9 pages., Via online journal., Food labels legislated by the U.S. government have been designed to provide information to consumers. It has been asserted that the simple disclosures “produced using genetic engineering” on newly legislated U.S. food labels will send a signal that influences individual preferences rather than providing information. Vermont is the only US state to have experienced mandatory labeling of foods produced using genetic engineering (GE) via simple disclosures. Using a representative sample of adults who experienced Vermont’s mandatory GE labeling policy, we examined whether GE labels were seen by consumers and whether the labels provided information or influenced preferences. Nearly one-third of respondents reported seeing a label. Higher income, younger consumers who search for information about GE were more likely to report seeing a label. We also estimated whether labels served as information cues that helped reveal consumer preferences through purchases, or whether labels served as a signal that influenced preferences and purchases. For 50.5% of consumers who saw a label, the label served as an information cue that revealed their preferences. For 13% of those who saw the label, the label influenced preferences and behavior. Overall, for 4% of the total sample, simple GE disclosures influenced preferences. For a slight majority of consumers who used a GE label, simple disclosures were an information signal and not a preference signal. Searching for GE information, classifying as female, older age and opposing GE in food production significantly increased the probability that GE labels served as an information source. Providing such disclosures to consumers may be the least complex and most transparent option for mandatory GE labeling.
15 pages, via online journal article, Scientist-stakeholder partnerships are formed by scientists from academic institutions and industry representatives in an effort to address contingent science issues such as climate change, inform the public and influence public policies. Such organizations often lack expertise in communicating to the public and conducting outreach which are crucial components to building a good reputation. This study selected Florida Water and Climate Alliance [FWCA] as an example of such an organization, exploring its media attention and media framing to assess the visibility and reputation of [FWCA]. Results showed very limited media attention had been devoted to [FWCA]. The framing analysis results indicated that the coverage of [FWCA] is mostly introductory and descriptive information from public institutions, collaborators and funding agencies. These results demonstrate the need for such organizations to increase media visibility and build their reputations through strategic communication. Scientist-stakeholder partnership organizations like FWCA could gain from strategic collaborations with agricultural communications professionals and academic researchers. To better assist in building the reputation for these organizations, recommendations include developing strategic communication plans and conducting research about stakeholders’ and collaborators’ perceptions of an organization’s reputation.
