Hansen, Maggie Jo (author) and Edgar, Leslie D. (author)
Format:
Paper
Publication Date:
2015
Published:
Belgium
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 138 Document Number: D05787
Notes:
Paper presented in the Agricultural Communications Section of the annual conference of the Southern Association of Agricultural Scientists, Atlanta, Georgia, January 31-February 1, 2015. 23 pages.
Reports a survey indicating that Americans lean toward optimism regarding biotechnology, but a substantial minority has concerns. "Controversy in this area is unlikely to go away any time soon."
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Document Number: D05928
Notes:
Pages 27-38 in Allan Eaglesham, Sandra Ristow and Ralph W.F. Hardy (eds.) Biotechnology: science and society at a crossroad. NABC Report 15. National Agricultural Biotechnology Council, Ithaca, New York. 292 pages., "...holding innumerable debates about the pros and cons of agricultural biotechnology will not resolve the issues raised here, as long as the problem is framed as a lack of knowledge."
Mather, Damien W. (author), Knight, John G. (author), Insch, Andrea (author), Holdsworth, David K. (author), Ermen, David F. (author), and Breitbarth, Tim (author)
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2012
Published:
International
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Document Number: D06487
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 151 Document Number: D06776
Notes:
Online via Pew Research Center. 8 pages., "Scientists and the American public are often far apart when it comes to views about science-related issues."
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Document Number: D07370
Notes:
Pages 123-137 in Nick Pidgeon, Roger E. Kasperson and Paul Slovic (eds.), The social amplification of risk. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom. 448 pages.
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 162 Document Number: D08126
Notes:
Research paper presented in the Agricultural Communications Section, Southern Association of Agricultural Scientists (SAAS) in San Antonio,Texas, February 7-8, 2016. 30 pages.
Ruth, Taylor K. (author), Lamm, Alexa J. (author), and Rumble, Joy N. (author)
Format:
Conference paper
Publication Date:
2017-02
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 162 Document Number: D08144
Notes:
Research paper presented in the Agricultural Communications Section, Southern Association of Agricultural Scientists (SAAS), in Mobile, Alabama, February 4-7, 2017. 27 pages.
Martin, Brittany (author), Anderson, Sandra (author), Lundy, Lisa (author), and Rumble, Joy (author)
Format:
Conference paper
Publication Date:
2017-02
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 163 Document Number: D08155
Notes:
Research paper presented in the Agricultural Communications Section, Southern Association of Agricultural Scientists (SAAS) conference in Mobile, Alabama, February 4-7, 2017. 25 pages.
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 199 Document Number: D10003
Notes:
Abstract of paper presented at the National Agricultural Communications Symposium, Southern Association of Agricultural Scientists (SAAS) Agricultural Communications Section, Jacksonville, Florida, February 4-5, 2018.
Randolph, Levy (author), Rumble, Joy (author), and Carter, Hannah (author)
Format:
Paper abstract
Publication Date:
2018-02
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 199 Document Number: D10008
Notes:
Abstract of paper presented at the National Agricultural Communications Symposium, Southern Association of Agricultural Scientists (SAAS) Agricultural Communications Section, Jacksonville, Florida, February 4-5, 2018.
20 pages., Via online journal., Consumers are concerned about the risks related to genetically modified (GM) food, and there is a need for agricultural communicators and educators to address those concerns. The purpose of this study was to explore Florida residents’ latitudes of acceptance, rejection, and noncommitment toward GM food messages. The findings from this study can be used to guide communication and education campaigns for GM food. An online survey was distributed to a non-probability sample of 500 Florida residents to fulfill the purpose of the study. The messages that most aligned with the respondents’ views toward GM food discussed how potential risks related to human health had not been adequately investigated and that GM food may be riskier to consume compared to traditional food. The messages that most opposed the respondents’ views were that GM food was safe for consumption and that it caused cancer in humans. People whose views most aligned with the message that GM food caused cancer in humans had the largest latitude of rejection, likely due to their extreme attitude, confirmation bias, and ego-involvement. The largest percentage of respondents accepted messages that aligned with their position but expressed noncommitment to messages that opposed their views. This lack of rejection and indication of alignment with messages related to potential risk and uncertainty indicated Florida consumers were unsure about the effects of GM food. Communicators and educators should acknowledge these concerns when delivering information about GM food to enhance the effectiveness of communication with consumers.
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 8 Document Number: D10313
Notes:
2 pages., University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign., Researchers report consumer research indicating that the "future of U. S. citrus may hinge on consumer acceptance of genetically modified food."
USA: International Food Information Council Foundation, Washington, D.C.
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 30 Document Number: D10555
Notes:
3 pages., via website, International Food Information Council Foundation., Topics like sustainability, plant-based diets and clean eating seem to permeate news about food, but it turns out they’re not just buzzwords or “flavors of the week.” IFIC Foundation’s 2019 Food and Health Survey shows genuine and growing interest in these and other trends.
15 pages., via online journal, Genetic modification (GM) science has received considerable pushback from consumers despite the research finding GM products are safe for consumption. This may be partly due to the disconnect between consumers and farms since most consumers are disconnected from the farm by at least three generations. The largest consumer population is composed of millennials, which is the generation furthest removed from the farm which may mean they need to be educated differently about GM science than other generations. The purpose of this research was to determine if there were generational differences regarding the perceived attributes of GM science to inform the development of extension programs designed to educate consumers about GM science. A survey was used to collect consumers’ perceptions of GM science. The respondents were grouped into generational classifications and perceptions between groups were compared. The findings revealed generations do perceived GM science differently and extension programs should be designed for specific generational audiences.
