IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/agrhuv/v14y1997i1p59-66.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The bST debate: The relationship between awareness and acceptance of technological advances

Author

Listed:
  • David Smith
  • J. Skalnik
  • Patricia Skalnik

Abstract

Despite concerns of consumer protection andenvironmental groups that the use of geneticallyproduced growth hormone in milk-producing cows mayadversely impact the safety of the milk supply,scientific evidence and governmental findings from theUSA appear to indicate that milk fromtreated cows is identical in quality, taste, andnutritional value to milk from untreated cows. Limitedexperience to date in the USA demonstrateslittle consumer resistance to milk from cows that havereceived the growth hormone, which can lead to a 15%increase in milk production. In fact, if there is noperceived differentiation between the two forms ofmilk, the issue offers little choice to consumers atlarge, and may result in economic benefit only toselected dairy farmers, as well as the producers ofthe genetically produced growth hormone. Thissituation in the USA may be an example ofdysfunctional technology transfer, with desirablebenefits to a few, and as yet unknown benefits to thesociety. The USA has taken a bold move inapproving the use of bovine growth hormone in milk-producing cows, while the European Union has takena divergent approach by enacting lengthy moratoriumsagainst its use. The basic lesson to be learned fromthe bST case is that lack of awareness amonggovernment officials and the public at large serves asa significant impediment to the adoption of newtechnologies. Accordingly, delays may occur indelivery of significant social benefits to thepopulation as a whole. Obviously, the issue extendsbeyond bST. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 1997

Suggested Citation

  • David Smith & J. Skalnik & Patricia Skalnik, 1997. "The bST debate: The relationship between awareness and acceptance of technological advances," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 14(1), pages 59-66, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:14:y:1997:i:1:p:59-66
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1007389720705
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1023/A:1007389720705
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/A:1007389720705?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
    ---><---

    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. Lynn Frewer & Richard Shepherd, 1995. "Ethical concerns and risk perceptions associated with different applications of genetic engineering: Interrelationships with the perceived need for regulation of the technology," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 12(1), pages 48-57, December.
    2. Joanna Chataway & Joyce Tait, 1993. "Is risk regulation a strategic influence on decision making in the biotechnology industry?," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 10(2), pages 60-67, March.
    3. Pascal Byé & Maria Fonte, 1993. "Towards science-based techniques in agriculture," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 10(2), pages 16-25, March.
    4. Loren W. Tauer, 1994. "The value of segmenting the milk market into bST-Produced and Non-bST-Produced milk," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(1), pages 3-12.
    5. Joseph Havlicek, 1986. "Megatrends Affecting Agriculture: Implications for Agricultural Economics," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 68(5), pages 1053-1064.
    6. Roberto Fanfani & Raúl Green & Manuel Zuñiga, 1993. "Biotechnologies in the agro-food sector: A limited impact," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 10(2), pages 68-74, March.
    7. Gerd Junne, 1993. "Agricultural biotechnology: Slow applications by large corporations," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 10(2), pages 40-46, March.
    8. John Wilkinson, 1993. "Adjusting to a demand oriented food system: New directions for biotechnology innovation," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 10(2), pages 31-39, March.
    9. Blayney, Don P. & Fallent, Richard F. & Shagam, Shayle D., 1991. "Controversy Over Livestock Growth Hormones Continues," Food Review/ National Food Review, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, vol. 14(4), October.
    10. Paul Sparks & Richard Shepherd & Lynn Frewer, 1994. "Gene technology, food production, and public opinion: A UK study," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 11(1), pages 19-28, December.
    11. Rodolfo M. Nayga & Lukman M. Baga, 1995. "Economic reforms and firm level strategic planning," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(6), pages 565-572.
    12. Frederick Buttel, 1993. "Ideology and agricultural technology in the late twentieth century: Biotechnology as symbol and substance," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 10(2), pages 5-15, March.
    13. Havlicek Jr., Joseph, 1986. "Megatrends Affecting Agriculture: Implications For Agricultural Economics," 1986 Annual Meeting, July 27-30, Reno, Nevada 278432, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    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. Kazumi Kondoh & Raymond Jussaume, 2006. "Contextualizing farmers’ attitudes towards genetically modified crops," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 23(3), pages 341-352, October.
    2. Macfarlane, Ronald, 2002. "Integrating the consumer interest in food safety: the role of science and other factors+," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 65-80, February.

