IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/revpol/v37y2020i4p511-534.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Song of Policy Incongruence: The Missing Choir of Consumer Preferences in GMO‐Labeling Policy Outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • Samantha L. Mosier
  • Arbindra Rimal
  • Megan M. Ruxton

Abstract

This article focuses on the degree of policy congruence, and by extension policy responsiveness, of U.S. federal‐ and state‐level GMO labeling laws from 2011–2016. Utilizing consumer survey data, evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates consumers prefer clear text‐based indication if food products contain genetically modified ingredients. However, the federal law adopted in 2016 mandates GMO labeling but with exceptions permitted to clear on‐package text labeling. The results of this study demonstrate that consumer preferences were not adequately represented at the federal level and were misaligned with state policy activities as captured in the aggregate outcome. State legislatures were actively proposing mandatory legislation with only a few cases of success, which did not adequately represent the wishes of the people. Given the misalignment and overall policy incongruence, the consequences of pending federal law are discussed in light of why the voices of the consumer choir were not heard by lawmakers. 本文重点分析了2011‐2016年美国联邦和州级转基因生物(GMO)标签法的政策一致程度以及相关的政策响应。 利用消费者调查数据,绝大多数证据表明,如果食品含有转基因成分,消费者更喜欢使用清晰的文字说明。 然而,2016年通过的联邦法虽然规定转基因食品必须使用标签说明,但允许例外,准许包装上无文字标签。 本项研究的结果表明,消费者偏好在联邦一级没有得到充分体现,并且与总结果所反映的州政策活动也错位。 州立法机关虽积极提出强制性立法,但只有少数成功案例,因此,也没有充分体现人民的意愿。 鉴于这种错位和总体政策上的不一致,本文就立法者缘何没有听到消费者的集体声音这个问题探讨了这项悬而未决的联邦法的后果。 Este artículo se centra en el grado de congruencia de las políticas, y por extensión en la capacidad de respuesta de las políticas,de las leyes federales y estatales de etiquetado de OMG de los Estados Unidos entre 2011 y 2016. Utilizando los datos de las encuestas a los consumidores, las pruebas demuestran de manera abrumadora que losconsumidores prefieren una indicación clara basada en texto si los productos alimenticios contienen ingredientes modificados genéticamente. Sin embargo, la ley federal adoptada en 2016 exige el etiquetado de OMG, pero con excepciones se permite borrar el etiquetado de texto en el paquete. Los resultados de este estudio demuestran que las preferencias de los consumidores no estaban adecuadamente representadas a nivel federal y estaban desalineadas con las actividades de política estatal, como se refleja en el resultado agregado. Las legislaturas estatales están proponiendo activamente una legislación obligatoria con sólo unos pocos casos de éxito, que no representan adecuadamente los deseos del pueblo. Dada la desalineación y la incongruencia general de las políticas, las consecuencias de la ley federal pendiente se discuten a la luz de por qué los legisladores no escucharon las voces del coro de consumo.