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 133 Document Number: D11397
Notes:
5 pages., Via online from website., Results of a national survey among U.S. adults suggest that "Americans are closely divided over the health benefits of organic produce."
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 133 Document Number: D11399
Notes:
9 pages., Online via website., Results of a national survey among U.S. adults suggest that"divides in public opinion over food are encapsulated by how people assess the health effects of two kinds of food: organic and genetically modified (GM) foods. Americans' beliefs about food connect with their personal concerns about the role of food choices in their long term health and well-being."
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 134 Document Number: D11401
Notes:
30 pages., Online via website., "Despite the growing use of genetically modified crops over the past 20 years, most Americans say they know only a little about GM foods. And many people appear to hold 'soft' views about the health effects of GM foods, saying they are not sure about whether such foods are better or worse for one's health. ... a majority of Americans perceive disagreement in the scientific community over whether or not GM foods are safe to eat. And, only a minority of Americans perceive scientists as having a strong understanding of the health risks and benefits of GM foods."
5 pages., Author concludes that "genetic information is easy to portray as a new and scary technology, but fearmongering is largely based on misinformation, a misunderstanding of evolution and our place in the natural world, and vague fears of contamination. In reality, GMO safety testing is extensive and has not uncovered any safety concerns for current GMOs. There are other issues with GMOs that are worth discussing, but fears of adverse health effects are not legitimate." Cites a review of research ty the European Commission in 2010: "The main conclusion to be drawn from the efforts of more than 130 research projects, covering a period of more than 25 years of research and involving more than 500 independent research groups, is that biotechnology, and in particular GMOs, are not per se more risky than e.g. conventional plant breeding technologies."
Online via UI Library electronic subscription., Authors used data from Eurobarometer surveys to examine factors that condition citizens' attitudes toward genetically modified foods in 15 European Union member states. Strongest findings confirmed the importance of public understanding of science as a basis for support for this emerging technology.
6 pages., Gene editing (GE) and gene modification (GM) technologies demonstrate noticeable differences. GE technologies introduce changes in DNA, which are intrinsic to the species, while GM technologies incorporate changes from foreign species. The potential benefits of GE have been highlighted in a number of recent scientific studies, pointing to the opportunities that are opening up in addressing the food availability problems as a result of the growing world population. However, the implementation of GE technology in food production would rely on public awareness, acceptance, and attitudes toward genetically modified and genetically edited food products. Based on the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA), we surveyed Lithuanian consumers, farmers, and producers for their awareness, attitudes, and behavioural intentions towards GM and GE food. The 251 consumers, 50 farmers, and 56 food producers participated in the survey. Consistent across all samples (consumers, farmers, and producers, respectively), GM technology-related products’ self-assed awareness was significantly higher than the level of self-assed awareness of GE products. Awareness of GEO in all samples is relatively low. The level of support for GMO and GEO is also low in all groups of respondents. All groups – consumers, farmers, and producers – are less negative about food produced from GE than from GM raw materials. There was a statistically significantly higher overall likelihood for future use of GEO than the GMO. Producers would be less likely than consumers and farmers to use GMOs in the future. The same inclinations are observed with regard to GEO, with statistically significant differences in the sample of consumers, farmers, and producers.
12 pages, To date, there has been an increase in genome modification biotechnologies that improve production and food security but the process has not been accompanied by the delivery of information about them intended for citizens. This is essential considering that to achieve better health, food security and sustainability these biotechnologies need to be incorporated into production systems. This study aimed to explore perceptions and attitudes of Chilean citizens towards the use of genome modifications with an emphasis on transgenes and genome editing (CRISPR). An electronic questionnaire was applied, and afterwards the results were analysed through descriptive statistics, GLM, Spearman’s correlation and Wilcoxon Signed Rank test. A total of 702 questionnaires were analysed. High awareness of concepts such as transgenic and cloning was reported with CRISPR being the least known term. Most respondents perceived negative effects on health regarding the consumption of genetically modified products, with women having a significantly more negative attitude. Still, a high willingness to use CRISPR for improving animal and human health was reported. When comparing vegetable and animal products that underwent CRISPR or transgenes, the willingness to consume these products was higher for vegetables. The results show that changes in perception can be achieved after providing the definition of CRISPR and transgenic, therefore, consumer education seems to be essential. Science communication focused on making information about genome modification biotechnologies available to citizens could promote more positive attitudes and perceptions and facilitate their future implementation in the country.
10 pages, Biotechnology use in food production has been a polarizing topic that has encountered resistance from some consumers. The discovery of genome editing biotechnology, in which no foreign genetic material is introduced into the host organism while making accurate and efficient changes in genomes, has the potential to revolutionize food biotechnology in a more socially acceptable and less polarizing fashion. The success and adoption of gene-edited foods, however, ultimately depends on consumer acceptance. This study reports the results of a geographically disperse Chinese consumer acceptance study (n = 835) in which individuals evaluated rice and pork products that were bio-engineered to address two significant hazards that have recently garnered international attention: cadmium contamination in rice and African swine fever. We explore the role that food technology neophobia has on consumer acceptance and assess how information on the differences between transgenic and gene editing technologies affects consumer preferences. While averse to the use of biotechnology in food products, consumers were considerably more accepting of products that have undergone genome editing rather than transgenic modification. We find differential impacts of information provision on preferences between pork and rice products and on preferences for product provenance. Our analysis indicates that a reduction in consumers’ fear of novel food technologies can substantially increase consumer valuation and market acceptance of bioengineered food products and reinforces the need to consider attitudes in measuring acceptance of novel food products.
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 155 Document Number: C25109
Notes:
Retrieved December 15, 2006, Online from GMO Compass. 2 pages., Attachment includes URL to obtain full results of the DemoSCOPE study (German language).
