Risk?

[ianben]

I asked this question in Charlies thread and got a
very one very interesting answer but then the
new CWB took it over.

Getting back to risk, I wonder if North Americans
have a different attitude to risk than Europeans

Did you need to be a risk taker to up sticks and
move to the land of the free?

Would love to know what your relations thought
the risk was back then.

Was it a no brainer as life was so bad back here
and anyone who got the chance left.
or
Was it a massive risk and only the really brave
risk takers dared head for the new world leaving
Europe to the risk averse.

Anyone else care to answer especially on your
ancestors reasons for going to Canada and if
they thought it a big risk.

[dalek]

Combination of being bigger risk takers and out of
options. My direct ancestor was 14 and came under
a fake name in 1759, probably on the run from
something. Most of the others were youngest sons
with no prospects in Europe or dirt poor and
unemployed.
I do tend to think that it has made a difference
genetically, the more
adventurous/innovative/progressive of our
ancestors left Europe and bred with others with the
same tendencies, while the less adventurous stayed
in Europe.

[dalek]

Combination of being bigger risk takers and out of
options. My direct ancestor was 14 and came under
a fake name in 1759, probably on the run from
something. Most of the others were youngest sons
with no prospects in Europe or dirt poor and
unemployed.
I do tend to think that it has made a difference
genetically, the more
adventurous/innovative/progressive of our
ancestors left Europe and bred with others with the
same tendencies, while the less adventurous stayed
in Europe.

[Braveheart]

As far as I know it was weighing what was little
known (Canada) vs what was known which was
the persecution for still supporting the Rebellion
(Scotland) even though it was over 200 years
previous.

The Ancestors arrived in Quebec City in 1866
from Scotland via Liverpool. Many relatives had
left for France in the previous 100 years.

I believe they became quite used to managing
this type of risk as the children of those
immigrants settled in MB, SK, and AB, starting
farms in most cases.

But Ian, at what point did the scales tip and risk
become opportunity. Or, did they always see it
such?

Just like the GMO debate, some see risk, some
see opportunity.

[ado089]

My ancestors came here because it was risky being Polish during the first half
of the last century. With that said there were no guarantees coming here to
settle the land. Little or no infrastructure or services, no support networks of
any type. All you had was 160 ac of prairie or bush and whatever was left of
summer to secure food and shelter to last through at least 5 months of bitch
cold and snow. Followed by the task of breaking and clearing the land and for
many picking rocks...all manually.

[ado089]

As far as current levels of risk tolerance
I do believe that N. Americans are more
open to change. I partly attribute this
to the fact that our nations are still
building their identity where as Europeans
have centuries of traditions and practices
built into their identities to temper
enthusiasm for the unknown???

[charliep]

There are differences in how North Americans and
Europeans understand food risk and their level of
confidence in government/industry health and safety
process. There are groups in North American like in
Europe but most consumers are confident in the food
system. The are surveys which can quantify these
differences. Not sure if because of our pioneer
history or the fact we haven't had the same issues
around BSE. Asians again perceive food risk
differently (particularly Japan) with more
requirements around food inspection and trust.

I suspect if you surveyed different countries in the EU,
you would find great differences in attitude towards
risk. For example, Spain and Portugal are more open
to GE crops. Again, you would have to look at culture
and experience which is the driver of risk attitude.

[charliep]

ianben

I know your question is not specific to GMO products but I highlight your comment that BSE (Europe) and GMO launch (North America) both occurred at the same time. Not trying to tie the 2 together but the the drivers/experience coming out of 2 events was quite a bit different as it played out in both countries.

No one asked me why I started the other posting but it was the comment that organic consumers didn't consider organic polish canola oil safe because of fear of contamination. I went through the risk in my mind of seed contamination across polish and argentine canola (for planting or crushing - as close to zero as you can get), the amount of solids that might contain GE genetic material in the oil and from there including canola oil as a part of a balance daily diet.

From another standpoint, I was out at my brother market garden (community supported agriculture garden to be exact) and the mesquitos were viscious/hungary. Realize there are organic alternatives but a lot of the customers will lather up with DEET to keep the mesquitos away. Wrong time of year but later on, mesquitos in Alberta can carry west nile virus (deadly to anyone who gets bit/contacts). Just a note that everyone has to make decisions based on information with both positive and negative outcomes.

[ianben]

When I was thinking of going to Canada I saw it
as an opportunity but many other people thought
I was taking a hugh risk and slightly mad.
It certainly would not have been the same 100yrs
earlier and I have always wondered how they
made their choice so thanks for the replies.
I guess it is all in the mind and wether we see
risk or opportunity.It is what makes the world go
round, both are needed but with out the risk
takers progress would be very slow.