Public acceptance of plant biotechnology and GM crops

Viruses

Volumn 7, Issue 8, 2015, Pages 4254-4281

  Lucht, Jan M ^a  

^a Scienceindustries Swiss Business Association Chemistry Pharma Biotech   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Consumers; Farmers; GMO labeling; Knowledge; New breeding techniques; Personal attitudes; Politics; Risk benefit perception; Trust

Indexed keywords

ADOPTION; AGRICULTURAL WORKER; CONSUMER ATTITUDE; DNA MODIFICATION; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR; GENETIC ENGINEERING; GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; HUMAN; MARKET; PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY; PLANT BREEDING; POLITICS; REVIEW; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; SPECIES CULTIVATION; TRANSGENIC CROP; VIRUS RESISTANCE; AGRICULTURE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; BIOTECHNOLOGY; CROP; FOOD SAFETY; GENETICS; PROCEDURES; PRODUCT SAFETY; TRANSGENIC PLANT;

AGRICULTURE; BIOTECHNOLOGY; CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY; CROPS, AGRICULTURAL; FOOD SAFETY; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; PLANTS, GENETICALLY MODIFIED;

EID: 84938377838     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19994915     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3390/v7082819     Document Type: Review

References (125)

1. Bruening, G.; Lyons, J.M. The case of the FLAVR SAVR tomato. Calif. Agric. 2000, 54, 6-7.[CrossRef]
2. James, C. Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2014; ISAAA Brief. ISAAA: Ithaca, NY, USA, 2014.
3. Dillen, K.; Demont, M.; Tillie, P.; Rodriguez Cerezo, E. Bred for Europe but grown in America: The case of GM sugar beet. New Biotechnol. 2013, 30, 131-135. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
4. Gonsalves, C.V.; Gonsalves, D. The Hawaii papaya story. In Handbook on Agriculture, Biotechnology and Development; Smyth, S.J., Phillips, P.W.B., Castle, D., Eds.; Edward Elgar Publishers: Northhampton, MA, USA, 2014; pp. 642-660.
5. Klümper, W.; Qaim, M. A Meta-Analysis of the Impacts of Genetically Modified Crops. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e111629. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
6. Qaim, M. The Economics of Genetically Modified Crops. Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ. 2009, 1, 665-694. [CrossRef]
7. Carpenter, J.E. The socio-economic impacts of currently commercialised genetically engineered crops. Int. J. Biotechnol. 2013, 12, 249-268. [CrossRef]
8. Fernandez-Cornejo, J.; Wechsler, S.; Livingston, M. Mitchell Genetically Engineered Crops in the United States; USDA Economic Research Service: Washington, DC, USA, 2014.
9. Brookes, G.; Barfoot, P. Economic impact of GM crops. GM Crops Food 2014, 5, 65-75.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
10. Van Eenennaam, A.L.; Young, A.E. Prevalence and impacts of genetically engineered feedstuffs on livestock populations. J. Anim. Sci. 2014, 92, 4255-4278. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
11. Gómez-Barbero, M.; Berbel, J.; Rodríguez-Cerezo, E. Bt corn in Spain—The performance of the EU’s first GM crop. Nat. Biotechnol. 2008, 26, 384-386. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
12. Lefebvre, L.; Polet, Y.; Wiliams, B. EU-28: Biotechnology and Other New Production Technologies; Agricultural Biotechnology Annual. USDA Foreign Agricultural Service: Washington, DC, USA, 2014.
13. Otiman, I.P.; Badea, E.M.; Buzdugan, L. Roundup Ready soybean, a Romanian story. Bull. Univ. Agric. Sci. Vet. Med. Cluj-Napoca Anim. Sci. Biotechnol. 2008, 65, 352-357.
14. Areal, F.J.; Riesgo, L.; Rodríguez-Cerezo, E. Attitudes of European farmers towards GM crop adoption: Attitudes of EU farmers towards GM crop adoption. Plant Biotechnol. J. 2011, 9, 945-957. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
15. Jones, P.P.; Tranter, R.B. Farmers’ Interest in Growing GM Crops in the UK, in the Context of a Range of On-farm Coexistence Issues. AgBioForum 2014, 17, 13-21.
16. Bernauer, T.; Meins, E. Technological revolution meets policy and the market: Explaining cross-national differences in agricultural biotechnology regulation. Eur. J. Polit. Res. 2003, 42,643-683. [CrossRef]
17. International Food Information Council IFIC Foundation. Food Biotechnology: A Study of U.S. Consumer Attitudinal Trends, 2006 Report; International Food Information Council IFIC Foundation: Washington, DC, USA, 2006.
