IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/aieabj/276286.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A stakeholder engagement approach for identifying future research directions in the evaluation of current and emerging applications of GMOs

Author

Listed:
  • Menozzi, Davide
  • Kostov, Kaloyan
  • Sogari, Giovanni
  • Arpaia, Salvatore
  • Moyankova, Daniela
  • Cristina Mora

Abstract

The yield of several commodity crops is provided in large part by genetically modified crops in North and South America. However, reservations exist in Europe due to possible negative effects on human health or environment. This paper aims to analyse the current research priorities identified in EU countries and to engage European stakeholders into the formulation of future common research needs regarding the effects of the possible adoption of commercially available and forthcoming genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in the areas of socio-economics, human and animal health, and environment. Additionally, it aims to identify the requirements for sharing available research capacities and existing infrastructures. First a mapping exercise of existing research activities in Europe was performed. A questionnaire was developed on a web-based platform and submitted to national focal points to collect information from EU Member States. Information was collected from 320 research projects conducted in the last 10 years in Europe. To refine results of the surveys, twenty invited experts and stakeholders from the public funding agencies of different EU Member States participated in an international workshop. This paper reports the main findings of these activities.

Suggested Citation

  • Menozzi, Davide & Kostov, Kaloyan & Sogari, Giovanni & Arpaia, Salvatore & Moyankova, Daniela & Cristina Mora, 2017. "A stakeholder engagement approach for identifying future research directions in the evaluation of current and emerging applications of GMOs," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 6(1), May.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aieabj:276286
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.276286
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/276286/files/18535-43452-1-PB.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.276286?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. 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.
    2. Bürger, Jana & Darmency, Henri & Granger, Sylvie & Guyot, Sébastien H.M. & Messéan, Antoine & Colbach, Nathalie, 2015. "Simulation study of the impact of changed cropping practices in conventional and GM maize on weeds and associated biodiversity," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 51-63.
    3. repec:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:1:p:-:d:61984 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. repec:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:1:p:62:d:61984 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Mora, Cristina & Menozzi, Davide & Kleter, Gijs & Aramyan, Lusine H. & Valeeva, Natasha I. & Zimmermann, Karin L. & Pakki Reddy, Giddalury, 2012. "Factors Affecting the Adoption of Genetically Modified Animals in the Food and Pharmaceutical Chains," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 1(3), pages 1-17, December.
    6. Rosa Binimelis & Anne Ingeborg Myhr, 2016. "Inclusion and Implementation of Socio-Economic Considerations in GMO Regulations: Needs and Recommendations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-24, January.
    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. Sigfrid Kjeldaas & Trine Antonsen & Sarah Hartley & Anne Ingeborg Myhr, 2021. "Public Consultation on Proposed Revisions to Norway’s Gene Technology Act: An Analysis of the Consultation Framing, Stakeholder Concerns, and the Integration of Non-Safety Considerations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-25, July.

    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. Frewer, L.J. & Coles, D. & Dijkstra, A.M. & Kuznesof, S. & Kendall, H. & Kaptan, G, 2016. "Synthetic Biology Applied In The Agrifood Sector: Societal Priorities And Pitfalls," APSTRACT: Applied Studies in Agribusiness and Commerce, AGRIMBA, vol. 10(2-3), pages 1-8, October.
    2. Anna K. Edenbrandt & Christian Gamborg & Bo Jellesmark Thorsen, 2020. "Observational learning in food choices: The effect of product familiarity and closeness of peers," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(3), pages 482-498, June.
    3. Yang, Ruoye & Raper, Kellie Curry & Lusk, Jayson L., 2020. "Impact of Hormone Use Perceptions on Consumer Meat Preferences," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 45(1), January.
    4. Karen Lewis DeLong & Carola Grebitus, 2018. "Genetically modified labeling: The role of consumers’ trust and personality," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(2), pages 266-282, March.
    5. Kubitzki, S. & Henseleit, M. & Herrmann, R., 2010. "Informationsgewinn und Markttransparenz durch Labeling? – Eine kritische Würdigung der neuen Lebensmittelkennzeichnung „Ohne Gentechnik“," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 45, March.
    6. Craig F. Berning & Brian E. Roe, 2017. "Assessing the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard of 2016: Can Americans Access Electronic Disclosure Information?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-9, May.
    7. Gülbanu Kaptan & Arnout R.H. Fischer & Lynn J. Frewer, 2018. "Extrapolating understanding of food risk perceptions to emerging food safety cases," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(8), pages 996-1018, August.
    8. Raszap Skorbiansky, Sharon & Adjemian, Michael K. & Saitone, Tina L. & Sexton, Richard J., 2017. "Price Determination and Margin Volatility in Thinly Traded Commodity Markets: An Application to Major U.S. Field Crops," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258577, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. Sigfrid Kjeldaas & Trine Antonsen & Sarah Hartley & Anne Ingeborg Myhr, 2021. "Public Consultation on Proposed Revisions to Norway’s Gene Technology Act: An Analysis of the Consultation Framing, Stakeholder Concerns, and the Integration of Non-Safety Considerations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-25, July.
    10. Cerrada-Serra, Pedro & Ortiz-Miranda, Dionisio, 2015. "Disentangling the connections between the GMO-related food system and food and nutrition security in Europe: A concept map from a systematic literature review," 148th Seminar, November 30-December 1, 2015, The Hague, The Netherlands 229268, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Sharon Raszap Skorbiansky & Michael K Adjemian, 2021. "Not All Thin Markets Are Alike: The Case of Organic and Non‐genetically Engineered Corn and Soybeans," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(1), pages 117-133, February.
    12. Koen Beumer, 2019. "How to include socio-economic considerations in decision-making on agricultural biotechnology? Two models from Kenya and South Africa," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 36(4), pages 669-684, December.
    13. Mora, C. & Menozzi, Davide & Sogari, G. & Brennan, Margaret F. & Raley, M. & Frewer, L. J., 2013. "Biotechnology and Public opinion: The results of a citizens’ jury case study," 2013 Second Congress, June 6-7, 2013, Parma, Italy 149921, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).
    14. Elijah Wolfe & Michael Popp & Claudia Bazzani & Rodolfo M. Nayga & Diana Danforth & Jennie Popp & Pengyin Chen & Han†Seok Seo, 2018. "Consumers’ willingness to pay for edamame with a genetically modified label," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(2), pages 283-299, March.
    15. Yang Yang & Jill E. Hobbs, 2020. "Food values and heterogeneous consumer responses to nanotechnology," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 68(3), pages 289-313, September.
    16. 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.
    17. Daniela Covino & Flavio Boccia & Immacolata Viola, 2021. "Genetically modified and socially responsible foods: A significant relationship for consumer’s preferences," RIVISTA DI STUDI SULLA SOSTENIBILITA', FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 0(2), pages 371-383.
    18. Carola Grebitus & Anne O. Peschel & Renée Shaw Hughner, 2018. "Voluntary food labeling: The additive effect of “free from” labels and region of origin," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(4), pages 714-727, October.
    19. Romano, Donato, 2012. "The Bio-based Economy: a New Development Model," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 1(3), pages 1-3, December.
    20. Carola Grebitus & Ellen J. Van Loo, 2022. "Relationship between cognitive and affective processes, and willingness to pay for pesticide‐free and GMO‐free labeling," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 53(3), pages 407-421, May.

    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:ags:aieabj:276286. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aieaaea.html .

    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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aieaaea.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.