IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/34924.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A stakeholder approach to investigating public perception and attitudes towards agricultural biotechnology in Ghana

Author

Listed:
  • Yawson, Robert M.
  • Quaye, Wilhemina
  • Williams, Irene E.
  • Yawson, Ivy

Abstract

A stakeholder survey was conducted in Ghana to assess the level of public perceptions and acceptance of agricultural biotechnologies. A total of 100 respondents drawn from academia, Non-governmental organizations, business community, government and other stakeholders were interviewed on their views on self-protection attitudes, health and economic benefits, skepticism and optimism about agricultural biotechnologies as well as the level of confidence in existing government regulatory systems to protect society against any negative effects of biotechnological issues. Although half of the sample interviewed did not accept biotechnologies in general and GM foods in particular, there was rather high approval of some specific health and economic benefits. About 80 percent of the sample interviewed lack confidence in existing government regulatory systems probably due to inadequate capacity. Upgrading of the existing regulatory system with adequate capacity to regulate the ethical and moral issues associated with biotechnologies and GM foods was recommended

Suggested Citation

  • Yawson, Robert M. & Quaye, Wilhemina & Williams, Irene E. & Yawson, Ivy, 2008. "A stakeholder approach to investigating public perception and attitudes towards agricultural biotechnology in Ghana," MPRA Paper 34924, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:34924
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/34924/1/MPRA_paper_34924.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wanki Moon & Siva K. Balasubramanian, 2004. "Public Attitudes toward Agrobiotechnology: The Mediating Role of Risk Perceptions on the Impact of Trust, Awareness, and Outrage," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 26(2), pages 186-208.
    2. Hossain, Ferdaus & Onyango, Benjamin M. & Adelaja, Adesoji O. & Schilling, Brian J. & Hallman, William K., 2002. "Uncovering Factors Influencing Public Perceptions Of Food Biotechnology," Research Reports 18178, Rutgers University, Food Policy Institute.
    3. Wanki Moon & Siva K. Balasubramanian, 2004. "Public Attitudes toward Agrobiotechnology: The Mediating Role of Risk Perceptions on the Impact of Trust, Awareness, and Outrage," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 26(2), pages 186-208.
    4. Nicholas G. Kalaitzandonakes, 2000. "Agrobiotechnology and Competitiveness," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(5), pages 1224-1233.
    5. Baker, Gregory A. & Burnham, Thomas A., 2001. "The Market For Genetically Modified Foods: Consumer Characteristics And Policy Implications," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 4(4), pages 1-10.
    6. Baker, Gregory A. & Burnham, Thomas A., 2001. "Consumer Response To Genetically Modified Foods: Market Segment Analysis And Implications For Producers And Policy Makers," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 26(2), pages 1-17, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Costa-Font, Montserrat & Gil, José M. & Traill, W. Bruce, 2008. "Consumer acceptance, valuation of and attitudes towards genetically modified food: Review and implications for food policy," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 99-111, April.
    2. à frica Martínez-Poveda & Margarita Brugarolas Mollá-Bauzá & Francisco José del Campo Gomis & Laura Martínez Carrasco Martínez & Asunción Agulló Torres, 2019. "Consumer Perception of Gm Foods. Profiles of Potential Consumers and Non-Consumers in Spain," Current Investigations in Agriculture and Current Research, Lupine Publishers, LLC, vol. 7(3), pages 942-952, August.
    3. Ramu Govindasamy & Benjamin Onyango & William K. Hallman & Ho-Min Jang & Venkata Puduri, 2008. "Public approval of plant and animal biotechnology in South Korea: an ordered probit analysis," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(1), pages 102-118.
    4. 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.
    5. Harrison, R. Wes & Han, Jae-Hwan, 2005. "The Effects of Urban Consumer Perceptions on Attitudes for Labeling of Genetically Modified Foods," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 36(2), pages 1-10, July.
    6. Martinez-Poveda, Africa & Molla-Bauza, Margarita Brugarolas & del Campo Gomis, Francisco Jose & Martinez, Laura Martinez-Carrasco, 2009. "Consumer-perceived risk model for the introduction of genetically modified food in Spain," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 519-528, December.
