Team:Zamorano/PerceptionBibliography

From 2014.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
 
(2 intermediate revisions not shown)
Line 308: Line 308:
.carousel-control {
.carousel-control {
   position: absolute;
   position: absolute;
-
   top: 40%;
+
   top: 85%;
   left: 15px;
   left: 15px;
   width: 40px;
   width: 40px;
Line 1,096: Line 1,096:
<div class="navbar-inner">
<div class="navbar-inner">
-
<div class="igem-bar2"><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2014/1/10/Zamorano_Logo.png"></div>
+
<div class="igem-bar2"><a href="http://www.zamorano.edu" target="_blank"><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2014/1/10/Zamorano_Logo.png"></a></div>
     <ul class="nav">
     <ul class="nav">
Line 1,109: Line 1,109:
       </a>
       </a>
<ul class="dropdown-menu">
<ul class="dropdown-menu">
-
       <li><a href="https://2014.igem.org/Team:Zamorano/Executive_Summary">Executive Summary</a></li>
+
       <li><a href="https://2014.igem.org/Team:Zamorano/Overview">Overview</a></li>
       <li><a href="https://2014.igem.org/Team:Zamorano/Perception">Public Perception</a></li>       
       <li><a href="https://2014.igem.org/Team:Zamorano/Perception">Public Perception</a></li>       
       <li><a href="https://2014.igem.org/Team:Zamorano/Education">Education Component</a></li>
       <li><a href="https://2014.igem.org/Team:Zamorano/Education">Education Component</a></li>

Latest revision as of 02:59, 18 October 2014

Public perception of university students in Honduras about Biotechnology, Synthetic Biology and GMOs



Bibliography


  • Aerni, P. (2002). Stakeholder Attitudes Toward the Risks and Benefits of Agricultural Biotechnology in Developing Countries: A Comparison Between Mexico and the Philippines. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 22(6), 1123-1137.

  • Amin, L., Azlan, N., Ahmad, J., & Ibrahim, R. (2011). Public Perception of the Ethical Aspects of Golden Rice in Malaysia. International Journal of Science in Society, 2(4), 15-34.

  • Environics International. (2000). International Environmental Monitor 2000. Toronto: Environics International.

  • Gatharaa, V., Ngugi, J., Kilambya, D., & Gichuki, T. (2008). Consumers' Perceptions of Biotechnology in Kenya. Journal of Agricultural & Food Information, 9(4), 354-361.

  • Environics International. (2000). International Environmental Monitor 2000. Toronto: Environics International.

  • Ho, P., Zhao, J., & Xue, D. (2009). Access and control of agro-biotechnology: Bt cotton, ecological change and risk in China. Journal of Peasant Studies, 36(2), 345-364.

  • Hoban, T. (2004). Public attitudes towards agricultural biotechnology. Food and Agriculture Organization.

  • Pauwels, E. (2013). Public understanding of Synthetic Biology. BioScience.

  • Pauwels E. and I. Ifrim. (2008), Trends in American and European press coverage of synthetic biology: Tracking the last five years of coverage. Synthetic Biology Project 2008.

  • Pauwels, E. 2009. Public perception and Media: The case of synthetic Biology. Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. Avaliable on: http://ec.europa.eu/bepa/european-group-ethics/docs/archives/ege-ep.pdf

  • Purnick, P., & Weiss, R. (2009). The second wave of synthetic biology: from modules to systems. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology, 10, 410-422. Obtenido de http://www.nature.com/nrm/journal/v10/n6/abs/nrm2698.html