KiJuPa took place online. It was divided into two parts: First, we presented some basic facts about modern genetic engineering, focusing further on biocontainment and agricultural use of GMOs to give the attendants of the meeting some background knowledge and a fair chance for the discussion round which followed up. We were able to implement many aspects from the prior Dies Academicus into the presentation, while narrowing down the target group at the same time.
Our main focus was the second part: A structured discussion round to achieve a proper understanding of the opinions of young people - represented by the KiJuPa - on the field of green genetic engineering.
The first question was the possible future usage of plant engineering. Next to nitrogen fixation and the production of vaccines in plants the main interest was the possibility of enriching plants with nutrients to prevent malnutrition, similar to “Golden Rice” or even get to design plants with a whole set of for the human necessary vitamins , including vitamins like B12.
Next, we discussed arguments for the use of genetic engineering.The attendants of the meeting pointed out that genetically modified plants could be used to prevent hunger and also to have more resilient plants which do survive extreme weather as we experience it today. They also referred to the mutation breeding which is already practiced as a more risky way to get exactly the same modified plant as with genetic engineering without the mandatory labeling GMOs would need.
As arguments against the use of genetic engineering the members of the KiJuPa pointed out that so far it is not completely researched how GMOs have an influence on the human organism. Additionally there is the fear of the unknown. One point of concern is the future impact of genetically modified plants. Another contra argument is the possible resistance which pests could develop to attack even modified plants.
The KiJuPa worried that while economically wealthy countries have the possibilities to use the techniques of plant engineering the economically poor countries will have the greater need of these products like drought resistant plants, leading into a further dependent relationship. Also while agricultural genetic engineering has a huge impact on the environment it has to be considered that the economy in the first place wants to sell its products.
At last, we wanted to develop some solution approaches considering the in beforehand collected discussion points. According to the members of the KiJuPa it is important to design this field of research more attractive. Instead of restrictions they would like to have promotions for good research and use of this technique. One important topic is the improvement of science education as good science education and communication is an important tool to prevent misinformation and also helps people to develop their own opinion based on facts. To get more control of economical activities they also suggested splitting big companies or getting the state as a participant of the enterprise involved.
Conclusion
We were really positively surprised about the interest the young people showed in this topic and also about their opinions which were far more open-minded than our research on the opinions of adult people as consumers/politicians revealed. The suggested approach to motivate companies and researchers in the field of genetic engineering to do their research in a positive and helpful way instead of working with restrictions was quite surprising.
Another part which was pointed out multiple times during the talks was the importance of good science education and communication. This motivates us in our approach to always combine these two parts in our Human Practices field which is why our motto can be quite fitting described as “talk and listen to people” in a balanced way.
All in all, our discussion round with the KiJuPa was a really important part of our project to get to know the opinions of the often overheard young generation a little better. We thank the KiJuPa Marburg for their interest and for sharing their time and thoughts with us.