    7. Moon, Wanki & Rimal, Arbindra & Balasubramanian, Siva K., 2004. "Willingness-to-Accept and Willingness-to-Pay for GM and Non-GM Food: UK Consumers," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20138, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    8. Quaye, Wilhemina & Yawson, Ivy & Yawson, Robert M. & Williams, Irene E., 2009. "Acceptance of biotechnology and social-cultural implications in Ghana," MPRA Paper 33237, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. 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.
    10. Jae-Hwan Han & R. Wes Harrison, 2007. "Factors Influencing Urban Consumers' Acceptance of Genetically Modified Foods," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 29(4), pages 700-719.
    11. Moon, Wanki & Balasubramanian, Siva K. & Rimal, Arbindra, 2006. "WTP and WTA for Non-GM and GM Food: UK Consumers," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21057, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    12. Luisa Menapace & Gregory Colson & Carola Grebitus & Maria Facendola, 2011. "Consumers' preferences for geographical origin labels: evidence from the Canadian olive oil market," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 38(2), pages 193-212, June.
    13. Onyango, Benjamin M., 2004. "Consumer Acceptance Of Genetically Modified Foods: The Role Of Product Benefits And Perceived Risks," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 35(1), pages 1-8, March.
    14. Jayson L. Lusk & Darren Hudson, 2004. "Willingness-to-Pay Estimates and Their Relevance to Agribusiness Decision Making," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 26(2), pages 152-169.
    15. Wendy J. Umberger & Dawn D. Thilmany McFadden & Amanda R. Smith, 2009. "Does altruism play a role in determining U.S. consumer preferences and willingness to pay for natural and regionally produced beef?," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(2), pages 268-285.
    16. Lucy Mallinson & Jean Russell & Duncan D. Cameron & Jurriaan Ton & Peter Horton & Margo E. Barker, 2018. "Why rational argument fails the genetic modification (GM) debate," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 10(5), pages 1145-1161, October.
    17. Cristina Marreiros & M. Raquel Lucas & Kerstin Röhrich, 2010. "Explaining organic food choice on the basis of socio-demographics.A study in Portugal and Germany," CEFAGE-UE Working Papers 2010_03, University of Evora, CEFAGE-UE (Portugal).
    18. John Cranfield & Spencer Henson & James Northey & Oliver Masakure, 2010. "An assessment of consumer preference for fair trade coffee in Toronto and Vancouver," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(2), pages 307-325.
    19. Kim, Renee B. & Boyd, Milton S., 2004. "Identification of Niche Market for Hanwoo Beef: Understanding Korean Consumer Preference for Beef using Market Segment Analysis," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 7(3), pages 1-19.
    20. Meldrum, James R. & Champ, Patricia A. & Bond, Craig A., 2013. "Heterogeneous nonmarket benefits of managing white pine bluster rust in high-elevation pine forests," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 61-77.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Biotechnology; Stakeholder; Acceptance; GM Foods;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A1 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics
    • L6 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing
    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products
    • A2 - General Economics and Teaching - - Economic Education and Teaching of Economics
    • L66 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - Food; Beverages; Cosmetics; Tobacco
    • N7 - Economic History - - Economic History: Transport, International and Domestic Trade, Energy, and Other Services
    • A10 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - General
    • P32 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Socialist Institutions and Their Transitions - - - Collectives; Communes; Agricultural Institutions
    • L24 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Contracting Out; Joint Ventures
    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy; Animal Welfare Policy
    • O14 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Industrialization; Manufacturing and Service Industries; Choice of Technology
    • Q16 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - R&D; Agricultural Technology; Biofuels; Agricultural Extension Services
    • Q1 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture
    • O1 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development
    • L2 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior
    • Q17 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agriculture in International Trade
    • P3 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Socialist Institutions and Their Transitions
    • N5 - Economic History - - Agriculture, Natural Resources, Environment and Extractive Industries

    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:pra:mprapa:34924. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.