IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aes/amfeco/v14y2012i31p230-245.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Genetically Modified Products in Lithuania: Situational Analysis and Consumers’ Attitudes

Author

Listed:
  • Dainora Grundey

    (Mykolas Romeris University, Lithuania)

  • Indre Rimkiene

    (Aleksandras Stulginskis University, Lithuania)

Abstract

The paper analyses the genetically modified organism products (GMP) in relation to genetically modified organisms (GMO) from two perspectives: 1) from the theoretical standpoint, discussing the GMO and GMP trade conditions and 2) from the practical perspective, namely analysing the availability of GMP in the Lithuanian market. With the growing of genetically modified products (GMP) levels, it becomes important to examine the situation of genetically modified products. According to various studies on Lithuanian public opinion on genetic modification, genetically modified organisms and their products, we can provide for the future of GMOs in the Lithuanian market. Although there are different opinions about genetically modified products not only in Lithuania, but also throughout the world, the level of development in this area increases every year. This is one of the reasons for which it is necessary to know and explore the Lithuanian population, as the buyer of the genetically modified products, and to examine the Lithuanian market of these products. Although the market is limited for these products, it is still very important to know as much as possible about genetically modified organisms and their effects on humans and the environment, and the future of the people, as consumers have their own opinion about them.

Suggested Citation

  • Dainora Grundey & Indre Rimkiene, 2012. "Genetically Modified Products in Lithuania: Situational Analysis and Consumers’ Attitudes," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 14(31), pages 230-245, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:aes:amfeco:v:14:y:2012:i:31:p:230-245
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.amfiteatrueconomic.ro/temp/Article_1113.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. GianCarlo Moschini, 2008. "Biotechnology and the development of food markets: retrospect and prospects," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 35(3), pages 331-355, September.
    2. Matthew Rousu & Wallace E. Huffman & Jason F. Shogren & Abebayehu Tegene, 2007. "Effects And Value Of Verifiable Information In A Controversial Market: Evidence From Lab Auctions Of Genetically Modified Food," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 45(3), pages 409-432, July.
    3. Dumitru Miron & Monica Petcu & Iulia Maria Sobolevschi, 2011. "Corporate Social Responsibility and the Sustainable Competitive Advantage," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 13(29), pages 162-179, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Gina Waterfield & Scott Kaplan & David Zilberman, 2020. "Willingness to Pay versus Willingness to Vote: Consumer and Voter Avoidance of Genetically Modified Foods," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 102(2), pages 505-524, March.
    2. Carrieri, Vincenzo & Principe, Francesco, 2022. "WHO and for how long? An empirical analysis of the consumers’ response to red meat warning," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    3. Anne-Célia Disdier & Lionel Fontagné, 2010. "Trade impact of European measures on GMOs condemned by the WTO panel," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 146(3), pages 495-514, September.
    4. McFadden, Brandon R. & Lusk, Jayson L., 2013. "Effects of Cost and Campaign Advertising on Support for California’s Proposition 37," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(2), pages 1-13, August.
    5. Onur Sapci & Ayse Sapci, 0. "Consumer Perception of Food Expiration Labels: “Sell By” Versus “Expires On”," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 0, pages 1-17.
    6. Jin, Hyun Joung & Han, Dae Hee, 2014. "Interaction between message framing and consumers’ prior subjective knowledge regarding food safety issues," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 95-102.
    7. Lusk Jayson L. & Marette Stéphan, 2012. "Can Labeling and Information Policies Harm Consumers?," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-15, October.
    8. Kwak, Lynn E. & Yoon, Sang Won & Kim, Younjun, 2020. "Genetically modified crops’ environmental impact and trust in eco-labels," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 361-373.
    9. Hellyer, Nicole Elizabeth & Fraser, Iain & Haddock-Fraser, Janet, 2010. "Food Choice, Nutritional Information And Functional Ingredients: An Experimental Auction Employing Bread," 115th Joint EAAE/AAEA Seminar, September 15-17, 2010, Freising-Weihenstephan, Germany 116424, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Stéphan Marette & John Beghin & Anne‐Célia Disdier & Eliza Mojduszka, 2023. "Can foods produced with new plant engineering techniques succeed in the marketplace? A case study of apples," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(1), pages 414-435, March.
    11. Skevas, Theodoros & Fevereiro, Pedro & Wesseler, Justus, 2010. "Coexistence regulations and agriculture production: A case study of five Bt maize producers in Portugal," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2402-2408, October.
    12. Grazyna Smigielska & Anna Dabrowska & Malgorzata Radziukiewicz, 2015. "Fair Trade in Sustainable Development. The Potential for Fair Trade Market Growth in Poland," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 17(Special 9), pages 1244-1244, November.
    13. Stephan S. Marette & Anne-Célia Disdier & John C Beghin, 2020. "A Comparison of EU and US consumers' willingness to pay for gene-edited food: Evidence from apples," PSE Working Papers halshs-02872222, HAL.
    14. John C. Beghin & Jean-Christophe Bureau & Alexandre Gohin, 2017. "The Impact of an EU–US Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership Agreement on Biofuel and Feedstock Markets," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(2), pages 321-344, June.
    15. Lang, John T., 2013. "Elements of public trust in the American food system: Experts, organizations, and genetically modified food," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 145-154.
    16. Waldman, Kurt B. & Kerr, John M. & Isaacs, Krista B., 2014. "Combining participatory crop trials and experimental auctions to estimate farmer preferences for improved common bean in Rwanda," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 183-192.
    17. Huffman, Wallace, 2009. "Does Information Change Behavior?," Staff General Research Papers Archive 13128, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    18. Bo Xiong & John C. Beghin, 2018. "TTIP and agricultural trade: The case of tariff elimination and pesticide policy cooperation," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(3), pages 495-508, June.
    19. Disdier, Anne-Célia & Marette, Stéphan, 2012. "How do consumers in developed countries value the environment and workers’ social rights in developing countries?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 1-11.
    20. Zhao, Li & Gu, Haiying & Yue, Chengyan & Ahlstrom, David, 2013. "Consumer welfare and GM food labeling: A simulation using an adjusted Kumaraswamy distribution," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 58-70.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    genetically modified organisms (GMO); genetically modified foods and products (GMP); agriculture in international trade; consumers’ attitude; Lithuania;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q13 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Markets and Marketing; Cooperatives; Agribusiness
    • Q17 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agriculture in International Trade
    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy; Animal Welfare Policy
    • P2 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Socialist and Transition Economies

    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:aes:amfeco:v:14:y:2012:i:31:p:230-245. 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: Valentin Dumitru (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aseeero.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.