- Masakazu Inaba and Darryl Macer
Institute of
Biological Sciences, University of Tsukuba,
Tsukuba Science City,
305-8572, JAPAN
Email: asianbioethics@yahoo.co.nz
Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics 13 (2003), 78-90.
I.
Introduction
Japan
has a population of 125 million persons enjoying a relatively high standard of
living internationally, being the eighth most populated nation globally. Accordingly on the FAO index of food
intake Japan rates as a developed country. In 1995 there was 4.282 million ha
of land under crops, so the ratio of agricultural land per person is only 0.3
ha per person, because the country is 80% mountainous. Of these crops 2 million
ha is under rice. In order to feed
these people most food is imported.
Although
some surveys of Japanese biotechnology have pointed out the relatively low
importance of agricultural biotechnology when compared to agricultural
exporting countries like Australasia or the United States, the increased
capacity for food production from a limited area of land is of great potential
benefit to Japan, where there is little agricultural land available. The
government and industry has been promoting biotechnology since the 1980s.
The
2002 budget related to biotechnology in Japan included 27 billion Yen from the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI), 128 billion
yen from the Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare (MHLW), 23 billion yen from
the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF), 71 billion yen from the Ministry of Education,
Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MECST), and 4 billion yen from the
Ministry of Environment (Japan Bioindustry Association Figures, 2002).
Given the large amount spent upon biotechnology in Japan, we can
ask why almost nothing is spent discussing the ethical, social and legal (ELSI)
issues raised by the application of biotechnology in society. Until now, there has been little spent
on these issues when compared to other countries. For example in Canada 12% of the budget for the human genome
project was spent on ELSI issues, and in USA 5%, but Japan has never got above
1% despite this point having been discussed internationally (Macer, 1992b).
This paper attempts to examine the attitudes towards some of the
ethical issues of biotechnology in Japan, especially focusing on descriptive
bioethics, that is, how do people think about biotechnology. It presents
results of public opinion surveys conducted in 2003 with comparisons over the
past 13 years.
2.1. Food safety
One of
the fundamental ethical principles is that of non-maleficence. This principle is behind the commonly
accepted principle of safety assessment. The need for long term risk assessment
studies has been emphasized by NGOs opposed to GM products. There are sections
on GM food safety inside MAFF and MHLW. The MHLW introduced mandatory
requirements for safety assessment of foods and food additives produced by
recombinant DNA techniques adding new provisions to the "Specifications
and Standards for Foods, Food Additives and Other Related Products". The
MHLW Announcements were published in May, 2000 and other related texts are
available on-line.
In the
early 1990s there were claims by Japanese Ministry of Health officials that
Japanese persons had an on average 1m longer intestinal tract compared to
Westerners, which meant that all recombinant DNA products and foods would need
separate safety data for Japan.
This was dropped after U.S. pressure. However, as will be discussed below, health concerns over
genetically modified (GM) food among the public have increased since then.
Concerns
over allergenicity are seen in the food safety assessment guidelines. A strong
organic farming movement for so-called "natural foods" exists in
Japan, and public concern about pesticides has increased as described below.
The availability of organic foods sold at a premium price has increased,
utilizing the high consumer spending power and fears about the safety.
The
Japanese government also often releases data or specific cases, which make
people believe that imported food has more pesticides. The prices of domestically grown food
are often twice those of imported food, playing upon people's fear of pesticide
residues. In fact the ethical
principle of do no harm or non-maleficence, needs to be understood by the fear
mongers, those who generate excess fear in members of society, often to direct
them to alternative commercial products of biotechnology.
Systems
of traceability for food are not yet established, but are under investigation.
This was in particularly important after the outbreak of BSE in Japan, so that
for cows a system is being implemented. The BSE crisis was an impetus to the introduction of
these systems into Japanese agriculture, but there is a long way to go. The public trust in these systems is
not high, as a number of companies have been caught falsely labeling the origin
of foods.
2.2 Consumer right to know, and right to choose
The
right to know was the major thrust of the consumer's movement regarding GM
food, and their petition led to a reversal of the government's position on
labeling of GM food, from rejection of labeling in 1997 to mandatory labeling
from April 2001. The MAFF decided in August 2000 to introduce this mandatory
labeling system of foods and food additives produced by recombinant DNA
techniques in view of consumers' choice under the amended Law Concerning
Standardization and Proper Labeling of Agriculture and Forestry Products (JAS
Law). In addition, the MHLW requested the Food Safety Investigation Council
discuss the necessity for labeling of foods and food additives produced by
recombinant DNA techniques in view of public health.
