How would Swiss consumers decide if they had freedom of choice? Evidence from a field study with organic, conventional and GM corn bread

Food Policy

Volumn 36, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 830-838

  Aerni, Philipp ^a   Scholderer, Joachim ^b   Ermen, David ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BERN   (Switzerland)

^b AARHUS UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Attitude behavior consistency; Discrete choice; Field study; Freedom of choice; GM food; Revealed consumer behavior

Indexed keywords

AGRICULTURE; CONSUMPTION BEHAVIOR; DISCRETE CHOICE ANALYSIS; GENETIC ENGINEERING; GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISM; MAIZE;

SWITZERLAND;

ZEA MAYS;

EID: 80855132761     PISSN: 03069192     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2011.08.002     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Aerni P., Bernauer T. Stakeholder attitudes towards GMOs in the Philippines, Mexico and South Africa: the issue of public trust. World Development 2006, 34:557-575.
2. Andrews J.C., Shimp T.A. Effects of involvement, argument strength, and source characteristics on central and peripheral processing of advertising. Psychology and Marketing 2006, 7(3):195-214.
3. Ariely D., Norton M.I. Conceptual consumption. Annual Review of Psychology 2009, 60:475-499.
4. Belk R.W., Wallendorf M., Sherry J.F. The sacred and the profane in consumer behavior: Theodicy on the Odyssey. Journal of Consumer Research 1989, 16(1):1-38.
5. Bernard J.C., Schulze W. The next new thing: curiosity and the motivation to purchase novel products. Economics Bulletin 2005, 3(32):1-8.
6. Bonfadelli H., Dahinden U. Gentechnologie in der öffentlichen Kontroverse. Eine sozialwissenschaftliche Analyse 2002, Seismo Verlag, Zürich.
7. Brunsø K., Scholderer J., Grunert K.G. Closing the gap between values and behavior-a means-end theory of lifestyle. Journal of Business Research 2004, 57(6):665-670.
8. Carlsson F., Fryblom P., Lagerkvist C.-J. Consumer benefits of labels and bans on GMO food-choice experiment with Swedish consumers. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 2007, 89:153-161.
9. ConsumerChoice, 2008. Do Europeans Buy GM Foods? European Commission: Framework 6, Project No. 518435. Final Report. King's College, London. http://www.kcl.ac.uk/schools/biohealth/research/nutritional/consumerchoice.
10. Einsele A. The gap between science and perception: the case of plant biotechnology in Europe. Advances in Biochemical Engineering/Biotechnology 2007, 107:1-11.
11. EU, 2010. Communication from the Commission on the Freedom for Member States to Decide on the Cultivation of Genetically Modified Crops. COM (2010) 380 Final, Brussels, 13.7.2010. http://www.ec.europa.eu/food/food/biotechnology/index_en.htm.
12. Eurobarometer (64.3). 2005. Europeans and Biotechnology in 2005: Patterns and Trends. Final Report. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities Luxembourg.
13. Finucane M., Satterfield T. Risk as narrative value: a theoretical framework for facilitating the biotechnology debate. International Journal of Biotechnology 2005, 7(1/2/3):128-146.
14. Grunert K.G., Bech-Larsen T., Lähteenmäki L., Ueland Ø., åström A. Attitudes towards the use of GMOs in food production and their impact on buying intention: the role of positive sensory experience. Agribusiness 2004, 20:95-107.
15. Grunert K.G., Wills J.M. A review of European research of research on consumer response to nutrition information on food labels. Journal of Public Health 2007, 15:385-399.
16. Hammerl M. I like it, but only when I'm not sure why: evaluative conditioning and the awareness issue. Conscious Cognition 2000, 8:37-40.
17. Janas S., Irani T. Advocacy advertising for biotechnology: the effect of public accountability on corporate trust and attitude toward the ad. Journal of Advertising 2005, 34(3):59-73.
18. Choices, Values and Frames 2000, Cambridge University Press, New York. D. Kahneman, A. Tversky (Eds.).
19. Kalaitzandonakes N., Marks L.A., Vickner S.S. Sentiments and acts towards genetically modified foods. International Journal of Biotechnology 2005, 7:161-177.
20. Kirchhoff, S., Zago, A., 2001. A Simple Model of Voluntary vs Mandatory Labelling of GMOs. Working Paper, Istituto Nazionale di Economia Agraria (INEA), Rome.
21. Knight J.G., Mather D.W., Holdsworth D.K., Ermen D.F. Acceptance of GM food-an experiment in six countries. Nature Biotechnology 2007, 25:507-508.
22. Lichtenstein S., Slovic P. The Construction of Preference 2006, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2006.
23. Morgan D.L., Morgan R.K. Counterfactuals and Causal Inference 2001, Cambridge University Press, London.
24. Nelkin D. Selling Science 1995, W.H. Freeman & Company, New York.
25. Noussair C., Robin S., Ruffieux B. Do consumers really refuse to buy genetically modified food?. The Economic Journal 2004, 114:102-120.
26. OSEC, 2009. Schweizer Bio-Produkte für gesunden Genuss an der BioFach 2009. Medienmitteilung, Zürich.
27. Petty R.E., Cacioppo J.T. Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change 1986, Springer, New York.
28. Pollan M. The Omnivore's Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals 2006, Penguin Books, New York.
29. Siegrist M. Perception of gene technology, and food risks: result of a survey in Switzerland. Journal of Risk Research 2003, 6:45-60.
30. Siegrist M. Belief in gene technology: the influence of environmental attitudes and gender. Personality and Individual Differences 1998, 24(6):861-866.