The structure and origins of attitudes to genetic engineering have so far hardly been systematically investigated in Switzerland. In Switzerland, too, the future of genetic engineering procedures appears to depend on consensus among the population. The vote on the gene protection initiative and the media campaigns that preceded it made it clear that there can be no talk of consensus. Rather, there are deep, almost unbridgeable gulfs between proponents and opponents of this new technology. At the scientific level, the opinion polls carried out so far and the rare qualitative studies on the attitudes on this issue are far from sufficient to understand the motives of the advocates and opponents of genetic engineering and to understand the dynamics of opinion-forming both among politicians and among the population in this area. In addition, longitudinal studies on both the policy process and media coverage of genetic engineering are lacking. For this reason, the IPMZ - Institute for Journalism and Media Research at the University of Zurich initiated a research project in 1996 which, supported by a group of researchers from different disciplines and institutions, tried to shed light on the phenomenon of "genetic engineering in the field of tension between politics, media and the public" from different perspectives and on the basis of four interlinked subprojects. Hypotheses, theoretical perspectives and methodical access should be mutually coordinated. In detail, the subprojects (1) are a policy analysis of genetic engineering policy in Switzerland, (2) a content analysis of media coverage of genetic engineering over the last 25 years, (3) supplemented by a qualitative content analysis of the media response to the "Dolly" case and (4) a representative survey of the Swiss population on genetic engineering in spring 1997 (Eurobarometer 1997). Only the data of the representative survey is archived at FORS. The Swiss project "Genetic engineering in the field of tension between politics, media and the public" is not only transdisciplinary in concept, but also international and comparative, as it is part of the concerted action "Biotechnology and the European Public", in which researchers from 15 countries work on the topic under the direction of a team of researchers from the "Science Museum" and the "London School of Economics". The common basis is the Eurobarometer Survey conducted in these countries as well as the jointly conceived and coordinated policy studies on the regulation of genetic engineering and content analyses of media reporting in the various European countries, but also in the USA and Canada. The goal of the international project can be summarized as follows: "A cross-national comparative analysis will identify why, in different countries and at different times, particular issues and concerns have characterized public debate and public policy making. This will lead to a European comparative perspective on the evaluation and interpretation of the Eurobarometer survey. The practical implications of public perceptions for European biotechnology policy-making will be drawn out for the benefit of the scientific, industrial and policy-making communities."