Consumer
confidence in food labeling has been shaken by a number of food labeling scams,
continuing through 2002. On 29 August, 2002, the MAFF announced the results of
a survey that found that 25 out of 80 randomly selected tofu and
"natto" soybean products sold under organic labels were found to
contain GM soybeans. Under these labels they should not have any GM food
components.
Under
agricultural standards regulations, products containing GMOs, even in trace
amounts, cannot bear organic labels. The MAFF said that it would inspect the
factories at which the products in question were produced. According to the
officials, the tests identified genetically modified soybeans in 20 tofu
products and five natto fermented soybean products. These products were
manufactured by 25 companies in 15 prefectures. They point to a fundamental
difficulty in a country which relies upon imported soybean from the USA, where
over 80% of soybean is GM.
2.3. Ecological concerns
There
have been field trials of GM crops through the 1990s in Japan, and no adverse
environmental impact has been detected. There are trials now at the farm
level in size, but Japan has not been one of the countries to commercialize
GMOs yet (James 2002).
Because
of the high prices of foods in Japan, organic food manufacturers can also
receive high returns on their crops. There is positive public image of organic
products in Japan, based on the idea that the products are pure and/or
"natural".
Fears
of the development of resistant weeds and pests have also been expressed in
debates on GMOs, but the most commonly cited examples are the introduction of
new species, such as caterpillars, which have been tree pests. There have not
been concerns expressed especially for farming, because farming is not a major
export industry. Being an island, there has been some isolation from disease
until recent introductions. These concerns, for example, caterpillars that
attack cherry trees, a national symbol, have been more important that fears to
the farm environment.
2.4. Environmental benefits
These
benefits may include less use of fertilizers and less use of chemicals,
given the widespread residues. Japanese are sensitive to environmental
contaminants, since the environmental diseases like Minamata disease. The issue
is becoming important, although most Japanese consumers are taught that foreign
imported food has more pesticides, when in fact generally not. Previous opinion
surveys of Macer (1992a, 1994), and the survey described here, suggest that
there is little change in public opinion on the potential reduction in use of
pesticides by GMOs in Japan from 1991 to 2003, revealing the lack of publicity
in Japan about this issue.
2.5. Economic concerns
Utilitarian
theories of ethics reveal the importance of economic calculations to the
principle of justice, where the interests of all members in a society are
included in reaching social consensus. Japan imports almost all its food,
except for rice. These food
imports come from a variety of countries. The principle country from which food
is imported is the USA, which does not label food containing GMOs for its
domestic production. Japan has
asked a number of producers in many different countries to send non-GM food,
and to label products containing GMOs. If Europe had not insisted on labeling
GM seed and foods Japan would not have done so, however, because of European
led global resistance to GMOs Japan has joined the EU.
Economically
affluent consumers mean that many in Japan can afford higher premiums on food
that required identity preservation and is labeled. The decisions however are
largely made by industry in food importers and manufacturers, rather than from
public involvement.
The
same arguments that are used globally to argue that GM technology may help
produce more food and lower cost are also relevant to Japanese farmers and
consumers. Over the past few years the average price of food has fallen, but still
the average family spends more of their income on food in Japan than in other
OECD countries. The argument of lower costs is being used in the case of
Japanese beef made through animal cloning studies. Japanese marbled beef sells
at prices of US$100/kg, a price an order of magnitude higher than imported
Australian or American beef.
The
"feeding the poor" argument is used to promote biotechnology in
general, but the poor are usually considered to be outside of Japan, e.g.
Africa or Asia. However, given that the average family spends so much of their
income on food, lower costs would free up money for other uses and even the
relatively wealthy middle class Japan would value this.
2.6. Cultural and social values
Agriculture
is more than mere economics, there are also important cultural values and
identity in farming, fisheries and forestry. A feature of the Japanese
environment is the minute size of rice paddy fields and agricultural land. This
is evidence of the relatively small size of farms compared to the major food
exporters. Almost 5 million people
are associated with the farming land, at a ratio of less than one person in a
farming family per hectare cultivated. In practice many small farms may be
linked together in cooperatives, both formal and informal, as it may not be
economic to actually produce rice from the small land area. Market vegetables in veneer houses
offer higher income than rice.
