IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/agrhuv/v36y2019i1d10.1007_s10460-018-9896-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How consumers use mandatory genetic engineering (GE) labels: evidence from Vermont

Author

Listed:
  • Jane Kolodinsky

    (University of Vermont)

  • Sean Morris

    (University of Vermont)

  • Orest Pazuniak

    (University of Vermont)

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Jane Kolodinsky & Sean Morris & Orest Pazuniak, 2019. "How consumers use mandatory genetic engineering (GE) labels: evidence from Vermont," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 36(1), pages 117-125, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:36:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s10460-018-9896-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s10460-018-9896-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10460-018-9896-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10460-018-9896-y?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christopher Kanter & Kent D. Messer & Harry M. Kaiser, 2009. "Does Production Labeling Stigmatize Conventional Milk?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(4), pages 1097-1109.
    2. Lusk, Jayson L. & Rozan, Anne, 2008. "Public Policy and Endogenous Beliefs: The Case of Genetically Modified Food," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 33(2), pages 1-20.
    3. Colson, Gregory & Huffman, Wallace E. & Rousu, Matthew C., 2011. "Improving the Nutrient Content of Food through Genetic Modification: Evidence from Experimental Auctions on Consumer Acceptance," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 36(2), pages 1-22, August.
    4. Guillaume P. Gruère & Colin A. Carter & Y. Hossein Farzin, 2008. "What labelling policy for consumer choice? The case of genetically modified food in Canada and Europe," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(4), pages 1472-1497, November.
    5. Bansal, Sangeeta & Chakravarty, Sujoy & Ramaswami, Bharat, 2013. "The informational and signaling impacts of labels: experimental evidence from India on GM foods," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(6), pages 701-722, December.
    6. Julie A. Caswell & Eliza M. Mojduszka, 1996. "Using Informational Labeling to Influence the Market for Quality in Food Products," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(5), pages 1248-1253.
    7. Bruno, Christopher C. & Campbell, Benjamin L., 2016. "Students’ Willingness to Pay for More Local, Organic, Non-GMO and General Food Options," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 47(3), pages 1-17, November.
    8. Costanigro, Marco & Lusk, Jayson L., 2014. "The signaling effect of mandatory labels on genetically engineered food," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P1), pages 259-267.
    9. Huffman, Wallace E. & Rousu, Matthew C. & Shogren, Jason F. & Tegene, Abebayehu, 2003. "Consumers' Resistance To Genetically Modified Foods In High Income Countries: The Role Of Information In An Uncertain Environment," 2003 Annual Meeting, August 16-22, 2003, Durban, South Africa 25837, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Nelson, Phillip, 1970. "Information and Consumer Behavior," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 78(2), pages 311-329, March-Apr.
    11. Kolodinsky, Jane, 2008. "Affect or information? Labeling policy and consumer valuation of rBST free and organic characteristics of milk," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 616-623, December.
    12. James O. Bukenya & Natasha R. Wright, 2007. "Determinants of consumer attitudes and purchase intentions with regard to genetically modified tomatoes," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(1), pages 117-130.
    13. Georgina Catacora-Vargas & Rosa Binimelis & Anne I. Myhr & Brian Wynne, 2018. "Socio-economic research on genetically modified crops: a study of the literature," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 35(2), pages 489-513, June.
    14. Cook, A. J. & Kerr, G. N. & Moore, K., 2002. "Attitudes and intentions towards purchasing GM food," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 557-572, October.
    15. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    16. Loureiro, Maria L. & Hine, Susan E., 2002. "Discovering Niche Markets: A Comparison Of Consumer Willingness To Pay For Local (Colorado Grown), Organic, And Gmo-Free Products," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 34(3), pages 1-11, December.
    17. Nelson, Philip, 1974. "Advertising as Information," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 82(4), pages 729-754, July/Aug..
    18. Wachenheim, Cheryl J. & Vanwechel, Tamara, 2004. "The Influence Of Environmental-Impact Information On Consumer Willingness To Pay For Products Labeled As Free Of Genetically Modified Ingredients," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 35(2), pages 1-13, July.
    19. Colson, Gregory & Huffman, Wallace E. & Rousu, Matthew C., 2011. "Improving the Nutrient Content of Food through Genetic Modification: Evidence from Experimental Auctions on Consumer Acceptance," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 36(2), pages 1-22, August.
    20. Wuyang Hu & Michele M. Veeman & Wiktor L. Adamowicz, 2005. "Labelling Genetically Modified Food: Heterogeneous Consumer Preferences and the Value of Information," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 53(1), pages 83-102, March.
    21. Katner, Christopher & Messer, Kent D. & Kaiser, Harry M., 2009. "AJAE Appendix: “Does Production Labeling Stigmatize Conventional Milk?”," American Journal of Agricultural Economics APPENDICES, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(4), pages 1-10, March.
    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. Stéphan Marette & Anne‐Célia Disdier & Anastasia Bodnar & John Beghin, 2023. "New plant engineering techniques, R&D investment and international trade," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(2), pages 349-368, June.
    2. Fan, Linlin & Stevens, Andrew W. & Thomas, Betty, 2022. "Consumer purchasing response to mandatory genetically engineered labeling," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    3. Thomas, Elizabeth & Fan, Linlin & Stevens, Andrew W., 2020. "Consumer Purchasing Response to Genetically Engineered Labeling," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304523, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    4. Katrina Oselinsky & Ashlie Johnson & Pamela Lundeberg & Abby Johnson Holm & Megan Mueller & Dan J. Graham, 2021. "GMO Food Labels Do Not Affect College Student Food Selection, Despite Negative Attitudes towards GMOs," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-19, February.

