IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jageco/v60y2009i3p604-624.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consumer Acceptance of Second-Generation GM Foods: The Case of Biofortified Cassava in the North-east of Brazil

Author

Listed:
  • Carolina González
  • Nancy Johnson
  • Matin Qaim

Abstract

Biofortified staple foods are currently being developed to reduce problems of micronutrient malnutrition among the poor. This partly involves use of genetic modification. Yet, relatively little is known about consumer acceptance of such second-generation genetically modified (GM) foods in developing countries. Here, we analyse consumer attitudes towards provitamin A GM cassava in the north-east of Brazil. Based on stated preference data, mean willingness to pay is estimated at 60-70% above market prices for traditional cassava. This is higher than the results from similar studies in developed countries, which is plausible given that micronutrient malnutrition is more severe in developing countries. GM foods with enhanced nutritive attributes seem to be well received by poor consumers. However, the results also suggest that acceptance would be still higher if provitamin A were introduced to cassava through conventional breeding. Some policy implications are discussed. Copyright (c) 2009 The Authors. Journal compilation (c) 2009 The Agricultural Economics Society.

Suggested Citation

  • Carolina González & Nancy Johnson & Matin Qaim, 2009. "Consumer Acceptance of Second-Generation GM Foods: The Case of Biofortified Cassava in the North-east of Brazil," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(3), pages 604-624.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jageco:v:60:y:2009:i:3:p:604-624
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1477-9552.2009.00219.x
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    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. Han, Jae-Hwan & Harrison, R. Wes, 2006. "Consumer Valuation of the Second Generation of Genetically Modified (GM) Foods with Benefits Disclosure," 2006 Annual Meeting, February 5-8, 2006, Orlando, Florida 35277, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    2. Simon Chege Kimenju & Hugo De Groote, 2008. "Consumer willingness to pay for genetically modified food in Kenya," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 38(1), pages 35-46, January.
    3. Rousu, Matthew C. & Monchuk, Daniel C. & Shogren, Jason F. & Kosa, Katherine M., 2005. "Consumer Willingness to Pay for "Second-Generation" Genetically Engineered Products and the Role of Marketing Information," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 37(03), December.
    4. McCluskey, Jill J. & Grimsrud, Kristine M. & Ouchi, Hiromi & Wahl, Thomas I., 2003. "Consumer Response to Genetically Modified Food Products in Japan," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 32(02), pages 222-231, October.
    5. Jayson L. Lusk, 2003. "Effects of Cheap Talk on Consumer Willingness-to-Pay for Golden Rice," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(4), pages 840-856.
    6. Klaus G. Grunert & Tino Bech-Larsen & Liisa Lähteenmäki & Øydis Ueland & Annika Åström, 2004. "Attitudes towards the use of GMOs in food production and their impact on buying intention: The role of positive sensory experience," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(1), pages 95-107.
    7. Lusk, Jayson L. & Jamal, Mustafa & Kurlander, Lauren & Roucan, Maud & Taulman, Lesley, 2005. "A Meta-Analysis of Genetically Modified Food Valuation Studies," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 30(01), April.
    8. Matin Qaim & Alexander J. Stein & J. V. Meenakshi, 2007. "Economics of biofortification," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 37(s1), pages 119-133, December.
    9. Peter A. Diamond & Jerry A. Hausman, 1994. "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 45-64, Fall.
    10. Matin Qaim & Alain de Janvry, 2003. "Genetically Modified Crops, Corporate Pricing Strategies, and Farmers' Adoption: The Case of Bt Cotton in Argentina," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(4), pages 814-828.
    11. Meenakshi, J.V. & Johnson, Nancy L. & Manyong, Victor M. & DeGroote, Hugo & Javelosa, Josyline & Yanggen, David R. & Naher, Firdousi & Gonzalez, Carolina & García, James & Meng, Erika, 2010. "How Cost-Effective is Biofortification in Combating Micronutrient Malnutrition? An Ex ante Assessment," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 64-75, January.
    12. Jayson L. Lusk & W. Bruce Traill & Lisa O. House & Carlotta Valli & Sara R. Jaeger & Melissa Moore & Bert Morrow, 2006. "Comparative Advantage in Demand: Experimental Evidence of Preferences for Genetically Modified Food in the United States and European Union," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(1), pages 1-21, March.
    13. John Calfee & Clifford Winston & Randolph Stempski, 2001. "Econometric Issues In Estimating Consumer Preferences From Stated Preference Data: A Case Study Of The Value Of Automobile Travel Time," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 83(4), pages 699-707, November.