18. Zilberman, D.; Kaplan, S.; Kim, E.; Hochman, G.; Graff, G. Continents divided: Understanding differences between Europe and North America in acceptance of GM crops. GM Crops Food 2013,4,202-208. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
19. Raybould, A.; Poppy, G.M. Commercializing genetically modified crops under EU regulations. GM Crops Food 2012, 3, 9-20. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
20. Mitchell, P. Europe angers US with strict GM labeling. Nat. Biotechnol. 2003, 21. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
21. Du, L. GMO Labelling and the Consumer’s Right to Know: A Comparative Review of the Legal Bases for the Consumer’s Right to Genetically Modified Food Labelling. McGill J. Law Health 2014,8,1-42.
22. Varzakas, T.H.; Arvanitoyannis, I.S.; Baltas, H. The Politics and Science behind GMO Acceptance. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2007, 47, 335-361. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
23. Schauzu, M. The European Union Regulatory Framework on Genetically Modified Organisms and Derived Foods and Feeds. Adv. Genet. Eng. 2013, 2. [CrossRef]
24. Ansell, C.; Maxwell, R.; Sicurelli, D. Protesting food: NGOs and political mobilization in Europe. In What’s the Beef; Ansell, C., Vogel, D., Eds.; The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2006; pp. 97-122.
25. Doh, J.P.; Guay, T.R. Corporate Social Responsibility, Public Policy, and NGO Activism in Europe and the United States: An Institutional-Stakeholder Perspective. J. Manag. Stud. 2006, 43, 47-73. [CrossRef]
26. Frewer, L.J.; Miles, S.; Marsh, R. The Media and Genetically Modified Foods: Evidence in Support of Social Amplification of Risk. Risk Anal. 2002, 22, 701-711. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
27. Bonny, S. Why are most Europeans opposed to GMOs? Factors explaining rejection in France and Europe. Electron. J. Biotechnol. 2003, 6. [CrossRef]
28. Vilella-Vila, M.; Costa-Font, J. Press media reporting effects on risk perceptions and attitudes towards genetically modified (GM) food. J. Socio-Econ. 2008, 37, 2095-2106. [CrossRef]
29. Moon, W.; Balasubramanian, S.K. Public perceptions and willingness-to-pay a premium for non-GM foods in the US and UK. AgBioForum 2002, 4, 221-231.
30. Lusk, J.L.; Jamal, M.; Kurlander, L.; Roucan, M.; Taulman, L. A Meta-Analysis of Genetically Modified Food Valuation Studies. J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 2005, 30, 28-44.
31. Lusk, J.L.; Bruce Traill, W.; House, L.O.; Valli, C.; Jaeger, S.R.; Moore, M.; Morrow, B. Comparative Advantage in Demand: Experimental Evidence of Preferences for Genetically Modified Food in the United States and European Union. J. Agric. Econ. 2006,57,1-21.[CrossRef]
32. Frewer, L.J.; van der Lans, I.A.; Fischer, A.R.H.; Reinders, M.J.; Menozzi, D.; Zhang, X.; van den Berg, I.; Zimmermann, K.L. Public perceptions of agri-food applications of genetic modification—A systematic review and meta-analysis. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2013,30, 142-152. [CrossRef]
33. Gaskell, G.; Stares, S.; Allansdottir, A.; Allum, N.; Castro, P.; Esmer, Y.; Fischler, C.; Jackson, J.; Kronberger, N.; Hampel, J., et al. Europeans and Biotechnology in 2010: Winds of Change?; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2010.
