Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
GM Food (gm + food)
Selected AbstractsPublic Beliefs about GM Foods: More on the Makings of a Considered SociologyMEDICAL ANTHROPOLOGY QUARTERLY, Issue 1 2001Anne Murcott First page of article [source] Public Beliefs about GM Foods: Anne Murcott's ContributionMEDICAL ANTHROPOLOGY QUARTERLY, Issue 1 2001Martin Teitel No abstract is available for this article. [source] Some simple economics of GM foodECONOMIC POLICY, Issue 33 2001Dietmar Harhoff Public opposition to the genetic engineering of food crops (GM food) has not been based solely on concern about biological risks. Economic risks have been widely cited too: the fear that the world's food supply will be concentrated in the hands of a few large firms, the fear that such firms will engage or are already engaging in anti,competitive practices, and the fear of the transfer of ownership rights over genetic resources to the private sector. Are these fears justified? We argue that the GM food industry may be on course for further consolidation, and this could be anti,competitive. In fact, policymakers face a dilemma: a stringent regulatory approval process enhances food safety, but at the cost of increasing market concentration. We argue also that the integration of seed and agri,chemical manufacturers may bias the introduction of GM traits in undesirable directions. Some business practices (such as tie,in contracts between seeds and complementary products such as herbicides) may have an exclusionary motive that warrants scrutiny on anti,competitive grounds, while some other practices (such as the use of terminator genes) appear more benign. Finally, we argue against granting patents on genes or even on gene ,functions'. Doing so may delay the development of socially beneficial applications. [source] Consumers' beliefs, attitudes and intentions towards genetically modified foods, based on the 'perceived safety vs. benefits' perspectiveINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, Issue 4 2005Ioannis S. Arvanitoyannis Summary It has been repeatedly claimed that the application of genetic engineering in the field of agricultural and food production is both beneficial and advantageous. However, biotechnology is developing in an environment where public concerns about food safety and environmental protection are steadily increasing. The present study aims at gaining an insight into Greek consumers' beliefs, attitudes and intentions towards genetically modified (GM) food products. The objectives of this study are summarized as follows (i) to provide evidence that consumer beliefs are built around the ,safety-benefits' axis, and (ii) to segment the Greek market in terms of consumer beliefs about GM food products and identify a number of clusters with clear-cut behavioural profiles. Although the overall attitude of Greek consumers towards GM food is negative, the research very interestingly concludes that there exists a market segment of substantial size, whose beliefs about GM food appears to be positive. This finding suggests that there is not a ,consensus' regarding the rejection of GM foods in the Greek market as one might have expected thus ,encouraging' the implementation of adequate marketing strategies to target this segment of ,early adopters' in the first place. [source] Comparative Advantage in Demand: Experimental Evidence of Preferences for Genetically Modified Food in the United States and European UnionJOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, Issue 1 2006Jayson L. Lusk Q130; Q170; Q180; C190 Abstract The United States (US) exports more than US$6 billion in agricultural commodities to the European Union(EU) each year, but one issue carries the potential to diminish this trade: use of biotechnology in food production. The EU has adopted more stringent policies towards biotechnology than the US. Understanding differences in European and American policies towards genetically modified (GM) foods requires a greater understanding of consumers' attitudes and preferences. This paper reports results from the first large-scale, cross-Atlantic study to analyse consumer demand for genetically modified food in a non-hypothetical market environment. We strongly reject the frequent if convenient assumption in trade theory that consumer preferences are identical across countries: the median level of compensation demanded by English and French consumers to consume a GM food is found to be more than twice that in any of the US locations. Results have important implications for trade theory, which typically focuses on differences in specialization, comparative advantage and factor endowments across countries, and for on-going trade disputes at the World Trade Organization. [source] On the Segregation of Genetically Modified, Conventional and Organic Products in European Agriculture: A Multi-market Equilibrium AnalysisJOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, Issue 3 2005GianCarlo Moschini Q1; O3 Abstract Evaluating the possible benefits of the introduction of genetically modified (GM) crops must address the issue of consumer resistance as well as the complex regulation that has ensued. In the European Union (EU), this regulation envisions the co-existence of GM food with conventional and quality-enhanced products, mandates the labelling and traceability of GM products and allows only a stringent adventitious presence of GM content in other products. All these elements are brought together within a partial equilibrium model of the EU agricultural food sector. The model comprises conventional, GM and organic food. Demand is modelled in a novel fashion, whereby organic and conventional products are treated as horizontally differentiated but GM products are vertically differentiated (weakly inferior) relative to conventional ones. Supply accounts explicitly for the land constraint at the sector level and for the need for additional resources to produce organic food. Model calibration and simulation allow insights into the qualitative and quantitative effects of the large-scale introduction of GM products in the EU market. We find that the introduction of GM food reduces overall EU welfare, mostly because of the associated need for costly segregation of non-GM products, but the producers of quality-enhanced products actually benefit. [source] GM food and neophobia: connecting with the gatekeepers of consumer choiceJOURNAL OF THE SCIENCE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE, Issue 5 2008John G Knight Abstract Resistance to importation of genetically modified (GM) foods in rich countries has deterred governments in many food-exporting countries from approving the planting of GM food crops for fear of damaging export markets for conventional food. Apart from governments that have actively imposed barriers to entry, another level of resistance can arise from food distribution channel members deciding not to import foods which they believe consumers in their markets will not want. GM foods fall in this category in some markets, particularly in Europe. In China and India, the two most populous consumer markets, pragmatic considerations appear likely to overcome neophobia regarding this technology, provided that benefits are adequately communicated to consumers. Choice-modelling experiments show that the same may well be true in Europe. Copyright © 2008 Society of Chemical Industry [source] The effect of knowledge types on consumer-perceived risk and adoption of genetically modified foodsPSYCHOLOGY & MARKETING, Issue 2 2007Deon Klerck Scientists have asserted that genetically modified (GM) food offers financial, environmental, health, and quality benefits to society, but the realization of such benefits depends on consumer acceptance of this new technology. Consumer concerns about GM food raise questions about what consumers know about GM food and to what extent this knowledge translates into their evaluations of GM products. The present research empirically examines the effect of both objective and subjective knowledge on perceived risk and, in turn, key consumer behaviors associated with GM food. The results reveal that objective knowledge about GM food significantly reduces performance and psychological risks, whereas subjective knowledge influences only physical risk, and the valence of that impact depends on the level of the consumer's objective knowledge. Furthermore, different risk types enhance consumers' information search and reduce their propensity to buy GM food. The overall findings thus suggest the need for cooperation among government, scientific institutions, and the food industry to foster effective communication strategies that increase consumers' objective knowledge, reduce their risk perceptions, and encourage consumer adoptions of GM technology. © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. [source] GMO Food Labelling in the EU: Tracing ,the Seeds of Dispute'EUROCHOICES, Issue 1 2003Maria L. Loureiro Summary GMO Food Labelling in the EU: Tracinq ,the Seeds of Dispute' Genetically modified (GM) food labelling has become a critical issue in the international trade arena. Policymakers and consumers in the European Union (EU) seem to agree on the need to control the use of biotechnology in the food industry. As a consequence, recently the EU Commission approved a measure that establishes strict rules on genetically modified organisms (GMOs), but which lifts the moratorium on GMO production and marketing. This new Directive deals with mandatory labelling of GM foods and their traceability along the food chain. In spite of the substantial effort made to reconcile the different opinions in the escalating debate about biotechnology, the new GMO regulation seems to be unsatisfactory for too many interest groups. A system of total traceability from ,farm to fork' and mandatory labelling for genetically modified products may be considered too complex and too expensive to implement, particularly by those countries or industries that have produced GMO foods for many years. Yet, giving European consumers the freedom to choose GMOs may be the only option that there is until