Suggested Citation

  • Samantha L. Mosier & Arbindra Rimal & Megan M. Ruxton, 2020. "A Song of Policy Incongruence: The Missing Choir of Consumer Preferences in GMO‐Labeling Policy Outcomes," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(4), pages 511-534, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:37:y:2020:i:4:p:511-534
    DOI: 10.1111/ropr.12391
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12391
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ropr.12391?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jakob Skovgaard & Sofía Sacks Ferrari & Åsa Knaggård, 2019. "Mapping and clustering the adoption of carbon pricing policies: what polities price carbon and why?," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(9), pages 1173-1185, October.
    2. Ragnar E. Löfstedt & Baruch Fischhoff & Ilya R. Fischhoff, 2002. "Precautionary principles: general definitions and specific applications to genetically modified organisms," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(3), pages 381-407.
    3. Bovay, John & Alston, Julian M., 2018. "GMO food labels in the United States: Economic implications of the new law," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 14-25.
    4. Brady, Henry E. & Verba, Sidney & Schlozman, Kay Lehman, 1995. "Beyond SES: A Resource Model of Political Participation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 89(2), pages 271-294, June.
    5. Zilberman, David & Kaplan, Scott & Gordon, Ben, 2018. "The political economy of labeling," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 6-13.
    6. Lusk, Jayson L. & McFadden, Brandon R. & Wilson, Norbert, 2018. "Do consumers care how a genetically engineered food was created or who created it?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 81-90.
    7. James Flynn & Paul Slovic & C. K. Mertz, 1994. "Gender, Race, and Perception of Environmental Health Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(6), pages 1101-1108, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tatjana Brankov & Bojan Matkovski & Marija Jeremić & Stanislav Zekić, 2022. "GMO standards in South East Europe: assessing a GMO index within the process of EU integration," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 49(1), pages 253-275, February.
    2. Agnieszka Dudziak & Anna Kocira, 2022. "Preference-Based Determinants of Consumer Choice on the Polish Organic Food Market," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-18, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Elena Rosculete & Elena Bonciu & Catalin Aurelian Rosculete & Elena Teleanu, 2018. "Detection and Quantification of Genetically Modified Soybean in Some Food and Feed Products. A Case Study on Products Available on Romanian Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-13, April.
    2. Jung-In Jo & Hyun Jin Choi, 2019. "Enigmas of grievances about inequality: Effects of attitudes toward inequality and government redistribution on protest participation," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 22(4), pages 348-368, December.
    3. Denny,Elaine Kathryn & Dow,David & Levy,Gabriella & Villamizar-Chaparro,Mateo, 2022. "Extortion and Civic Engagement among Guatemalan Deportees," Policy Research Working Paper Series 10020, The World Bank.
    4. Bourguignon, Francois, 2005. "The Effect of Economic Growth on Social Structures," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 27, pages 1701-1747, Elsevier.
    5. Bimbo, Francesco & Bonanno, Alessandro & Viscecchia, Rosaria, 2019. "An empirical framework to study food labelling fraud: an application to the Italian extra-virgin olive oil market," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 63(4), October.
    6. Ronconi, Lucas & Zarazaga S.J., Rodrigo, 2015. "Labor Exclusion and the Erosion of Citizenship Responsibilities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 453-461.
    7. Ann Bostrom & Ragnar E. Löfstedt, 2003. "Communicating Risk: Wireless and Hardwired," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 241-248, April.
    8. Antoci Angelo & Sabatini Fabio & Sodini Mauro, 2009. "Will growth and technology destroy social interaction? The inverted U-shape hypothesis," wp.comunite 0057, Department of Communication, University of Teramo.
    9. Evelien Tonkens & Imrat Verhoeven, 2019. "The civic support paradox: Fighting unequal participation in deprived neighbourhoods," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 56(8), pages 1595-1610, June.
    10. Poy, Samuele & Schüller, Simone, 2016. "Internet and Voting in the Web 2.0 Era: Evidence from a Local Broadband Policy," IZA Discussion Papers 9991, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Easwaran Narassimhan & Stefan Koester & Kelly Sims Gallagher, 2022. "Carbon Pricing in the US: Examining State-Level Policy Support and Federal Resistance," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(1), pages 275-289.
    12. Grillos, Tara, 2017. "Participatory Budgeting and the Poor: Tracing Bias in a Multi-Staged Process in Solo, Indonesia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 343-358.
    13. Zeynep Altinay & Eric Rittmeyer & Lauren L. Morris & Margaret A. Reams, 2021. "Public risk salience of sea level rise in Louisiana, United States," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 11(4), pages 523-536, December.
    14. Hannah Eboh & Courtney Gallaher & Thomas Pingel & Walker Ashley, 2021. "Risk perception in small island developing states: a case study in the Commonwealth of Dominica," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 105(1), pages 889-914, January.
    15. Dan Jiang & Guangling Zhang, 2021. "Marketing Clues on the Label Raise the Purchase Intention of Genetically Modified Food," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-20, September.
    16. Chuanshen Qin & Jianhua Xu & Gabrielle Wong‐Parodi & Lan Xue, 2020. "Change in Public Concern and Responsive Behaviors Toward Air Pollution Under the Dome," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(10), pages 1983-2001, October.
    17. Gautam, Narayan Prasad & Chhetri, Bir Bahadur Khanal & Raut, Nirmal Kumar & Tigabu, Mulualem & Raut, Nirjala & Rashid, Muhammad Haroon U. & Ma, Xiangqing & Wu, Pengfei, 2020. "Do earthquakes change the timber and firewood use pattern of the forest dependent households? Evidence from rural hills in Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    18. Wegenast, Tim, 2010. "Cana, café, cacau: agrarian structure and educational inequalities in Brazil," Revista de Historia Económica / Journal of Iberian and Latin American Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(1), pages 103-137, March.
    19. Lee, You-Kyung, 2020. "Sustainability of nuclear energy in Korea: From the users’ perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    20. Chia-Hui Chen & Chao-Lung Liu & Bryant Pui Hung Hui & Ming-Lun Chung, 2020. "Does Education Background Affect Digital Equal Opportunity and the Political Participation of Sustainable Digital Citizens? A Taiwan Case," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-17, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:37:y:2020:i:4:p:511-534. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipsonea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.