34. Desaint, N.; Varbanova, M. The use and value of polling to determine public opinion on GMOs in Europe: Limitations and ways forward. GM Crops Food 2013, 4, 183-194. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
35. Gaskell, G.; Allansdottir, A.; Allum, N.; Castro, P.; Esmer, Y.; Fischler, C.; Jackson, J.; Kronberger, N.; Hampel, J.; Mejlgaard, N., et al. The 2010 Eurobarometer on the life sciences. Nat. Biotechnol. 2011, 29, 113-114. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
36. Sleenhoff, S.; Osseweijer, P. Consumer choice. GM Crops Food 2013, 4, 166-171. [CrossRef][PubMed]
37. Knight, J.G.; Mather, D.W.; Holdsworth, D.K.; Ermen, D.F. Acceptance of GM food—An experiment in six countries. Nat. Biotechnol. 2007, 25, 507-508. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
38. Mather, D.W.; Knight, J.G.; Insch, A.; Holdsworth, D.K.; Ermen, D.F.; Breitbarth, T. Social Stigma and Consumer Benefits Trade-Offs in Adoption of Genetically Modified Foods. Sci. Commun. 2012, 34, 487-519. [CrossRef]
39. Aerni, P. Do Political Attitudes Affect Consumer Choice? Evidence from a Large-Scale Field Study with Genetically Modified Bread in Switzerland. Sustainability 2011, 3, 1555-1572. [CrossRef]
40. Aerni, P.; Scholderer, J.; Ermen, D. 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 2011,36,830-838. [CrossRef]
41. Aerni, P. Resistance to agricultural biotechnology: The importance of distinguishing between weak and strong public attitudes. Biotechnol. J. 2013, 8, 1129-1132. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
42. Hess, S.; Lagerkvist, C.J.; Redekop, W.; Pakseresht, A. Consumers’ Evaluation of Biotechnology in Food Products: New Evidence from a Meta-Survey. In Proceedings of the AAEA & CAES Joint Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, USA, 4-6 August 2013; Agricultural and Applied Economics Association: Washington, DC, USA, 2013. Available online: http://purl.umn.edu/(accessed on 10 May 2015).
43. Li, Q.; Curtis, K.R.; McCluskey, J.J.; Wahl, T.I. Consumer attitudes toward genetically modified foods in Beijing, China. AgBioForum 2003, 5, 145-152.
44. Zhang, X.; Huang, J.; Qiu, H.; Huang, Z. A consumer segmentation study with regards to genetically modified food in urban China. Food Policy 2010, 35, 456-462. [CrossRef]
45. Lu, C. The first approved transgenic rice in China. GM Crops 2010, 1, 113-115. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
46. De Steur, H.; Liqun, G.; Straeten, D.V.D.; Lambert, W.; Gellynck, X. The Potential Market for GM Rice with Health Benefits in a Chinese High-Risk Region. J. Food Prod. Mark. 2015, 21, 231-243. [CrossRef]
47. Siegrist, M. Factors influencing public acceptance of innovative food technologies and products. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2008, 19, 603-608. [CrossRef]
48. Costa-Font, M.; Gil, J.M.; Traill, W.B. Consumer acceptance, valuation of and attitudes towards genetically modified food: Review and implications for food policy. Food Policy 2008, 33, 99-111. [CrossRef]
49. Connor, M.; Siegrist, M. Factors Influencing People’s Acceptance of Gene Technology: The Role of Knowledge, Health Expectations, Naturalness, and Social Trust. Sci. Commun. 2010,32, 514-538. [CrossRef]
50. Rollin, F.; Kennedy, J.; Wills, J. Consumers and new food technologies. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2011,22,99-111. [CrossRef]
51. Lusk, J.L.; Roosen, J.; Bieberstein, A. Consumer Acceptance of New Food Technologies: Causes and Roots of Controversies. Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ. 2014, 6, 381-405. [CrossRef]
52. Batista, R.; Oliveira, M.M. Facts and fiction of genetically engineered food. Trends Biotechnol. 2009,27,277-286. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
53. Brookes, G.; Yu, T.H.; Tokgoz, S.; Elobeid, A. The Production and Price Impact of Biotech Corn, Canola, and Soybean Crops. AgBioForum 2010, 13, 25-52.
54. Barrows, G.; Sexton, S.; Zilberman, D. The impact of agricultural biotechnology on supply and land-use. Environ. Dev. Econ. 2014, 19, 676-703. [CrossRef]
55. Carpenter, J.E. Impact of GM crops on biodiversity. GM Crops 2011, 2, 7-23. [CrossRef][PubMed]
56. Barfoot, P.; Brookes, G. Key global environmental impacts of genetically modified (GM) crop use 1996-2012. GM Crops Food 2014, 5, 149-160. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
57. DeFrancesco, L. How safe does transgenic food need to be? Nat. Biotechnol. 2013, 31, 794-802.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
58. Nicolia, A.; Manzo, A.; Veronesi, F.; Rosellini, D. An overview of the last 10 years of genetically engineered crop safety research. Crit. Rev. Biotechnol. 2013, 34, 77-88. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
59. Gaskell, G.; Allum, N.; Wagner, W.; Kronberger, N.; Torgersen, H.; Hampel, J.; Bardes, J. GM Foods and the Misperception of Risk Perception. Risk Anal. 2004,24,185-194. [CrossRef][PubMed]
60. De Steur, H.; Blancquaert, D.; Strobbe, S.; Lambert, W.; Gellynck, X.; van der Straeten, D. Status and market potential of transgenic biofortified crops. Nat. Biotechnol. 2015, 33, 25-29. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
61. European Commission. The Europeans and Modern Biotechnology—Eurobarometer 46.1; Special Eurobarometer. European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 1997.
