Consumer Attitudes Towards GM Food: Literature Review and Recommendations for Effective Communication

Journal of International Food and Agribusiness Marketing

Volumn 13, Issue 2-3, 2001, Pages 77-98

  Verdurme, Annelies ^a   Viaene, Jacques ^a  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Communication; Consumer attitude; Genetically modified food; Literature review; Structural Equation Modelling

Indexed keywords

EID: 0038320273     PISSN: 08974438     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1300/J047v13n02_05     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Alder, H. (2001). Mind to mind marketing. Communicating with 21st-century customers. London: Kogan Page.
2. Ando, A. & Khanna, M. (2000). Environmental costs and benefits of genetically modified crops. American Behavioural Scientist, 44, 435-463.
3. Angus Reid (2000). Angus Reid Poll on Consumer acceptance of GM foods. Angus Reid Group, available on: http://www.angusreid.com.
4. Bereano, P. (1996). The environmental and ethical considerations of genetically engineered plants and foods-Changing Nature's cause: the ethical challenge of biotechnology. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
5. Bereano, P. (1999). Report on Danish citizen consensus conference on genetically engineered foods. Loka Institute, Amherst, United States of America.
6. Beresford, E. (1999). The ethical implications of genetically modified food. Anglican Journal, October.
7. Beckwitch, H. (1997). De verkoop van het niet-zichtbare: de sleutel tot moderne marketing. Amsterdam: De Arbeiderspers.
8. Bentler, P. (1990). Comparative fit indices in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238-246.
9. Biefang, S. (1999). Strategies for communication on food biotechnology. Report for the European Commission, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.
10. Bollen, K. & Long, J. (Eds.) (1993). Testing structural equation models. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
11. Braun, R. (1999). The public perception of biotechnology in Europe: between acceptance and hysteria. Final report, Biolink, Worb, Switzerland, August 18.
12. Bredahl, L. (2000). Determinants of consumer attitudes and purchase intentions with regard to genetically modified foods-Results of a cross-national survey. Working paper no. 69, MAPP, Aarhus, Denmark.
13. Brom, F. (2000). Food, consumer concerns, and trust: food ethics for a globalizing market. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 12 (2), 127-139.
14. Byrne, B. (1998). Structural equation modelling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS: basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
15. Dale, P. (1999). Public concerns over transgenic crops. Genome Research, 9 (12), December, 1159-1162.
16. De Muelenaere, M. (2001). La presse et les institutions: une relation à risque. In P. Hupet (Ed.), Risque et systèmes complexes-Les enjeux de la communication, Chapter X (pp. 173-183). Brussels: P.I.E.-Peter Lang.
17. Einseidel, E. (2000). Biotechnology and the Canadian public: 1997 and 2000. Final report, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.
18. Fazio, R. (1990). Multiple processes by which attitudes guide behaviour. In Mark Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 23 (pp. 75-109). San Diego: Academic Press.
19. Fernandez-Cornejo, J., Caswell, M. & Klotz-Ingram, C. (1999). Seeds of change: from hybrids to genetically modified crops. Choices, 14 (4), 18-22.
20. Fischoff, B., Lichenstein, S., Slovic, P., Derby, S. & Keeney, R. (1981). Acceptable Risk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21. Frewer, L., Howard, C., Hedderley, D. & Shepherd, R. (1996). What determines trust in information about food-related risks? Underlying psychological constructs. Risk Analysis, 16, 473-486.
22. Frewer, L., Hedderley, D., Howard, C. & Shepherd, R. (1997). Objection mapping in determining group and individual concerns regarding genetic engineering. Agriculture and Human Values, 14, 67-79.