    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. Gautam, Ruskin & Gustafson, Christopher R. & Brooks, Kathleen R., 2017. "Label Position and it Impacts on WTP for Products Containing GMO," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258105, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Costanigro, Marco & Lusk, Jayson L., 2014. "The signaling effect of mandatory labels on genetically engineered food," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P1), pages 259-267.
    3. Costanigro, Marco & Scozzafava, Gabriele & Casini, Leonardo, 2019. "Vertical differentiation via multi-tier geographical indications and the consumer perception of quality: The case of Chianti wines," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 246-259.
    4. Aslan, Hadiye & Kumar, Praveen, 2016. "The product market effects of hedge fund activism," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(1), pages 226-248.
    5. Charity, Nabwire Ephamia Juma, 2016. "Economic Analysis Of Consumers’ Awareness And Willingness To Pay For Geographical Indicators And Other Quality Attributes Of Honey In Kenya," Research Theses 265574, Collaborative Masters Program in Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    6. Andreas C. Drichoutis & Panagiotis Lazaridis & Rodolfo M. Nayga, 2009. "Would consumers value food-away-from-home products with nutritional labels?," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(4), pages 550-575.
    7. Verbeke, Wim & Ward, Ronald W., 2003. "Importance of EU Label Requirements: An Application of Ordered Probit Models to Belgium Beef Labels," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22077, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    8. Pecchioli, Bruno & Moroz, David, 2023. "Do geographical appellations provide useful quality signals? The case of Scotch single malt whiskies," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    9. Breeda Comyns & Frank Figge & Tobias Hahn & Ralf Barkemeyer, 2013. "Sustainability reporting: The role of “Search”, “Experience” and “Credence” information," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(3), pages 231-243, September.
    10. Costanigro, Marco & Scozzafava, Gabriele & Casini, Leonardo, 2017. "Vertical Differentiation, Perceptions Restructuring, And Wine Choices: The Case Of The Gran Selezione In Chianti Wines," Working Papers 253850, American Association of Wine Economists.
    11. Stefanella Stranieri & Lucia Baldi & Alessandro Banterle, 2010. "Do Nutrition Claims Matter to Consumers? An Empirical Analysis Considering European Requirements," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(1), pages 15-33, February.
    12. Guillaume P. Gruère & Colin A. Carter & Y. Hossein Farzin, 2008. "What labelling policy for consumer choice? The case of genetically modified food in Canada and Europe," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 41(4), pages 1472-1497, November.
    13. Benner, E. & Profeta, A. & Wirsig, A., 2009. "Die EU-Übergangsregelung zum Herkunftsschutz bei Agrarprodukten und Lebensmitteln aus dem Blickwinkel der Transaktions- und der Informationsökonomie," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 44, March.
    14. Frank, Joshua, 2006. "Process attributes of goods, ethical considerations and implications for animal products," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 538-547, June.
    15. Liaukonyte, Jura & Streletskaya, Nadia A. & Kaiser, Harry M., 2015. "Noisy Information Signals and Endogenous Preferences for Labeled Attributes," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 40(2), pages 1-24, May.
    16. Benner, Dietrich, 2004. "Quality Ambiguity and the Market Mechanism for Credence Goods," Working Papers 98639, Universitaet Hohenheim, Institute of Agricultural Policy and Agricultural Markets.
    17. Chen, Xianwen & Alfnes , Frode & Rickertsen , Kyrre, 2015. "Labeling Farmed Seafood," Working Paper Series 10-2015, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, School of Economics and Business.
    18. Jingjing Wang & Chengyan Yue & Karina Gallardo & Vicki McCracken & James Luby & Jim McFerson, 2017. "What Consumers Are Looking for in Strawberries: Implications from Market Segmentation Analysis," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(1), pages 56-69, January.
    19. Kariyawasam, Sumudu & Jayasinghe-Mudalige, Udith K. & Weerahewa, Jeevika, 2006. "Assessing Consumer Attitudes and Perceptions Towards Food Quality: The Case of Consumption of Tetra-Packed Fresh Milk in Sri Lanka," Annual Meeting, 2006, May 25-28, Montreal, Quebec 34173, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society.
    20. Dannenberg, Astrid, 2009. "The dispersion and development of consumer preferences for genetically modified food -- A meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(8-9), pages 2182-2192, June.

    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:spr:agrhuv:v:36:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s10460-018-9896-y. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.