IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/jlofdr/27714.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consumer Attitudes Toward Genetic Modification and Other Possible Production Attributes for Chicken

Author

Listed:
  • Bernard, John C.
  • Pan, Xiqian
  • Sirolli, Ryan

Abstract

Today's consumers face foods whose production attributes they are often largely unfamiliar with and uncertain about. This study surveyed Delaware consumers about labeling, health risk concerns, and knowledge of five potential attributes for chicken: free-range, treated with antibiotics, irradiated, fed genetically modified (GM) feed, and GM chicken. Respondents were highly in favor of labeling all attributes, and perceived a high health risk from and had a low self-reported knowledge of many of the attributes. Gender, tobacco use, and label reading habits were significant factors in explaining the difference in responses. An analysis of survey comments further demonstrated the extent of consumer concerns.

Suggested Citation

  • Bernard, John C. & Pan, Xiqian & Sirolli, Ryan, 2005. "Consumer Attitudes Toward Genetic Modification and Other Possible Production Attributes for Chicken," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 36(2), pages 1-11, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:jlofdr:27714
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.27714
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/27714/files/36020001.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.27714?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. Buzby, Jean C. & Morrison, Rosanna Mentzer, 1999. "Food Irradiation-An Update," Food Review/ National Food Review, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, vol. 22(2), May.
    2. Hossain, Ferdaus & Onyango, Benjamin M. & Schilling, Brian J. & Hallman, William K., 2003. "Public Perceptions Of Biotechnology And Acceptance Of Genetically Modified Food," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 34(3), pages 1-15, November.
    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. Sneeringer, Stacy & MacDonald, James & Key, Nigel & McBride, William & Mathews, Ken, 2015. "Economics of Antibiotic Use in U.S. Livestock Production," Economic Research Report 229202, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.

    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. Brianne Suldovsky & William K. Hallman, 2022. "The National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard of 2016: Intersection of Technology and Public Understanding of Science in the United States," Societies, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-15, September.
    2. Crutchfield, Stephen R. & Roberts, Tanya, 2000. "Food Safety Efforts Accelerate in the 1990's," Food Review/ National Food Review, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, vol. 23(3), September.
    3. Mangen, Marie-Josee J. & Poppe, Krijn J. & Havelaar, Arie H., 2005. "Controlling Campylobacter in the chicken meat chain; Estimation of intervention costs," Report Series 29108, Wageningen University and Research Center, Agricultural Economics Research Institute.
    4. 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.
    5. Katarzyna Zagórska & Mikołaj Czajkowski & Nick Hanley, 2022. "“GMO – Doesn’t Have To Go!” – Consumers’ Preferences Towards Genetically Modified Products Labelling and Sale," Working Papers 2022-07, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    6. 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.
    7. Spencer Henson & Mamane Annou & John Cranfield & Joanne Ryks, 2008. "Understanding Consumer Attitudes Toward Food Technologies in Canada," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(6), pages 1601-1617, December.
    8. Ekanem, Enefiok P. & Muhammad, Safdar & Mafuyai-Ekanem, Mary & Tegegne, Fisseha & Singh, Surendra P., 2005. "Producer Biotech Food Knowledge Differences: Findings from a Three-State Survey," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 36(1), pages 1-6, March.

    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:jlofdr:27714. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fdrssea.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.