The
government taxation policy however favors the maintenance of small farms for
production, and farmers may operate self-employed businesses simultaneously as
the farm, maintaining the farm because of the tax incentives from the
government. For some families it
is financially better to have young persons officially working on the farm
rather than in another occupation, just for the tax savings the family will
receive.
The
impacts of GMO technologies on economics and organization of food production
(including seeds, farming, rural landscape transportation and distribution, and
marketing) and economic interests of various constituencies (including
consumers) have not been well considered, because given the large taxation and
subsidies present, any financial benefit will be hard to perceive. This means that individually there may
not be a clear across-the-board reason for shifting to GM crops as a farming
community. The uncertainties in public opinion and consumer resistance also
make it difficult to predict at what stage it would actually be an economic
benefit for a farmer in Japan to switch to GM crops.
In addition
to the desire by many citizens to maintain the traditional image of Japanese
countryside agriculture, there may also be social practices related to what can
be called "seasonality" (i.e. apple season, cherry season, chestnut
season). This concept might be
related to the importance placed in Japanese culture on the transient, like the
"sakura" (cherry blossom).
For many the importance of sakura is that it lasts only one week and in
its peak for a few days. A longer
lasting flower would not be so appreciated, many Japanese persons say. Thus when faced with the concepts of
imported food throughout the year, a feature seen in many countries that import
food like the EU, some would claim that people do not value a fruit or flower
that appears throughout the year.
On the
other hand, the majority of Japanese living in the cities view the system as
consumers of a global market, and chose their food not based on season.
In this respect there is more emphasis on so-called "natural"
foods (as discussed above) rather than indigenous seasonal foods, because most
food markets are cosmopolitan being based on imported food. While there is
interest in "natural" foods, there is not strong support for any
traditional farming system. The
preservation of "natural" landscape with rice farms has more
support, but Japanese consumers have little aversion to globalization because
almost all food is imported. While Japanese rice is considered much tastier
than Chinese or Thai rice, Californian grown Japanese rice is already well
known to be equivalent to Japanese rice.
Economic
factors are important, and the success of developing a beer substitute without
hops that could be sold substantially cheaper by avoiding the tax on hops for
beer, lead to a successful introduction of beer substitute drinks. These "brews" have been so
successful that after all the major beer makers having introduced them, the
government is raising the taxes on them so as not to miss out on so much tax
revenue from the decline in beer sales.
3. Methodology of research
3.1. Choice of topics
Biotechnology is the use of living organisms or parts of them to
provide goods or services. Modern biotechnology includes technologies which can
modify characteristics of organisms without using the method of direct genetic
manipulation, or technologies which enhance beneficial attributions of food
products or organisms themselves, for example, chemical treatment, screening,
cell fusion, or food irradiation for longer food preservation.
A range of topics related to commercial biotechnology were chosen
to be included, which allows comparisons between examples and with earlier
research. For the mail response survey questions aimed at seeing how people
differentiate between applications of biotechnology. Attitudes of respondents
towards these applications may reveal their understanding and feeling towards
genetic engineering.
Genetically modified (GM) crops have started to be utilized and
commercialized since 1995. In 2002 there were 58 million hectares in GM plants
across fifteen countries. The proportions of harvest of GM crops in the world
in 2001 was the United States 68%, Argentina 22%, Canada 6%, and China 3%
(James, 2002). European countries and Japan are not so much in favor of
cultivating or importing GM crops. The variety of GM crops which are
commercialized for human consumption or animal feeds include soybean (63% of
the total global area of transgenic crops in 2001), maize (19%), cotton (13%),
canola (5%), and others are such as potato, squash or papaya. Plant-plant combinations used in the
questionnaire were for agricultural applications, and those products were for
human consumption. Among plant-plant combinations, how people differentiate
modern biotechnology and genetic modification was investigated.
Microorganism-human combination concerns medicines produced in
bacteria, with insulin as an example. Microorganisms are broadly recognized
organisms in research and production of organic substances as well as in daily
life although how many people do not have a concrete image. Medicines produced
by genetically modified (GM) microorganisms are the only application already
widespread in Japan. Insulin was approved in 1982, and is a classic example of
genetic engineering between human and microbes. The MHLW estimates that around
10% people in the Japanese population may develop diabetes. Since some scandals
such as HIV contaminated blood have occurred in Japan, general safety concerns
about medicines have increased. The results of this application illustrate how people
have hopes as well as doubts about production of medicines, as well as towards
genetic engineering.
