Mapping Moral Polarities (MORALMAP): Strategies to Navigate and Bridge Polarised Public Discourse About New Plant Breeding Technologies

Global climate change, marked by increased frequency of extreme weather events, severely threatens global agricultural productivity and food security. New plant breeding technologies (NBTs), through their precise and rapid means of developing crops resilient to pests; diseases; and climate-related stresses, may offer a solution. If NBTs are to deliver on their promised benefits, they must be accepted by the public. Yet NBTs face ethical, regulatory, and societal challenges. In particular, public debates around these technologies have become increasingly polarised into entrenched positions on either side of the debate. This is particularly true in the primary arena for public debate: social media. Such polarisation hinders constructive discourse as well as informed decision-making and must be addressed.

To minimise polarisation and foster constructive dialogue, it is necessary to understand and address the moral foundations underpinning entrenched positions as they apply to NBTs. Moral Foundations Theory (MFT) proposes that moral judgments are based on innate, culturally shaped foundations such as harm/care, fairness/reciprocity, loyalty/in-group, authority/respect, and purity/sanctity. These foundations strongly influence individuals' moral positions, particularly in polarized debates. By identifying and mapping these foundations in polarized discourse, MFT can reveal the deep-seated moral roots underpinning entrenched positions. More importantly, MFT has shown that polarization can be softened by reframing arguments in ways that resonate with individuals' underlying moral foundations. Experimental research using MFT has successfully softened polarized attitudes on other contentious issues, indicating its potential efficacy in NBT discourse.

Currently there exists limited research exploring moral foundations and polarisation on social media, with no research exploring how these issues relate to NBTs. Research that has explored NBT polarisation is descriptive, linking general values to NBTs without systematically exploring the prescriptive moral foundations that underpin polarised positions, and more importantly, how these may be softened. There is, therefore, a need to map the moral foundations underpinning polarised positions in the NBT debate, and to produce evidence-based, stakeholder-agreed strategies on how this map may be leveraged to soften polarisation and promote constructive dialogue.

PROJECT AIM: The MORALMAP project aims to map and critically evaluate the dominant moral framings that shape the polarized public discourse on NBTs in social media, so as to identify actionable communicative strategies that soften polarized perspectives and support constructive dialogue for all stakeholders.

To achieve this aim MORALMAP has 4 objectives:

1. Systematically survey the current state of public discourse around NBTs on social media platforms to identify dominant NBTs moral framings.
2. Investigate the communicative practices, moral framings, and motivations of influential NBT social media content creators.
3. Apply Moral Foundations Theory to decode the underlying moral structures informing opposing positions in NBT debates, and to experimentally identify specific moral framings that can soften polarisation and foster constructive dialogue.
4. Develop actionable, evidenced-based, stakeholder-backed recommendations for communication around NBTs.

The research employs a mixed-methods approach structured into four work packages (WPs):

WP 1: Conducts a semi-structured review of public discourse on major social media platforms to identify key narratives, influential actors, and moral framings using a Social Media Indicator Framework (SMIF) developed specifically for this project.

WP 2: Utilizes qualitative semi-structured interviews with prominent social media content creators to explore their communicative strategies, moral foundations, and motivations.

WP 3: Implements a quantitative, nationwide representative, experimental survey to test the effectiveness of specific morally framed arguments in shifting public perceptions and to reduce polarization.

WP 4: Analyses data obtained, triangulates and synthesizes findings, and engages in a modified Delphi process to obtain stakeholder consensus on practical, validated recommendations for stakeholders on how to communicate about NBTs in ways that foster constructive dialogue.

The project will produce a detailed mapping of the moral frameworks driving polarization in NBT discourse, a typology of influential communicative strategies, and empirically validated approaches to improving stakeholder communication. This will directly address key aims and objectives of NRP 84 including: identifying factors that hinder or facilitate public understanding of scientific information as well as improving modes of communication around NBTs.

MORALMAP has gathered an interdisciplinary and international consortium of scientific collaborators and implementation partners from academia and non-academic fields, including a number of prominent implementation stakeholders from the agri-food industry. It will build-on, compliment, and extend existing projects underway in NRP 84 (notably BREETH and PLANTAR), while addressing critical gaps in projects currently underway in NRP 84 (such as science communication). By providing evidence-based, stakeholder-agreed communication strategies, MORALMAP will contribute to softening polarisation and fostering public cohesion. In addition, drawn on a strong international, interdisciplinary collaborative team, MORALMAP will strengthen NRP 84s knowledge community and help to position Switzerland as a model for responsible innovation.