Author
Listed:
- Madison D. Horgan
(Department of Applied Ecology, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA)
- Christopher L. Cummings
(Genetic Engineering and Society Center, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA)
- Jennifer Kuzma
(Genetic Engineering and Society Center, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA
School of Public and International Affairs, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA)
- Michael Dahlstrom
(Greenlee School of Journalism and Communication, Iowa State University of Science and Technology, Ames, IA 50011, USA)
- Ilaria Cimadori
(Yale School of the Environment, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06511, USA)
- Maude Cuchiara
(North Carolina Plant Science Initiative, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27606, USA
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA)
- Colin Larter
(Department of Sociology and Criminal Justice, Iowa State University of Science and Technology, Ames, IA 50011, USA)
- Nick Loschin
(Department of Applied Ecology, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA
Genetic Engineering and Society Center, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA
North Carolina Plant Science Initiative, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27606, USA)
- Khara D. Grieger
(Department of Applied Ecology, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA
Genetic Engineering and Society Center, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA
North Carolina Plant Science Initiative, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27606, USA)
Abstract
Ensuring sustainable food systems is an urgent global priority as populations grow and environmental pressures mount. Technological innovations such as genetic engineering (GE) and nanotechnology (nano) have been promoted as promising pathways for achieving greater sustainability in agriculture and food production. Yet, the sustainability of these technologies is not defined by technical performance alone; it hinges on how they are perceived by key stakeholders and how well they align with broader societal values. This study addresses the critical question of how expert stakeholders evaluate the sustainability of GE and nano-based food and agriculture (agrifood) products. Using a multi-method online platform, we engaged 42 experts across academia, government, industry, and NGOs in the United States to assess six real-world case studies—three using GE and three using nano—across ten different dimensions of sustainability. We show that nano-based products were consistently rated more favorably than their GE counterparts in terms of environmental, economic, and social sustainability, as well as across ethical and societal dimensions. Like prior studies, our results reveal that stakeholders see meaningful distinctions between nanotechnology and biotechnology, likely due to underlying value-based concerns about animal welfare, perceived naturalness, or corporate control of agrifood systems. The fruit coating and flu vaccine—both nano-enabled—received the most positive ratings, while GE mustard greens and salmon were the most polarizing. These results underscore the importance of incorporating stakeholder perspectives in technology assessment and innovation governance. These results also suggest that responsible innovation efforts in agrifood systems should prioritize communication, addressing meaningful societal needs, and the contextual understanding of societal values to build trust and legitimacy.
Suggested Citation
Madison D. Horgan & Christopher L. Cummings & Jennifer Kuzma & Michael Dahlstrom & Ilaria Cimadori & Maude Cuchiara & Colin Larter & Nick Loschin & Khara D. Grieger, 2025.
"Beyond the Hype: Stakeholder Perceptions of Nanotechnology and Genetic Engineering for Sustainable Food Production,"
Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-26, July.
Handle:
RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:15:p:6795-:d:1710424
Download full text from publisher
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:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:15:p:6795-:d:1710424. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.