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

• Introduction
• Methodology
• Results
• Conclusions
• Bibliography

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