62. Lusk, J.L.; House, L.O.; Valli, C.; Jaeger, S.R.; Moore, M.; Morrow, J.L.; Traill, W.B. Effect of information about benefits of biotechnology on consumer acceptance of genetically modified food: Evidence from experimental auctions in the United States, England, and France. Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ. 2004, 31, 179-204. [CrossRef]
63. Scholderer, J.; Frewer, L.J. The Biotechnology Communication Paradox: Experimental Evidence and the Need for a New Strategy. J. Consum. Policy 2003, 26, 125-157. [CrossRef]
64. Huffman, W.E.; Rousu, M.; Shogren, J.F.; Tegene, A. The effects of prior beliefs and learning on consumers’ acceptance of genetically modified foods. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 2007, 63, 193-206. [CrossRef]
65. Grunert, K.G.; Bredahl, L.; Scholderer, J. Four questions on European consumers’ attitudes toward the use of genetic modification in food production. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2003,4,435-445. [CrossRef]
66. Bauer, M.W.; Allum, N.; Miller, S. What can we learn from 25 years of PUS survey research? Liberating and expanding the agenda. Public Underst. Sci. 2007, 16, 79-95. [CrossRef]
67. Connor, M.; Siegrist, M. The Power of Association: Its Impact on Willingness to Buy GM Food. Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. Int. J. 2011, 17, 1142-1155. [CrossRef]
68. Ceccoli, S.; Hixon, W. Explaining attitudes toward genetically modified foods in the European Union. Int. Polit. Sci. Rev. 2012, 33, 301-319. [CrossRef]
69. Public and Scientists’ Views on Science and Society; Pew Research Center: Washington, DC, USA, 2015; Available online: http://www.pewinternet.org/files/2015/01/PI_ScienceandSociety_Report_012915.pdf(accessed on 30 May 2015)
70. Finucane, M.L.; Holup, J.L. Psychosocial and cultural factors affecting the perceived risk of genetically modified food: An overview of the literature. Soc. Sci. Med. 2005, 60, 1603-1612. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
71. Lang, J.T.; Hallman, W.K. Who Does the Public Trust? The Case of Genetically Modified Food in the United States. Risk Anal. 2005, 25, 1241-1252. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
72. Wohlers, A.E. Labeling of genetically modified food. Polit. Life Sci. 2013, 32, 73-84. [CrossRef][PubMed]
73. Bain, C.; Dandachi, T. Governing GMOs: The (Counter) Movement for Mandatory and Voluntary Non-GMO Labels. Sustainability 2014, 6, 9456-9476. [CrossRef]
74. Leyser, O. Moving beyond the GM Debate. PLoS Biol. 2014, 12, e1001887. [CrossRef][PubMed]
75. Kuntz, M. Destruction of public and governmental experiments of GMO in Europe. GM Crops Food 2012, 3, 258-264. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
76. Nausch, H.; Sautter, C.; Broer, I.; Schmidt, K. Public funded field trials with transgenic plants in Europe: A comparison between Germany and Switzerland. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2015, 32, 171-178. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
77. Cressey, D. Monsanto drops GM in Europe. Nature 2013, 499, 387. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
78. Dixelius, C.; Fagerström, T.; Sundström, J.F. European agricultural policy goes down the tubers. Nat. Biotechnol. 2012, 30, 492-493. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
79. Dunwell, J.M. Genetically modified (GM) crops: European and transatlantic divisions: GM crops: European and transatlantic divisions. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2014, 15, 119-121. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
80. Twardowski, T.; Małyska, A. Uninformed and disinformed society and the GMO market. Trends Biotechnol. 2015, 33, 1-3. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
81. Kuntz, M.; Davison, J.; Ricroch, A.E. What the French ban of Bt MON810 maize means for science-based risk assessment. Nat. Biotechnol. 2013, 31, 498-500. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
82. Romeis, J.; McLean, M.A.; Shelton, A.M. When bad science makes good headlines: Bt maize and regulatory bans. Nat. Biotechnol. 2013, 31, 386-387. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
83. Varzakas, T.H.; Chryssochoidis, G.; Argyropoulos, D. Approaches in the risk assessment of genetically modified foods by the Hellenic Food Safety Authority. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2007, 45,530-542. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
84. Schläpfer, F. Determinants of Voter Support for a Five-Year Ban on the Cultivation of Genetically Modified Crops in Switzerland. J. Agric. Econ. 2008, 59, 421-435. [CrossRef]
85. Bernauer, T.; Tribaldos, T.; Luginbühl, C.; Winzeler, M. Government regulation and public opposition create high additional costs for field trials with GM crops in Switzerland. Transgenic Res. 2011, 20, 1227-1234. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
86. Leitungsgruppe des Nationalen Forschungsprogramms NFP 59. Nutzen und Risiken der Freisetzung Gentechnisch Veränderter Pflanzen: Programmsynthese NFP 59; Chancen Nutzen, Risiken Vermeiden, Kompetenzen Erhalten. Leitungsgruppe des Nationalen Forschungsprogramms NFP 59, Ed.; vdf, Hochsch.-Verl. an der ETH: Zürich, Switzerland, 2012.
87. Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences. Gentechnisch Veränderte Nutzpflanzen und ihre Bedeutung für Eine Nachhaltige Landwirtschaft in der Schweiz (Genetically Modified Crops and Their Significance for a Sustainable Swiss Agriculture); Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences: Bern, Switzerland, 2013.
88. Romeis, J.; Meissle, M.; Brunner, S.; Tschamper, D.; Winzeler, M. Plant biotechnology: Research behind fences. Trends Biotechnol. 2013, 31, 222-224. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
89. Katzek, J. At the end of the day everything boils down to politics: The evolving of German policy toward GMO crops and the existing stagnation. GM Crops Food 2014, 5, 178-182. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
90. Arvanitoyannis, I.S.; Tserkezou, P.; Varzakas, T. An update of US food safety, food technology, GM food and water protection and management legislation. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2006, 41, 130-159. [CrossRef]
91. Grobe, D.; Raab, C. Voters’ Response to Labeling Genetically Engineered Foods: Oregon’s Experience. J. Consum. Aff. 2004, 38, 320-331. [CrossRef]
92. Moschini, G. Mandatory GMO Labeling? Agric. Policy Rev. 2015, 2015, e4.
93. Costanigro, M.; Lusk, J.L. The signaling effect of mandatory labels on genetically engineered food. Food Policy 2014, 49 (Pt 1), 259-267. [CrossRef]
94. Huang, J.; Hu, R.; Rozelle, S.; Pray, C. Insect-Resistant GM Rice in Farmers’ Fields: Assessing Productivity and Health Effects in China. Science 2005, 308, 688-690. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
95. Jia, H. Chinese green light for GM rice and maize prompts outcry. Nat. Biotechnol. 2010, 28, 390-391. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
96. Qiu, J. Controversy of GM crops in China. Natl. Sci. Rev. 2014, 1, 466-470. [CrossRef]
97. Chen, S. Chinese Government Backs Further Studies of Genetically Modified Crops. South China Morning Post, 6 January 2015, Available online: http://www.scmp.com/print/news/china/article/1674969/chinese-government-backs-further-studies-genetically-modified-crops(accessed on 19 May 2015)
98. Wang, Q. China’s scientists must engage the public on GM. Nature 2015, 519. [CrossRef][PubMed]
99. Herring, R.J. State science, risk and agricultural biotechnology: Bt cotton to Bt Brinjal in India. J. Peasant Stud. 2015, 42, 159-186. [CrossRef]
100. Gruère, G.; Sengupta, D. Bt Cotton and Farmer Suicides in India: An Evidence-based Assessment. J. Dev. Stud. 2011, 47, 316-337. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
101. Kathage, J.; Qaim, M. Economic impacts and impact dynamics of Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) cotton in India. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2012, 109, 11652-11656. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
102. Qaim, M.; Kouser, S. Genetically Modified Crops and Food Security. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e64879.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
103. Krishna, V.; Qaim, M.; Zilberman, D. Transgenic crops, production risk and agrobiodiversity. Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ. 2015. [CrossRef]
104. Kumar, S.; Misra, A.; Verma, A.K.; Roy, R.; Tripathi, A.; Ansari, K.M.; Das, M.; Dwivedi, P.D. Bt Brinjal in India: A long way to go. GM Crops 2011, 2, 92-98. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
105. Jayaraman, K.S. India’s transgenic aubergine in a stew. Nature News, 10 February 2010.[CrossRef]
106. Padma, T.V. India stalls on GM crops. Nature News, 5 August 2014. [CrossRef]
