Determining acceptance and rejection of nano-enabled agriculture: A case study of the New Zealand wine industry.

This paper gathers gatekeeper views and perceptions on nano-enabled viticulture in Aotearoa New Zealand. While the science of nanotechnology is indicated to offer improvements to conventional vineyard inputs and operations, its acceptability by potential users and consumers has an impact on the governance of nano-enabled agriculture. This governance takes place not just at the state level through regulation and policy, but also through corporate, and community sectors' use of branding and narratives about nanotechnology and nano-based agrichemicals, and the (non)consumption of nano-enabled products. This paper investigates the technical and market acceptability, or governance, of nanotechnology by elucidating the attitudes of industry gatekeepers towards wines grown with nanotechnology. This necessarily informs the 'market permissibility' of such technologies, and illuminates sensitivities, concerns, and consumer-based barriers to adoption. We conducted 15 semi-structured, key informant interviews and a thematic data analysis. Our results suggest a high level of technical acceptability, particularly if environmental sustainability benefits are made clear. Wine producers are interested in nano-solutions to labour, pest and disease, and cost of production issues. However, key actors in the production-consumption network of New Zealand wine have concerns about nano-enabled approaches. Regulatory approval and safety assurances are expected prior to adoption in food or wine. Respondents argue that consumer acceptability is less clear, and that thought leaders like wine writers, intermediaries and 'influencers' will be critical in shaping public opinion. This research highlights the potential risks of nanotechnology development and adoption.
Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
(Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier B.V.)