Animal-human combinations include transgenic mice for cancer
research and transgenic pigs for xenotransplantation. Animals are often used as
models of human research. Transgenic mice are made for medical research that
aims to cure causes of human death in the world. Transgenic pigs made for heart
xenotransplantation are supposed to be an alternative solution to the current
lack of organs for transplantation. Xenotransplantation of pig hearts into
humans was used as another example of genetic engineering between mammals.
Organs from human cadavers are not broadly used over Japan (Macer 1992; Macer
et al. 2002). Also organs from brain dead patients are not widely used.
Genetic diagnosis of fetuses is a controversial topic in Japanese
bioethics, although commonly practiced. Preimplantation diagnosis was used
since 1990 in the UK (Macer, 1990). It is being widely used in some countries.
In 2002, the American Society of Fertility Ethics Committee decided to allow
its use for sex preselection, and the UK Human Fertilization and Embryology
Authority allowed its use for implanting an embryo who would be a suitable
immuno-compatible donor for tissue transplants.
Gene therapy has been a symbolic issue for human genetic
engineering and was included to allow comparisons to agricultural
biotechnology. Human cloning was
also included since it is of great media concern and should be a topic familiar
to people through the media.
3.2. Mail response
surveys in 2003
Sampling in 2003 was done across all prefectures of Japan by using
random sampling method with the cooperation of other persons including Eiko
Suda, Yoshihiro Okada, Masayuki Takahashi, Mariko Onodera, Fumika Hiwa, Fumi
Maekawa and Makina Kato. The 2003 survey followed a similar system to earlier
surveys with one important difference.
In the 1991, 1993, 2000 mail response surveys the anonymous letters had
been dropped into mail boxes without any contact with the householders, to
ensure they had few fears of invasion of privacy. However the response rate had
dropped from 1991 (26%), 1993 mail response surveys (23%), the 1997 telephone
survey (44%), to 12% in 2000 by mail response. Therefore in the 2003 survey,
the distributors personally asked randomly selected householders across Japan
to complete the questionnaire, leaving it behind with the householders to
complete and return. The response
rate is thus higher than the 2000 survey at around 20% and like the 1997 survey,
responses were obtained from all 47 prefectures. The sample characteristics are
given in Table 1 to allow comparisons with the previous samples. There is a mix
of different sectors of the Japanese public, education, different occupations
(not shown), and rural and urban populations. We estimate sample error at +/-
5%.
Comparisons to earlier surveys allow long term comparisons, though
the key questions for examination varied in the wording. The general public is defined as those
people who compromise ordinary society, over 90% of them do not have any
involvement with research. The reasons that the respondents gave for their
attitudes in the open spaces on the surveys for the open questions were
categorized on the basis of the keywords and concepts that were expressed into
a total of 30-40 types differing between questions, following the methods of
Macer (1992a, 1994a). Each comment was categorized into up to three concept
categories to describe the ideas in the answer.
4. A
positive image of science in Japan
4.1.
High public awareness of biotechnology
Through
public opinion studies since the 1980s we can see some specific uses of GMOs
that may be supported, as well as a general drop in support for GMOs in 1997,
that is seen across the EU. These look at the trends over time in the reasoning
that people have. The public in Japan is well
educated, and is aware of biotechnology, perceiving both benefits and risks of
most applications, and has a reasonable degree of bioethical maturity (Macer,
1992a).
The general attitude towards science is that it will provide more
good than harm, as shown in Table 2.
In response the question, "Q3. Overall do you think science and
technology do more harm than good, more good than harm, or about the same of
each?", only 5% in Japan think it will do more harm than good, a
proportion that has remained stable from 1993 to 2003.
Table 2: General pessimism about science remains low
|
% |
1990 |
1991 |
1993 |
2003 |
|
More harm |
7 |
6 |
5 |
6 |
|
More good |
53 |
55 |
42 |
43 |
|
Same |
31 |
39 |
45 |
45 |
|
Don't
know |
10 |
- |
8 |
7 |
*1990 (PMO survey data); 1991,
1993 and 2003 public surveys.