23. Frewer, L. (1998). Consumer opinions on transgenic animals. AgBiotech News and Information, 10 (7), 213-216.
24. Frewer, L. (1999a). Public perceptions of genetically modified foods in Europe. Journal of Commercial Biotechnology, 6 (2), 108-115.
25. Frewer, L. (1999b). Risk perception, social trust and public participation in strategic decision making: implications for emerging technologies. Ambio, 28 (6), 569-574.
26. Frewer, L., Hedderley, D., Howard, C. & Shepherd, R. (1999). Reactions to information about genetic engineering: impact of source credibility, perceived risk immediacy and persuasive content. Public Understanding of Science, 8 (1), 35-50.
27. Frewer, L., Scholderer, J., Downs, C. & Bredahl, L. (2000). Communicating about the risks and benefits of genetically modified foods: effects of different information strategies. Working paper, no. 71, MAPP, Aarhus, Denmark.
28. Gaskell, G., Brauer, M., Durant, J. & Allum, N. (1999). Worlds apart? The reception of genetically modified foods in Europe and the US. Science, 295, 384-387.
29. Groth, E. III (1991). Communicating with consumers about food safety and risk issues. Food Technology, 24, 248-253.
30. Grunert, K., Lahteenmaki, L., Nielsen N., Poulsen, J., Ueland, O. & Aström, A. (2000). Consumer perception of food products involving genetic modification-Results from a qualitative study in four Nordic countries. Working paper no. 72, MAPP, Aarhus, Denmark.
31. Hoban, T. (1999). Public perceptions and understanding of agricultural biotechnology. Economic Perspectives, Issue on "Biotechnology: food security and safety," 4, October, 1-6.
32. Huffman W. & Tegene, A. (2002). Public acceptance of and benefits from agricultural biotechnology: a key role for verifiable information. In V. Santaniello, R. Evenson and D. Zilberman (Eds.), Market development for genetically modified foods (pp. 179-189). Wallingford: Cabi Publishing.
33. INRA (2000). Eurobarometer 52.1-The Europeans and modern biotechnology. European Coordination Office, Brussels, Belgium.
34. Jacoby, M. (1999). Botanists design plants with a taste for salt. Chemical and Engineering News, 23 (77), 9.
35. Jordana, J. (2000). Traditional foods: challenges facing the European food industry. Food Research International, 33, 147-152.
36. Jöreskog, K. & Sörbom, D. (1996). Lisrel 8: User's reference guide. Scientific Software International, Chicago, IL, United States of America.
37. Kameldeen, S. & Powell, D. (2000). Public perceptions of biotechnology. Food Safety Network Technical Report no. 17, University of Guelph, Guelph, Canada.
38. Kershen, D. (1999). Biotechnology: an essay on the academy, cultural attitudes and public policy. AgBioForum, 2 (2), Spring, 137-146.
39. Mendenhall, C. & Evenson, R. (2002). Willingness to pay a premium for non-genetically modified foods. In V. Santaniello, R. Evenson and D. Zilberman (Eds.), Market development for genetically modified foods (pp. 55-61). Wallingford: Cabi Publishing.
40. Menrad, K., Koschatzky, K., Massfeller, S. & Strauss, E. (1998). Communicating genetic engineering in the agro-food sector to the public. Report for the European Commission, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.
41. Moses, V. (1999). Biotechnology products and European consumers. Biotechnology Advances, 17, 647-678.
42. Nelson, G. (2001). Risk perception, behaviour, and consumer response to genetically modified organisms. American Behavioural Scientist, 44, 1371-1388.
43. Nuffield Council on Bioethics (1999). Genetically modified crops: the ethical and social issues. Final report, London, United Kingdom.
44. Peterson, R. (2000). Public perceptions of agricultural biotechnology and pesticides: recent understandings and implications for risk communication. American Entomology, 46 (8), 8-16.
45. Uzogara, S. (2000). The impact of genetic modification of human foods in the 21st century: a review. Biotechnology Advances, 18, 179-206.
46. Robinson, J. (1999). Ethics and transgenic crops: a review. Electronic Journal of Biotechnology (Plant Biotechology), 2, August 15, 1-13.
