单项选择题

The UK government has some way to go in building trust in its handling of genetic modification in agriculture.
Lessons learnt in Britain ( and no doubt elsewhere ) from the BSE (疯牛病) crisis were evident in the UK government’s announcements last week of plans to change the way it regulates genetically modified crops. Out goes any lingering assumption that the technology is inherently safe, and in comes a new requirement for industry to demonstrate practically that its products will not have adverse ecological effects.
In a welcome move, a new steering group of scientists will be able to commission research it considers necessary on the ecological impacts of genetically modified crops. The government, in turn, promises not to allow the commercialization of any crop until the scientists are reasonably satisfied that it is safe to proceed.
The government’s attempts to build public trust in its scientific advice, and to include public views in its policy decisions, however, leave some questions open. It has chosen to set up a new forum of ’environmental stakeholders’ whose view would contribute to decisions about genetic modification in agriculture. This forum, spanning the spectrum of interests and opinion, will need to make constructive suggestions, and avoid well-trodden, predictable and ultimately time wasting disputes between industry and environmentalism.
The government is already poised to embark on a survey of the public--as opposed to environmentalist--perception of the biosciences. Ministers would be wise to wait for its outcome before putting more flesh on the stakeholders’ forum. But the latter should eventually be encouraged to make constructive contributions to the research agenda. In doing so, it will not only address public concerns about the risks of genetically modified crops, but should also help rebuild public trust in the application of science to foods. Here again, however, the government will need to ensure that the chance to influence research is not used as an unyielding instrument of obstruction by fundamentalist opponents of genetic modification.
Scientists on the whole are supportive of the changes, particularly the decision to authorize research trials on a commercial scale. They rightly seek better security arrangements following recent incidents of crop destruction. They should cautiously welcome, rather than oppose, increased public awareness and scrutiny of their activities while being themselves watchful over the details of the processes the government is putting in place.
From the last paragraph the conclusion can be drawn that scientists______.