Table
1: Sample characteristics of surveys
|
% |
P1991 |
P1993 |
P1997 |
P2000 |
P2003 |
S1991 |
S2000 |
|
N |
551 |
352 |
405 |
297 |
376 |
555 |
370 |
|
Response
|
26 |
23 |
44 |
12 |
20 |
56 |
23 |
|
Time |
7/91+ |
3/93+ |
1/97+ |
11/99+ |
12/02+ |
10/91+ |
11/99+ |
|
Male |
53 |
52 |
52.4 |
62.2 |
52 |
90.2 |
89.2 |
|
Female |
47 |
48 |
47.6 |
37.8 |
48 |
9.8 |
10.8 |
|
Rural |
- |
27 |
30.3 |
27.5 |
25 |
- |
83.5 |
|
Urban |
- |
73 |
69.7 |
72.5 |
75 |
- |
16.5 |
|
Age |
|||||||
|
Mean(yr) |
39.8 |
41.7 |
41.0 |
44.5 |
46.9 |
47.1 |
50 |
|
<20 |
4 |
3 |
6.2 |
4.9 |
1 |
0.0 |
0 |
|
<30 |
24 |
21 |
23.7 |
15.1 |
16 |
9.3 |
1.7 |
|
<40 |
23 |
26 |
17.5 |
21.8 |
18 |
18.3 |
13.9 |
|
<50 |
25 |
19 |
23.7 |
19.4 |
20 |
31.5 |
31.5 |
|
<60 |
12 |
14 |
14.3 |
20.4 |
21 |
30.5 |
38.6 |
|
>60 |
12 |
17 |
11.4 |
18.3 |
23 |
10.4 |
14.2 |
|
Marital
Status |
|||||||
|
Single |
29 |
29 |
31 |
25.5 |
21 |
12.4 |
6.1 |
|
Married |
66 |
66 |
66.4 |
71.4 |
71 |
86.1 |
92.5 |
|
Children |
|||||||
|
None |
35 |
40 |
39.9 |
34.8 |
30 |
17.7 |
15.1 |
|
Education |
|||||||
|
High
school |
37.0 |
37.0 |
40.4 |
27.3 |
- |
3.4 |
.3 |
|
2-year
college |
22.0 |
19.0 |
22 |
14.5 |
- |
5.8 |
1.1 |
|
Graduate |
31.0 |
31.0 |
32.9 |
40.1 |
- |
38.0 |
15.6 |
|
Postgraduate |
7.0 |
10.0 |
3.4 |
15.6 |
- |
49.4 |
80 |
|
Religion |
|||||||
|
None |
- |
39.0 |
48.2 |
55.1 |
33 |
- |
49.6 |
|
Buddhism |
- |
47.0 |
40.6 |
34.1 |
55 |
- |
39.3 |
|
Christian |
- |
8.0 |
6.7 |
2.8 |
5 |
- |
4.6 |
|
How
important is religion? |
|||||||
|
Very |
- |
10.0 |
- |
6.9 |
- |
- |
6.2 |
|
Some |
- |
33.0 |
- |
25.3 |
- |
- |
24.3 |
|
Not
too |
- |
40.0 |
- |
39.1 |
- |
- |
45.2 |
|
Not
at all |
- |
17.0 |
- |
28.7 |
- |
- |
24.3 |
Note: P1991 =
Public Sample from the 1991 Scientist/Public Survey in Japan (Macer 1992);
P1993 = Japanese Public Sample from the 1993 International Bioethics Survey
(Kato & Macer in Macer, 1994); P1997 = Public Sample from the 1997
Attitudes to Biotechnology in Japan Survey (Macer et al. 1997); P2000 = Public
Sample from the 2000 Biotechnology and Bioethics Survey in Japan (Ng et al.
2000); P2003 = Public sample from current research; S1991 = Scientist Sample
from the 1991 Scientist/Public Survey in Japan (Macer 1992); S2000 = Scientist
Sample from the 2000 Biotechnology and Bioethics Survey in Japan (Ng et al.
2000). N = number of total respondents; Response % = response rate of the
Survey; Time = Time period of the Survey.
Table 3:
Understanding of different technologies (self-evaluation)
Q5. Can
you tell me how much you have heard or read about each of these subjects?
N= Not heard of H=
Heard of E=
Could explain it to a friend
|
% |
N91 |
H91 |
E91 |
N93 |
H93 |
E93 |
N2003 |
H2003 |
E2003 |
|
Pesticides |
4 |
58 |
38 |
3 |
61 |
36 |
5 |
48 |
47 |
|
IVF |
5 |
45 |