Who does the public trust? The case of genetically modified food in the United States

Risk Analysis

Volumn 25, Issue 5, 2005, Pages 1241-1252

  Lang, John T ^a   Hallman, William K ^a  

^a RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Genetically modified food; Institutions; Public understanding of science; Trust; Uncertainty

Indexed keywords

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; FOOD PRESERVATION; HEALTH CARE; RISK MANAGEMENT; SOCIAL ASPECTS; SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS;

GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD; PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING OF SCIENCE; TRUST; UNCERTAINTY;

RISK PERCEPTION;

FOOD; GENETIC ENGINEERING; PUBLIC ATTITUDE;

ARTICLE; CONSUMER; DNA MODIFICATION; FOOD STORAGE; GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD; PERCEPTION; PUBLIC HEALTH; RESPONSIBILITY; RISK ASSESSMENT; SAMPLING; TECHNOLOGY; UNITED STATES; WELFARE;

BIOTECHNOLOGY; DATA COLLECTION; FOOD INDUSTRY; FOOD, GENETICALLY MODIFIED; HUMANS; PERCEPTION; PUBLIC OPINION; RISK ASSESSMENT; SAFETY; TRUST; UNITED STATES;

NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 28144436117     PISSN: 02724332     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00668.x     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. GEO-PIE. (2003). GE Foods in the Market. Ithaca, NY: Genetically Engineered Organisms Public Issues Education (GEO-PIE) Project, Cornell Cooperative Extension, Cornell University.
2. Hallman, W. K., et al. (2002). Public Perceptions of Genetically Modified Foods: Americans Know Not What They Eat. New Brunswick, NJ: Food Policy Institute, Cook College, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey.
3. Hallman, W. K., et al. (2003). Public Perceptions of Genetically Modified Foods: A National Study of American Knowledge and Opinion. New Brunswick, NJ: Food Policy Institute, Cook College, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey.
4. Hallman, W.K., et al. (2004). Americans and GM Food: Knowledge, Opinion and Interest in 2004. New Brunswick, NJ: Food Policy Institute, Cook College, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey.
5. Luhmann, N. (1979). Trust and Power. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
6. Gaskell, G., Allum, N. C., & Stares, S. R. (2003). Europeans and Biotechnology in 2002: Eurobarometer 58.0. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission.
7. Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481-510.
8. Putnam, R. D. (1993). Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
9. Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity. New York: Free Press.
10. Clarke, L. (1999). Mission Improbable: Using Fantasy Documents to Tame Disaster. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
11. Renn, O., & Levine, D. (1991). Credibility and trust communication. In R. E. Kasperson & P. J. M. Stallen (Eds.), Communicating Risks to the Public. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
12. Kasperson, R. E., Golding, D., & Tuler, S. (1992). Social distrust as a factor in siting hazardous facilities and communicating risks. Journal of Social Issues, 48(4), 161-187.
13. Slovic, P. (1993). Perceived risk, trust, and democracy. Risk Analysis, 13(6), 675-682.
14. Cvetkovich, G. T., & Ragnar, E. L. (1999). Social Trust and the Management of Risk. In G. T. Cvetkovich & R. E. Lofstedt (Eds.). London: Earthscan Publications, Ltd.
15. DiMaggio, P., & Walter, W. P. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review. 48, 147-160.
16. Johnson, B. B. (1999). Exploring dimensionality in the origins of hazard related trust. Journal of Risk Research, 2(4), 325-354.
17. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (1990). Federal Register, 55. 55th ed. Washington, DC.
18. Martineau, B. (2001). First Fruit: The Creation of the Flavr Savr Tomato and the Birth of Biotech Foods. New York: McGraw-Hill.
19. Charles, D. (2002). Lords of the Harvest: Biotech, Big Money, and the Future of Food. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Publishing.
20. Economic Research Service. (2001). Genetically Engineered Products: Economic Issues in Agricultural Biotechnology. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture.
21. Schlosser, E. (2001). Fast Food Nation: The Dark Side of the American Meal. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
22. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (1992). 57 Federal Register Statement of Policy: Foods Derived from New Plant Varieties, 57th ed. Washington, DC: Federal Register.
23. Office of Science Technology Policy. (1986). 57 Federal Register. Washington, DC.
