IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/waealb/36535.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Hawaii Public Opinion On Agricultural Products Derived From Genetically Modified Organism (Gmo) Technology

Author

Listed:
  • Ferguson, Carol
  • Chan-Halbrendt, Catherine
  • Wen, Na

Abstract

This article studied Hawaii public opinion on agricultural products and processes using GMO technology. We used telephone to interview the people in each island of Hawaii. We found out that the favorability rating toward the attributes of GMO technological application differ based on the nature of GMO benefits. And sociodemographic variables played a significant difference in the preference of using GMO technology on producing agricultural products and process. Most significant associations were gender and island of residence. Age, education and ethnic background significantly also influenced the attitude of respondents toward some of GMO attributes. The fewest significant associations were heard of GMO and income.

Suggested Citation

  • Ferguson, Carol & Chan-Halbrendt, Catherine & Wen, Na, 2002. "Hawaii Public Opinion On Agricultural Products Derived From Genetically Modified Organism (Gmo) Technology," 2002 Annual Meeting, July 28-31, 2002, Long Beach, California 36535, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:waealb:36535
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.36535
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/36535/files/sp02fe02.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.36535?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. Lynn J Frewer & Chaya Howard & Richard Shepherd, 1998. "Understanding public attitudes to technology," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(3), pages 221-235, July.
    2. Oral Capps & Randall A. Kramer, 1985. "Analysis of Food Stamp Participation Using Qualitative Choice Models," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 67(1), pages 49-59.
    3. 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.
    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. Soregaroli, Claudio & Boccaletti, Stefano & Moro, Daniele, 2003. "Consumer's Attitude Towards Labeled and Unlabeled GM Food Products in Italy," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 6(2), pages 1-17.

    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. Visschers, Vivianne H.M. & Siegrist, Michael, 2012. "Fair play in energy policy decisions: Procedural fairness, outcome fairness and acceptance of the decision to rebuild nuclear power plants," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 292-300.
    2. Garcia, Philip & Hudson, Michael A. & Waller, Mark L., 1988. "The Pricing Efficiency of Agricultural Futures Markets: An Analysis of Previous Research Results," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(1), pages 119-130, July.
    3. Nicolás Bronfman & Pamela Cisternas & Esperanza López-Vázquez & Luis Cifuentes, 2016. "Trust and risk perception of natural hazards: implications for risk preparedness in Chile," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 81(1), pages 307-327, March.
    4. Cao, Ying (Jessica) & Cranfield, John & Chen, Chen & Widowski, Tina, 2021. "Heterogeneous informational and attitudinal impacts on consumer preferences for eggs from welfare enhanced cage systems," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    5. Juliana Martins Ruzante & Valerie J. Davidson & Julie Caswell & Aamir Fazil & John A. L. Cranfield & Spencer J. Henson & Sven M. Anders & Claudia Schmidt & Jeffrey M. Farber, 2010. "A Multifactorial Risk Prioritization Framework for Foodborne Pathogens," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(5), pages 724-742, May.
    6. Wang, H. Holly & Young, Douglas L. & Camara, Oumou M., 2000. "The Role Of Environmental Education In Predicting Adoption Of Wind Erosion Control Practices," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 25(2), pages 1-12, December.
    7. Visschers, Vivianne H.M. & Keller, Carmen & Siegrist, Michael, 2011. "Climate change benefits and energy supply benefits as determinants of acceptance of nuclear power stations: Investigating an explanatory model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3621-3629, June.
    8. Barbara A. Knuth & Nancy A. Connelly & Judy Sheeshka & Jacqueline Patterson, 2003. "Weighing Health Benefit and Health Risk Information when Consuming Sport‐Caught Fish," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(6), pages 1185-1197, December.
    9. R. M. Wasantha Rathnayake, "undated". "Estimating Demand for Turtle Conservation at the Rekawa Sanctuary in Sri Lanka," Working papers 92, The South Asian Network for Development and Environmental Economics.
    10. Huang, Ying, 2012. "an econometric study of the impact of economic variables on adult obesity and food assistance program participation in the NLSY panel," ISU General Staff Papers 201201010800003717, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    11. McAleer, Michael, 1995. "The significance of testing empirical non-nested models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 149-171, May.
    12. Caffey, Rex H. & Kazmierczak, Richard F., Jr., 1994. "Factors Influencing Technology Adoption In A Louisiana Aquaculture System," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 26(1), pages 1-11, July.
    13. Lillywhite, Jay M. & Simonsen, J., 2008. "Understanding Factors That Influence Breeders to Sell Bulls at Performance Tests," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 40(3), pages 1-13, December.
    14. Xiaoqin Zhu & Xiaofei Xie, 2015. "Effects of Knowledge on Attitude Formation and Change Toward Genetically Modified Foods," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(5), pages 790-810, May.
    15. Naoko Kato-Nitta & Tadahiko Maeda & Yusuke Inagaki & Masashi Tachikawa, 2019. "Expert and public perceptions of gene-edited crops: attitude changes in relation to scientific knowledge," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-14, December.
    16. Djokoto, Justice Gameli & Afari-Sefa, Victor, 2017. "Alternative functional forms for technology choice: Application to cocoa production technologies," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 110-120.
    17. Mkhabela, T.S., 2002. "Determinants Of Manure Use By Small-Scale Crop Farmers In The Kwazulu-Natal Province: A Logit Analysis," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 41(1).
    18. Jones, Eugene & Batte, Marvin T. & Schnitkey, Gary D., 1990. "A Socioeconomic Analysis Of Marketing Information Usage Among Ohio Fruit Producers," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 22(2), pages 1-9, December.
    19. Makus, Larry D. & Guenthner, Joseph F. & Lin, Biing-Hwan, 1992. "Factors Influencing Producer Support For A State Mandatory Seed Law: An Empirical Analysis," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 17(2), pages 1-8, December.
    20. Erdem, Seda & Rigby, Dan, 2011. "Using Best Worst Scaling To Investigate Perceptions Of Control & Concern Over Food And Non-Food Risks," 85th Annual Conference, April 18-20, 2011, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 108790, Agricultural Economics Society.

    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:waealb:36535. 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/waeaaea.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.