47. Rudnitsky, H. (1996). Another agricultural revolution: genetically altered seeds hold great promise for seed companies and for the fast growing world population. Forbes Magazine, 157 (10), 159.
48. Saba, A., Moles, A. & Frewer, L. (1998). Public concerns about general and specific applications of genetic engineering: a comparative study between the UK and Italy. Journal of Nutrition and Food Science, 28 (1), January/February, 19-29.
49. Sandman, P. (1989). Hazard versus outrage in public perception of risk. In V. Covello, D. McCallum and M. Pavlova (Eds.), Effective risk communication (pp. 45-49). New York: Plenum.
50. Scholderer, J. & Balderjahn, I. (1999). Consumer information strategies for genetically modified food products. In Proceedings of the 28th EMAC Conference on Marketing and competition in the information age (on CD-ROM), Berlin, Germany, May 11-14.
51. Shiva, V. (1997). Biopiracy: the plunder of nature and knowledge. Cambridge: South End Press.
52. Shiva, V. (1999). Stolen harvest: the hijacking of the global food supply. Cambridge: South End Press.
53. Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. Science, 236, 280-285.
54. Slovic, P. (1990). The legitimacy of public perceptions of risk, Journal of Pesticide Reform, 10 (1), 13-15.
55. Smaglik, P. (1999). Food as medicine: nutritionists, clinicians disagree on role of chemo-preventive supplements. The Scientist, 13 (11), 14.
56. Sparks, P., Shepherd, R. & Frewer, L. (1994). Gene technology, food production, and public opinion: a UK study. Agriculture and Human Values, 11 (1), 233-254.
57. Spier, R. (1998). Animal and plant cell technology: a critical evaluation of the technology/society interface. Journal of Biotechnology 65, 111-125.
58. SPSS (1999). SPSS Base 10.0: User's Guide. SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, United States of America.
59. Stephens, D. (2001). Public perception of scientists. Trends in Cell Biology, 11 (6), 242-243.
60. Thompson, P. (1999). The ethics of truth-telling and the problem of risk. Science and Engineering Ethics, 5, 489-510.
61. Van Woerkum, C., Kuiper, D. & Bos, E. (1999). Communicatie en innovatie: een inleiding. Alphen aan den Rijn/Diegem: Samson.
62. Van Woerkum, C. (2000). Communicatie en interactieve beleidsvorming. Alphen aan den Rijn/Diegem: Samson.
63. Verdurme, A. & Viaene, J. (2002a). Consumer beliefs and attitude towards genetically modified food: basis for segmentation and implications for communication. Submitted to Agribusiness: An International Journal.
64. Verdurme, A. & Viaene, J. (2002b). Exploring and modelling consumer attitudes towards genetically modified food. Submitted to Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal.
65. Verdurme, A., Gellynck, X., Viaene, J. & Verbeke, W. (2002). Differences in public acceptance between generic and premium branded GM food producers: an analytical model. In V. Santaniello, R. Evenson & D. Zilberman (Eds.), Market development for genetically modified foods (pp. 39-47). Wallingford: Cabi Publishing.
66. Waggoner, D. & Nayga, R. (2001). GM foods and 21st century agriculture: an assessment of key stakeholder perspectives. In Proceedings of the 5th International ICABR Conference on Biotechnology, science and modern agriculture: a new industry at the dawn of the century (on the Internet), Ravello, Italy, June 15-18.
67. Wall, R. (2001). Genetically modified food-The science and the controversy. Publication in the special Know your environment, Environmental Associates, The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, United States of America.
68. Wheaton, B., Muthen, B., Alwin, D. & Summers, G. (1977). Assessing reliability and stability in panel models. In D. Heise (Ed.), Sociological Methodology (pp. 84-136). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
69. Wynne, B. (2001). Biotechnologies et gouvernance mondiale: Communiquer l'ignorance. In P. Hupet (Ed.), Chapter III, In: Risque et systèmes complexes-Les enjeux de la communication, Chapter III (pp. 57-77). Bruxelles: P.I.E.-Peter Lang.