107. Choudhary, B.; Gheysen, G.; Buysse, J.; van der Meer, P.; Burssens, S. Regulatory optionsfor genetically modified crops in India. Plant Biotechnol. J. 2014, 12, 135-146. [CrossRef][PubMed]
108. Kumar, S. India eases stance on GM crop trials. Nature 2015, 521, 138-139. [CrossRef][PubMed]
109. Holme, I.B.; Wendt, T.; Holm, P.B. Intragenesis and cisgenesis as alternatives to transgenic crop development. Plant Biotechnol. J. 2013, 11, 395-407. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
110. Hartung, F.; Schiemann, J. Precise plant breeding using new genome editing techniques: Opportunities, safety and regulation in the EU. Plant J. 2014, 78, 742-752. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
111. Jones, H.D. Regulatory uncertainty over genome editing. Nat. Plants 2015, 1. [CrossRef]
112. Lusser, M.; Parisi, C.; Plan, D.; Rodríguez-Cerezo, E. Deployment of new biotechnologies in plant breeding. Nat. Biotechnol. 2012, 30, 231-239. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
113. Nagamangala Kanchiswamy, C.; Sargent, D.J.; Velasco, R.; Maffei, M.E.; Malnoy, M. Looking forward to genetically edited fruit crops. Trends Biotechnol. 2015,33,62-64. [CrossRef][PubMed]
114. Ricroch, A.E.; Hénard-Damave, M.-C. Next biotech plants: New traits, crops, developers and technologies for addressing global challenges. Crit. Rev. Biotechnol. 2015. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
115. Schouten, H.J.; Krens, F.A.; Jacobsen, E. Do cisgenic plants warrant less stringent oversight? Nat. Biotechnol. 2006, 24, 753. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
116. Waltz, E. Tiptoeing around transgenics. Nat. Biotechnol. 2012,30,215-217. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
117. Kronberger, N.; Wagner, W.; Nagata, M. How Natural Is "More Natural"? The Role of Method, Type of Transfer, and Familiarity for Public Perceptions of Cisgenic and Transgenic Modification. Sci. Commun. 2014, 36, 106-130. [CrossRef]
118. Delwaide, A.-C.; Nalley, L.L.; Dixon, B.L.; Danforth, D.M.; Nayga, R.M., Jr.; van Loo, E.J.; Verbeke, W. Revisiting GMOs: Are There Differences in European Consumers’ Acceptance and Valuation for Cisgenically vs. Transgenically Bred Rice? PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0126060. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
119. Greenpeace; Friends of the Earth Europe; Testbiotech; GeneWatch; via Campesina; Econexus; Corporate Europe Observatory; Bee-Life. Open Letter to the Commission on New Genetic Engineering Methods. Available online: http://www.econexus.info/ publication/new-breeding- techniques (accessed on 25 May 2015)
120. Anonymous. Seeds of change. Nature 2015, 520, 131-132.
121. Palmgren, M.G.; Edenbrandt, A.K.; Vedel, S.E.; Andersen, M.M.; Landes, X.; Østerberg, J.T.; Falhof, J.; Olsen, L.I.; Christensen, S.B.; Sandøe, P., et al. Are we ready for back-to-nature crop breeding? Trends Plant Sci. 2015, 20, 155-164. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
122. Galvez, L.C.; Banerjee, J.; Pinar, H.; Mitra, A. Engineered plant virus resistance. Plant Sci. Int. J. Exp. Plant Biol. 2014, 228, 11-25. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
123. Ibrahim, A.B.; Aragão, F.J.L. RNAi-Mediated Resistance to Viruses in Genetically Engineered Plants. In Plant Gene Silencing; Mysore, K.S., Senthil-Kumar, M., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2015; pp. 81-92.
124. Devos, Y.; Sanvido, O.; Tait, J.; Raybould, A. Towards a more open debate about values in decision-making on agricultural biotechnology. Transgenic Res. 2013, 23, 933-943. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
125. Rose, N. Democracy in the contemporary life sciences. BioSocieties 2012, 7, 459-472.[CrossRef]