    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. Jordan, Jeffrey L. & Elnagheeb, Abdelmoneim H., 1992. "The Structure Of Citizen Preferences For Government Soil Erosion Control Programs," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 24(2), pages 1-10, December.
    2. Deaton, Brady J., 1996. "What is Agricultural Economics? A View From University Administration," AAEA Miscellaneous Paper Archive 337283, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    3. Rodolfo M. Nayga & Lukman M. Baga, 1995. "Economic reforms and firm level strategic planning," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(6), pages 565-572.
    4. Babb, Emerson M. & Long, Burl F., 1987. "The Role Of Alternative Agricultural Enterprises In A Changing Agricultural Economy," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 19(1), pages 1-9, July.
    5. R. E. Westgren & S. T. Sonka & K. K. Litzenberg, 1988. "Strategic issue identification among agribusiness firms," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 4(1), pages 25-37.
    6. Jau-Rong Li & Dawn D. Thilmany, 1998. "Branded pork consumption in Taiwan: Analysis of market and product choice," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(2), pages 127-138.
    7. Lynn Frewer & Chaya Howard & Richard Shepherd, 1998. "The influence of initial attitudes on responses to communication about genetic engineering in food production," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 15(1), pages 15-30, March.
    8. Johanna Pfeiffer & Andreas Gabriel & Markus Gandorfer, 2021. "Understanding the public attitudinal acceptance of digital farming technologies: a nationwide survey in Germany," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(1), pages 107-128, February.
    9. L.J. Frewer & D. Hedderley & C. Howard & R. Shepherd, 1997. "‘Objection’ mapping in determining group and individual concerns regarding genetic engineering," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 14(1), pages 67-79, March.
    10. Lohr, Luanne & Krissoff, Barry, 2001. "Consumer Effects Of Harmonizing International Standards For Trade In Organic Foods," Faculty Series 16726, University of Georgia, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    11. Abbas Mohammed Hussein & Mohammed Mustafa Ahmed & Mohamed Yahya Mahmoud Khudari, 2021. "The Impact of Strategic Planning in the University’s Competitiveness According to NIAS," Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, Richtmann Publishing Ltd, vol. 10, September.
    12. Emily Duncan & Alesandros Glaros & Dennis Z. Ross & Eric Nost, 2021. "New but for whom? Discourses of innovation in precision agriculture," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(4), pages 1181-1199, December.
    13. Ellen Townsend & David D. Clarke & Betsy Travis, 2004. "Effects of Context and Feelings on Perceptions of Genetically Modified Food," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(5), pages 1369-1384, October.
    14. Livia Ortolani & Riccardo Bocci & Paolo Bàrberi & Sally Howlett & Véronique Chable, 2017. "Changes in Knowledge Management Strategies Can Support Emerging Innovative Actors in Organic Agriculture: The Case of Participatory Plant Breeding in Europe," Organic Farming, Librello publishing house, vol. 3(1), pages 20-33.
    15. Lohr, Luanne, 1998. "Welfare Effects Of Eco-Label Proliferation: Too Much Of A Good Thing?," Faculty Series 16642, University of Georgia, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    16. Michael Siegrist, 2003. "Perception of gene technology, and food risks: results of a survey in Switzerland," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 45-60, January.
    17. 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.
    18. Tran, Van & Yiannaka, Amalia & Giannakas, Konstantinos, 2016. "Consumer Perceptions And Willingness-To-Pay For Nanotechnology Applications That Enhance Food Safety," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235918, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    19. Blayney, Don P., 1994. "Milk and Biotechnology: Maintaining Safe, Adequate Mille Supplies," Food Review/ National Food Review, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, vol. 17(2), May.
    20. Lockie, Stewart & Lawrence, Geoffrey & Lyons, Kristen & Grice, Janet, 2005. "Factors underlying support or opposition to biotechnology among Australian food consumers and implications for retailer-led food regulation," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 399-418, August.

    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:spr:agrhuv:v:14:y:1997:i:1:p:59-66. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.