    14. Anna Merino, 2003. "Eliciting consumers preferences using stated preference discrete choice models: Contingent ranking versus choice experiment," Economics Working Papers 705, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    15. Anna Merino, 2003. "Eliciting consumers preferences using stated preference discrete choice models: Contingent ranking versus choice experiment," Working Papers, Research Center on Health and Economics 705, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    16. Man-ser Jan & Tsu-tan Fu & Chung L. Huang, 2007. "A Conjoint/Logit Analysis of Consumers' Responses to Genetically Modified Tofu in Taiwan," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(2), pages 330-347, June.
    17. repec:oup:revage:v:30:y:2008:i:2:p:233-251. is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Onyango, Benjamin M. & Nayga, Rodolfo M., Jr., 2004. "Consumer Acceptance of Nutritionally Enhanced Genetically Modified Food: Relevance of Gene Transfer Technology," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 29(03), December.
    19. Breustedt, Gunnar & Muller-Scheessel, Jorg & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe, 2008. "Forecasting the Adoption of GM Oilseed Rape: Evidence from a Discrete Choice Experiment," 82nd Annual Conference, March 31 - April 2, 2008, Royal Agricultural College, Cirencester, UK 36771, Agricultural Economics Society.
    20. Gunnar Breustedt & Jörg Müller-Scheeßel & Uwe Latacz-Lohmann, 2008. "Forecasting the Adoption of GM Oilseed Rape: Evidence from a Discrete Choice Experiment in Germany," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(2), pages 237-256, June.
    21. Foster, Vivien & Mourato, Susana, 2002. "Testing for Consistency in Contingent Ranking Experiments," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 309-328, September.
    22. Ian J. Bateman & Richard T. Carson & Brett Day & Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Tannis Hett & Michael Jones-Lee & Graham Loomes, 2002. "Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2639, April.
    23. Mike Christie & Christopher D. Azevedo, 2009. "Testing the Consistency Between Standard Contingent Valuation, Repeated Contingent Valuation and Choice Experiments," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(1), pages 154-170.
    24. Vijesh V. Krishna & Matin Qaim, 2008. "Consumer Attitudes toward GM Food and Pesticide Residues in India," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 30(2), pages 233-251.
    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. von Meyer-Höfer, Marie & Juarez Tijerino, Andrea Maria & Spiller, Achim, 2015. "Sustainable food consumption in China and India," Discussion Papers 198718, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, GlobalFood, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
    2. Meyer-Höfer, Marie von & Spiller, Achim, 2015. ""Sustainability" a semi-globalisable concept for international food marketing: Consumer expectations regarding sustainable food," 143rd Joint EAAE/AAEA Seminar, March 25-27, 2015, Naples, Italy 202747, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. von Meyer-Höfer, Marie & Spiller, Achim, 2014. "“Sustainability” a semi-globalisable concept for international food marketing - Consumer expectations regarding sustainable food – An explorative survey in industrialised and emerging countries," Discussion Papers 182513, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, GlobalFood, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
    4. Schipmann, Christin & Qaim, Matin, 2011. "Supply chain differentiation, contract agriculture, and farmers’ marketing preferences: The case of sweet pepper in Thailand," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 667-677.
    5. Etumnu, Chinonso, 2016. "Behavioral Determinants of Biofortified Food Acceptance: The Case of Orange-fleshed Sweet Potato in Ghana," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, 2016, Boston, Massachusetts 235249, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Hans D. Steur & Jeroen Buysse & Shuyi Feng & Xavier Gellynck, 2013. "Role of Information on Consumers’ Willingness-to-pay for Genetically-modified Rice with Health Benefits: An Application to China," Asian Economic Journal, East Asian Economic Association, vol. 27(4), pages 391-408, December.
    7. Todua Nugzar & Gogitidze Teona & Phutkaradze Jaba, 2015. "Georgian Consumer Attitudes Towards Genetically Modified Products," International Journal of Management and Economics, De Gruyter Open, vol. 46(1), pages 120-133, June.
    8. Rim Lassoued & Konstantinos Giannakas, 2010. "Economic Effects of the Consumer-oriented Genetically Modified Products in Markets with a Labelling Regime," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 499-526.
    9. Schipmann, Christin & Qaim, Matin, 2011. "Supply chain differentiation, contract agriculture, and farmers’ marketing preferences: the case of sweet pepper in Thailand," Discussion Papers 108349, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, GlobalFood, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
    10. Fernandez-Cornejo, Jorge & Livingston, Michael J. & Mitchell, Lorraine & Wechsler, Seth, 2014. "Genetically Engineered Crops in the United States," Economic Research Report 164263, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.

    More about this item

    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:bla:jageco:v:60:y:2009:i:3:p:604-624. 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: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing) or (Christopher F. Baum). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0021-857X .

    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 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.

    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.