IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/jlaare/10148.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Continuum of Consumer Attitudes Toward Genetically Modified Foods in the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Ganiere, Pierre
  • Chern, Wen S.
  • Hahn, David E.

Abstract

A national telephone survey was conducted in the United States in April 2002 to study the consumer acceptance of genetically modified (GM) foods. Attitudes toward GM foods were examined through the use of a multiple correspondence analysis (MCA), analyzing the interrelationships among many categorical variables. This method was combined with a cluster analysis to construct a typology of consumers' attitudes. Four distinct classes of attitudes were finally extracted, denoted as: Proponents, Non-Opponents, Moderate Opponents, and Extreme Opponents. It was estimated that only 35% of the surveyed population was opposed to GM foods.

Suggested Citation

  • Ganiere, Pierre & Chern, Wen S. & Hahn, David E., 2006. "A Continuum of Consumer Attitudes Toward Genetically Modified Foods in the United States," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 31(1), pages 1-21, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:jlaare:10148
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.10148
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/10148/files/31010129.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.10148?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
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Xiaoqin Zhu & Xiaofei Xie, 2015. "Effects of Knowledge on Attitude Formation and Change Toward Genetically Modified Foods," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(5), pages 790-810, May.
    2. Dolores Garrido & Ana Espínola‐Arredondo & Felix Munoz‐Garcia, 2020. "Can mandatory certification promote greenwashing? A signaling approach," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 22(6), pages 1801-1851, December.
    3. Hu, R. & Deng, H., 2018. "A Crisis of Consumers’ Trust in Scientists and Influence on Consumer Attitude," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 276047, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Owusu, Rebecca & Dadzie, Samuel Kwesi Ndzebah, 2021. "Heterogeneity in consumer preferences for organic and genetically modified food products in Ghana," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 16(2), June.
    5. Kaneko, Naoya & Chern, Wen S., 2006. "Identification of Consumer Segments and Its Implication on the Willingness-to-Pay Distribution: The Case of Demand for Non-Genetically Modified Vegetable Oil in the United States," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21194, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    6. Craig A. Bond & Dawn Thilmany & Jennifer Keeling Bond, 2008. "Understanding consumer interest in product and process-based attributes for fresh produce," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(2), pages 231-252.
    7. Viktoriya Galushko & Monika Çule & Richard Gray, 2020. "Western Canadian producers’ attitudes towards wheat breeding funding," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 68(4), pages 461-487, December.
    8. Rodríguez-Entrena, Macario & Salazar-Ordóñez, Melania & Sayadi, Samir, 2013. "Applying partial least squares to model genetically modified food purchase intentions in southern Spain consumers," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 44-53.
    9. Fatemeh Taheri & Hossein Azadi & Marijke D’Haese, 2017. "A World without Hunger: Organic or GM Crops?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-17, April.
    10. Donatella Di Gregorio & Matteo Bognanno & Valentina Rosa Laganà & Agata Nicolosi, 2022. "Local Proximity Cheeses: Choices That Guiding Consumers and Orienting Producers—Case Studies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-21, December.
    11. Katherine Mintz, 2017. "Arguments and actors in recent debates over US genetically modified organisms (GMOs)," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 7(1), pages 1-9, March.
    12. Dilshani Sarathchandra & Aaron M. McCright, 2017. "The Effects of Media Coverage of Scientific Retractions on Risk Perceptions," SAGE Open, , vol. 7(2), pages 21582440177, 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:jlaare:10148. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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/waeaaea.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.