24. Glickman, D. (1999). New Crops, New Century, New Challenges: How Will Scientists, Farmers, and Consumers Learn to Love Biotechnology and What Happens If They Don't? National Press Club, Washington, DC. Available at 〈http://www. usda.gov/news/releases/1999/07/0285〉.
25. Priest, S. H. (2001). A Grain of Truth: The Media, the Public, and Biotechnology. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
26. Hardin, R. (2002). Trust and Trustworthiness. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
27. Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
28. Rotter, J. B. (1971). Generalized expectancies for interpersonal trust. American Psychologist, 26, 443-452.
29. Mechanic, D. (1998). Public trust and initiatives for new health care partnerships. Milbank Quarterly, 76(2), 281-302.
30. Erikson, K. (1976). Everything in Its Path: Destruction of Community in the Buffalo Creek Flood. New York: Simon and Schuster.
31. Erikson, K. (1994). A New Species of Trouble. New York: W. W. Norton.
32. Vaughan, D. (1996). The Challenger Launch Decision: Risky Technology, Culture, and Deviance at NASA. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
33. Hamstra, I. A. (1998). Public Opinion about Biotechnology: A Survey of Surveys. The Hague, The Netherlands: EFB Task Group on Public Perceptions of Biotechnology.
34. Poortinga, W., & Pidgeon, N. (2003). Exploring the dimensionality of trust in risk regulation. Risk Analysis, 25(5), 961-972.
35. Siegrist, M. (2000). The influence of trust and perceptions of risks and benefits on the acceptance of gene technology. Risk Analysis, 20(2), 195-204.
36. Giddens, A. (1990). The Consequences of Modernity. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
37. Seligman, A. B. (2000). The Problem of Trust. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
38. Zucker, L. G. (1986). Production of trust: Institutional sources of economic structure 1840-1920. Research in Organizational Behaviour, 8, 53-111.
39. Beck, U. (1992). Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London: Sage Publications.
40. Barber, B. (1983). The Logic and Limits of Trust. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
41. Frewer, L. J., et al. (1995). What determines trust in information about food-related risks? Underlying psychological constructs. Risk Analysis, 15(4), 473-486.
42. Metlay, D. (1999). Institutional trust and confidence: A journey into a conceptual quagmire. In G. T. Cvetkovich & R. E. Lofstedt (Eds.), Social Trust and the Management of Risks. London: Earthscan.
43. Gambetta, D. (2000). Can we trust trust? In D. Gambetta (Ed.), Trust: Making and Breaking Cooperative. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
44. Heimer, C. A. (2001). Solving the problem of trust. In K. S. Cook (Ed.), Trust in Society. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
45. Peters, R. G., Covello, V. T., & McCallum, D. B. (1997). The determinants of trust and credibility in environmental risk communication: An empirical study. Risk Analysis, 17(1), 43-54.
46. Siegrist, M. (2000). The influence of trust and perceptions of risks and benefits on the acceptance of gene technology. Risk Analysis, 20(2), 195-204.
47. Einsiedel, E. F. (2002). GM food labeling-The interplay of information, social values, and institutional trust. Science Communication, 24(2), 209-221.
48. Finucane, M. L. (2002). Mad cows, mad corn and mad communities: The role of socio-cultural factors in the perceived risk of genetically-modified food. Nutrition Society, 61(1), 31-37.
49. Frewer, L. J., Miles, S., & Roy, M. (2002). The media and genetically modified foods: Evidence in support of social amplification of risk 6. Risk Analysis, 22(4), 701-711.
50. Siegrist, M., Earle, T. C., & Gutscher, H. (2003). Test of a trust and confidence model in the applied context of electromagnetic field (EMF) risks. Risk Analysis, 23(4), 705-716.
51. Marris, C., et al. (2001). Public Perceptions of Agricultural Biotechnologies in Europe: Final Report of the PABE Research Project. Lancaster, UK: University of Lancaster.
52. Priest, S. H., Bonfadelli, H., & Rusanen, M. (2003). The "trust gap" hypothesis: Predicting support for biotechnology across national cultures as a function of trust in actors. Risk Analysis, 25(4), 751-766.
53. Freudenberg, W. R. (1993). Risk and recreancy: Weber, the division of labor, and the rationality of risk perceptions. Social Forces, 71(4), 909-932.
54. Schurman, R. (2004). Fighting "frankenfoods": Industry structures and the efficacy of the anti-biotech movement in Western Europe. Social Problems, 51(2), 243-268.
55. Nestle, M. (2002). Food Politics: How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition and Health. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.