Europeans restore their confidence in the food system and food regulators. A market or consumer-driven solution may eventually terminate the GMO dispute between the two transatlantic trading blocks. , Assurance , Revenud a ns , Agriculture Européenne ,étiquetage des aliments contenant des organismes génétiquement modifyés (OGM) est devenu une question cruciale sur la scène du commerce international. Tant les décideurs politiques que les citoyens de , Union européenne semblent s'accorder sur la nécessité de soumettre à contrôle , utilisation des biotechnologies dans , industrie alimentaire. En conséquence, la Commission européenne a récemment approuvé une mesure qui établit des règies strictes sur les OGM, mais qui lève le moratoire sur leur production et leur commercialisation. Cette nouvelle directive concerne ,étiquetage obligatoire des aliments contenant des OGM et la façon ? en assurer le suivi dans les filières alimentaires. Ce nouveau règlement OGM, en dépit des efforts réels effectués pour réconcilier les différents points de vue dans la montée du débat sur les biotechnologies, semble inconciliable avec trop de groupes ? intérêts pour être satisfaisant. Un système assurant une traçabilité totale, ,du champ à la fourchette' et un étiquetage obligatoire pour tout produit contenant des OGM, paraît bien trop complexe et coûteux à mettre en ,uvre, en particulier pour les pays ou les industries qui produisent des aliments génétiquement modifyés depuis des années. Et pourtant, il se pourrait bien que la seule façpn de restaurer la confiance perdue des Européens dans le système alimentaire et ses institutions soit justement de leur donner le droit de choisir. La fin de la querelle des OGM entre les blocs commerciaux des deux rives de , Atlantique peut venir de solutions apportées par le marché et issues des consommateurs. Einkommenversicherung in der Europäischen Landwirtschaft Die Kennzeichnung von genetisch veränderten Lebensmitteln ist zu einer der bedeutendsten Streitfragen auf dem Gebiet des internationalen Handels geworden. Politische Entscheidungsträger und Verbraucher in der Europäischen Union scheinen dahingehend überein zu stimmen, dass der Einsatz von Biotechnologie in der Nahrungsmittel-industrie kontrolliert werden sollte. Als Reaktion darauf hat die EU-Kommission kürzlich einer Maßnahme zugestimmt, welche ein strenges Regelwerk für genetisch veränderte Organismen (GVO) festschreibt, mit der aber gleichzeitig das Moratorium für die Produktion und Vermarktung von GVO aufgehoben wird. Die neue Richtlinie beschäftigt sich mit der Pflichtkennzeichnung von genetisch veränderten Nahrungsmitteln und mit ihrer Rückverfolgbarkeit entlang der Nahrungsmittelkette. Trotz der erheblichen Anstrengungen, die verschiedenen Standpunkte in der eskalierenden Debatte um Biotechnologie zu berücksichtigen, scheint die neue GVO Richtlinie in den Augen (zu) vieler Interessengruppen unbefriedigend zu sein. Ein System der vollständigen Rückverfolgbarkeit vom Stall bis zum Teller und die Pflichtkennzeichnung von genetisch veränderten Nahrungsmitteln mag in der Umsetzung als zu komplex und zu teuer betrachtet werden, insbesondere von den Ländern oder Industriezweigen, welche seit vielen Jahren GVO-Nahrungsmittel hergestellt haben. Dennoch könnte der Ansatz, den europäischen Verbrauchern die freie Wahl für oder gegen GVO zu gewähren, der einzig gangbare Weg sein, bis die Europäer ihr Vertrauen in das Produktions- und Kontrollsystem für Nahrungsmittel zurückgewonnen haben. Eine markt- oder verbraucherorientierte Lösung könnte letztlich den Streit um GVO zwischen den beiden transatlantischen Handelsblöcken beenden. [source] Consumers' beliefs, attitudes and intentions towards genetically modified foods, based on the 'perceived safety vs. benefits' perspectiveINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, Issue 4 2005Ioannis S. Arvanitoyannis Summary It has been repeatedly claimed that the application of genetic engineering in the field of agricultural and food production is both beneficial and advantageous. However, biotechnology is developing in an environment where public concerns about food safety and environmental protection are steadily increasing. The present study aims at gaining an insight into Greek consumers' beliefs, attitudes and intentions towards genetically modified (GM) food products. The objectives of this study are summarized as follows (i) to provide evidence that consumer beliefs are built around the ,safety-benefits' axis, and (ii) to segment the Greek market in terms of consumer beliefs about GM food products and identify a number of clusters with clear-cut behavioural profiles. Although the overall attitude of Greek consumers towards GM food is negative, the research very interestingly concludes that there exists a market segment of substantial size, whose beliefs about GM food appears to be positive. This finding suggests that there is not a ,consensus' regarding the rejection of GM foods in the Greek market as one might have expected thus ,encouraging' the implementation of adequate marketing