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."
In letter to the editor, Lancet is criticized by a representative of the Biotechnology Industry Organization for placing politics and tabloid sensationalism above its responsibility to report and assess new science.
Letter to the editor regarding publication of research by Stanley Ewen and Arpad Pusztai regarding effects of genetically modified potatoes on rat small intestines.
Survey data are presented on opinions about agricultural biotechnology and its application held by agricultural science faculty at highly ranked programs in the United States with and without personal involvement in biotechnology-oriented research. Findings prompt authors to argue that where even experts are divided, public opposition cannot reasonably be attributed to poor public understanding or sensationalistic media accounts.
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 140 Document Number: D06122
Notes:
Pages 66-71 in "Ethics, efficiency and food security: feeding the 9 billion well," The Crawford Fund 2014 Annual Parliamentary Conference, Canberra, ACT, Australia, August 24-28, 2014. 157 pages.
"The current situation in the EU can be summarized by the paradoxical conclusion that GMO is safe to eat, but only when produced outside the Member States."
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."
Authors examine tone of voice in coverage of the Monarch butterfly case (USA), GM potato case (UK)and StarLink corn case (USA). Suggest two ways forward: greater transparency by innovators that allows participation by the public in the production development process and quicker responses by scientists.
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: 161 Document Number: D07874
Notes:
Pages 99-102 in M.J. Navarro (ed.), Voices and views: why biotech? ISAAA Brief No. 50. International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications, Ithaca, New York. 158 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.
Krause, Amber (author), Meyers, Courtney (author), Irlbeck, Erica (author), and Chambers, Todd (author)
Format:
Conference paper
Publication Date:
2016-02
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 162 Document Number: D08142
Notes:
Research paper presented in the Agricultural Communications Section, Southern Association of Agricultural Scientists (SAAS), in San Antonio, Texas, February 7-8, 2016. 26 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: 168 Document Number: D08673
Notes:
Via AgriMarketing Weekly. 1 page., Involves an advertising campaign against recombinant bovine somatotropin (rbST), a supplement used to increase milk production.
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.
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.
USA: Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, New York City, New York
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 30 Document Number: D10572
Notes:
5 pages., via website, FAIR., Author revisits an earlier concern about the performance of a newspaper food columnist who recently admitted taking money from agribusiness interest groups that she covers.
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."
9 pages., Online via UI electronic subscription., The study involved a survey among 39 respondents from the milling industry and supermarkets, the main processors and distributors of maize products, in seven urban centres of Kenya. Identified information sources, knowledge level of biotechnology, and perceptions and preferences involving genetically modified food.
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.
13 pages, via Online Journal, Indicators of food sovereignty and food democracy center on people having the right and ability to define their food polices and strategies with respect to food culture, food security, sustainability and use of natural resources. Yet food sovereignty, like democracy, exists on multiple and competing scales, and policymakers and citizens often have different agendas and priorities. In passing a ban on the use of genetically-modified (GMO) seeds in agriculture, Jackson County, Oregon has obtained some measure of food sovereignty. Between 2016 and 2017 ethnographic research was undertaken in rural Southern Oregon where local community and State of Oregon priorities regarding the use of GMO crops are in conflict. This article presents ethnographic research findings about the expression and negotiation of multiple food sovereignties by civil society in rural southern Oregon and the State of Oregon via democratic processes. In particular, these findings illustrate the effects of socio-political power dynamics on local and state acts of food sovereignty, democracy and agrifood policy by analyzing what the different expressions of food sovereignty reveal for its implementation at the local level.
A version of this article appears in print on September 6, 2015, Section A, Page 1 of the New York Edition of the New York Times with the headline, "Emails reveal academic ties in a food war.", Examines lobbying activities of firms and interest groups in the debate over bioengineered foods - and involving third-party scientists "and their supposedly unbiased research." Includes examples of interactions and financial support for university scientists by commercial firms.
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.
