IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ssefpa/v8y2016i3d10.1007_s12571-016-0572-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Attitudes toward genetically modified organisms in Poland: to GMO or not to GMO?

Author

Listed:
  • Piotr Rzymski

    (Poznan University of Medical Sciences)

  • Aleksandra Królczyk

    (Poznan University of Medical Sciences)

Abstract

Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are a subject of on-going scientific, political and social discussions in Member States of the European Union (EU) concerning their use, benefits, risks, safety and limitations. EU societies have every right to substantive information and education in biotechnology, yet they appear to be misinformed by contradictory views and sensationalism. The present study investigated the level of knowledge and the attitude of citizens of Poland (n = 1021) towards the various uses of GMOs. As found, the use of GMOs in medicine and pharmacy received slight approval from the surveyed group, and was generally perceived as the greatest benefit of GMOs. In contrast, most respondents were against the production and distribution of GM food products on the Polish market or at least favoured the labelling of any product that contains a GM component. The majority of individuals who were willing to accept GM foods also demanded their labelling. The studied group revealed various concerns related to the safety of GM foods, particularly their potential effect on health and the environment. Generally, the greatest scepticism towards GMOs and GM foods was expressed by farmers, medical workers and school teachers while the greatest enthusiasm was shown by students of medical and life sciences, and researchers/academicians. Importantly, most of those taking part in the survey admitted that their knowledge of GMOs was insufficient, expressed a willingness to improve it, and expected school teachers, academicians and researchers to be actively involved in this process. In conclusion, the present study underlines the urgent need to implement evidence-based educational programmes so as to raise the public understanding of the current possibilities and limitations of GMO-based technology in Poland.

Suggested Citation

  • Piotr Rzymski & Aleksandra Królczyk, 2016. "Attitudes toward genetically modified organisms in Poland: to GMO or not to GMO?," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 8(3), pages 689-697, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:ssefpa:v:8:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1007_s12571-016-0572-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s12571-016-0572-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12571-016-0572-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s12571-016-0572-z?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. Annelies Verdurme & Jacques Viaene, 2003. "Consumer beliefs and attitude towards genetically modified food: Basis for segmentation and implications for communication," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(1), pages 91-113.
    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. Changxin Yu & Haiyan Deng & Ruifa Hu, 2019. "Attitude Gaps with Respect to GM Non-Food Crops and GM Food Crops and Confidence in the Government’s Management of Biotechnology: Evidence from Beijing Consumers, Chinese Farmers, Journalists, and Gov," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-19, December.
    2. Edward Royzman & Corey Cusimano & Robert F. Leeman, 2017. "What lies beneath? Fear vs. disgust as affective predictors of absolutist opposition to genetically modified food and other new technologies," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 12(5), pages 466-480, September.
    3. Bimal Kumar Ghimire & Chang Yeon Yu & Won-Ryeol Kim & Hee-Sung Moon & Joohyun Lee & Seung Hyun Kim & Ill Min Chung, 2023. "Assessment of Benefits and Risk of Genetically Modified Plants and Products: Current Controversies and Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-25, January.
    4. Rongting Zhou & Dong Wang & Ahmad Nabeel Siddiquei & Muhammad Azfar Anwar & Ali Hammad & Fahad Asmi & Qing Ye & Muhammad Asim Nawaz, 2019. "GMO/GMF on Social Media in China: Jagged Landscape of Information Seeking and Sharing Behavior through a Valence View," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-19, December.
    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. repec:cup:judgdm:v:13:y:2018:i:6:p:639-651 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Waldhof, Gabi & Fritsche, Ulrich, 2023. "Understanding moral narratives as drivers of polarization about genetically engineered crops," WiSo-HH Working Paper Series 78, University of Hamburg, Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences, WISO Research Laboratory.
    8. repec:cup:judgdm:v:12:y:2017:i:5:p:466-480 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Corey Cusimano & Edward B. Royzman & Robert F. Leeman & Stephen Metas, 2018. "Measurement is the core disgust problem: Response to Inbar and Scott (2018)," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 13(6), pages 639-651, November.
    10. Linda Ferrari, 2022. "Farmers' attitude toward CRISPR/Cas9: The case of blast resistant rice," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(1), pages 175-194, January.

    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. 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.
    2. Chuanhui Liao & Xiaomei Zhou & Dingtao Zhao, 2018. "An Augmented Risk Information Seeking Model: Perceived Food Safety Risk Related to Food Recalls," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-17, August.
    3. 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.
    4. Tuncay Turan TARABOĞLU & Tuğba Nur TOPALOĞLU & Serdar YAMAN, 2019. "The Effects of Macroeconomic Indicators on Leveraged Forex Volume: Evidence from Turkey," Istanbul Business Research, Istanbul University Business School, vol. 48(2), pages 160-175, November.
    5. Mutenje, M.J. & Ortmann, G.F. & Ferrer, S.R.D., 2011. "Management of non-timber forestry products extraction: Local institutions, ecological knowledge and market structure in South-Eastern Zimbabwe," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 454-461, January.
    6. Sevtap ÜNAL & F. Görgün DEVECİ & Tuğba YILDIZ, 2019. "The main aim of this study is determining which consumption motives and personal and social factors affect organic food buying decisions. Ajzen’s Planned Behavior Theory (TPB) is used to explain consu," Istanbul Business Research, Istanbul University Business School, vol. 48(1), pages 1-35, May.
    7. Caputo, Vincenzina & Scarpa, Riccardo & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Ortega, David L., 2018. "Are preferences for food quality attributes really normally distributed? An analysis using flexible mixing distributions," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 10-27.
    8. Takashi Ishida & Atsushi Maruyama & Shinichi Kurihara, 2022. "Risk Communication under Conflicting Information: The Role of Confidence in Subjective Risk Assessment," Journal of Food Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 11(1), pages 1-1, January.
    9. Liu, Pengcheng, 2009. "Consumers’ WTA for GM rice cookie: an experiment study in China," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 51771, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Mingyang Zhang & Chao Chen & Wuyang Hu & Lijun Chen & Jintao Zhan, 2016. "Influence of Source Credibility on Consumer Acceptance of Genetically Modified Foods in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-16, September.
    11. 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.
    12. Elena Laborda & Felipe Del-Busto & Carmen Bartolomé & Víctor Fernández, 2023. "Analysing the Social Acceptance of Bio-Based Products Made from Recycled Absorbent Hygiene Products in Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-38, February.

    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:ssefpa:v:8:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1007_s12571-016-0572-z. 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.