strategies to target this segment of ,early adopters' in the first place. [source] Consumer response to functional foods produced by conventional, organic, or genetic manipulationAGRIBUSINESS : AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL, Issue 2 2004Bruno Larue The agro-food industry is developing a "second generation" of genetically modified (GM) foods that can offer functional health benefits to consumers. Many consumers, however, are turning to organic foods in order to avoid GM foods. This report attempts to differentiate consumer valuation of functional health properties in conventional, organic, and GM foods. A representative sample of 1,008 Canadian household food shoppers responded to twelve stated-choice experiments during a telephone survey. Because opinions about organic and GM foods varied greatly, random parameters logit models were used to analyze their choices. Results indicate that many Canadian consumers will avoid GM foods, regardless of the presence of functional health properties. For others, the introduction of GM functional plant foods should increase acceptance of GM production methods, but many consumers will likely avoid functional foods derived from GM animals. The organic food industry could also profit from the introduction of organic functional foods. [EconLit citations: I120; D120.] © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Agribusiness 20: 155,166, 2004. [source] GM food and neophobia: connecting with the gatekeepers of consumer choiceJOURNAL OF THE SCIENCE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE, Issue 5 2008John G Knight Abstract Resistance to importation of genetically modified (GM) foods in rich countries has deterred governments in many food-exporting countries from approving the planting of GM food crops for fear of damaging export markets for conventional food. Apart from governments that have actively imposed barriers to entry, another level of resistance can arise from food distribution channel members deciding not to import foods which they believe consumers in their markets will not want. GM foods fall in this category in some markets, particularly in Europe. In China and India, the two most populous consumer markets, pragmatic considerations appear likely to overcome neophobia regarding this technology, provided that benefits are adequately communicated to consumers. Choice-modelling experiments show that the same may well be true in Europe. Copyright © 2008 Society of Chemical Industry [source] Risk assessment of genetically modified crops for nutrition and healthNUTRITION REVIEWS, Issue 1 2009Javier A Magaña-Gómez The risk assessment of genetically modified (GM) crops for human nutrition and health has not been systematic. Evaluations for each GM crop or trait have been conducted using different feeding periods, animal models, and parameters. The most common result is that GM and conventional sources induce similar nutritional performance and growth in animals. However, adverse microscopic and molecular effects of some GM foods in different organs or tissues have been reported. Diversity among the methods and results of the risk assessments reflects the complexity of the subject. While there are currently no standardized methods to evaluate the safety of GM foods, attempts towards harmonization are on the way. More scientific effort is necessary in order to build confidence in the evaluation and acceptance of GM foods. [source] What labelling policy for consumer choice?CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, Issue 4 2008Europe, The case of genetically modified food in Canada Abstract., Faced with divergent opinions among consumers on the use of genetically modified (GM) foods, Canada has adopted a voluntary labelling approach for non-GM foods, whereas the European Union has a mandatory labelling policy for GM foods. Interestingly, both labelling systems have resulted in very little, if any, additional consumer choice. Using an analytical model, we show that the coexistence of GM and non-GM products at the retail level depends on the labelling policy, consumer perceptions, and the type of product. Although voluntary labelling tends to favour the use of GM products, it is more likely to provide consumer choice. Confrontés à des opinions publiques divergentes sur l'usage des aliments génétiquement modifiés (GM), le Canada a adopté une politique d'étiquetage volontaire pour les aliments non-GM alors que l'Union Européenne a mis en place une politique d'étiquetage obligatoire des aliments GM. Curieusement, ces deux systèmes d'étiquetage n'ont pas réellement permis de faciliter le choix des consommateurs. A l'aide d'un modèle analytique, nous démontrons que la coexistence des produits GM et non-GM au niveau du commerce de détail dépend de la politique d'étiquetage, de la perception des consommateurs, et du type de produit. Bien que l'étiquetage volontaire ait tendance à favoriser l'usage des produits GM, cette approche est plus à même de faciliter le choix du consommateur que l'étiquetage obligatoire. [source] | |||||||||||||