IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/canjag/v68y2020i1p47-63.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Canadian consumer acceptance of gene‐edited versus genetically modified potatoes: A choice experiment approach

Author

Listed:
  • Violet Muringai
  • Xiaoli Fan
  • Ellen Goddard

Abstract

In 2016, second‐generation genetically modified (GM) potatoes were approved for production and sale in Canada. In this study, we analyze how consumer acceptance of GM potatoes may be affected by various factors, including the trait introduced (i.e., the product benefits), the type of breeding technology used, and the developer of the potato using any technology. We conduct an online survey and use a stated choice experiment to collect data on consumer acceptance of GM and other potatoes in Canada. Random utility models are used to analyze the economic value consumers place on the various attributes of the potatoes. Our results show that consumers are willing to pay more for a health attribute (reduced acrylamide produced when potatoes are fried) and an environmental attribute. Respondents in general need to face discounted prices to buy potatoes created by either gene editing or GM (either transgenic or cisgenic/intragenic) technologies. However, consumers are in general more accepting of the gene editing technology than the GM technologies. Our results also show that government is the most preferred developer of the potatoes, regardless of technology. Results from this study can help guide public and private management of the introduction of new foods when the products are developed with unpopular technologies. En 2016, la production et la vente de pommes de terre de deuxième génération génétiquement modifiées (GM) ont été approuvées au Canada. Dans cette étude, nous analysons comment l'acceptation par les consommateurs des pommes de terre génétiquement modifiées peut être affectée par divers facteurs, notamment le caractère introduit (c'est‐à‐dire les avantages du produit), le type de technologie de sélection utilisée et le développeur de la pomme de terre, peu importe la technologie. Nous menons un sondage en ligne et utilisons une expérience de choix déclaré pour recueillir des données sur l'acceptation par les consommateurs des pommes de terre GM et autres au Canada. Des modèles d'utilité aléatoires sont utilisés pour analyser la valeur économique que les consommateurs accordent aux divers attributs des pommes de terre. Nos résultats montrent que les consommateurs sont prêts à payer plus pour un attribut santé (réduction de l'acrylamide produite lorsque les pommes de terre sont frites) et un attribut environnemental. Les répondants en général doivent obtenir des réductions de prix pour accepter d'acheter des pommes de terre créées soit l’édition de gènes, soit par des technologies GM (transgéniques ou cisgéniques / intragéniques). Cependant, les consommateurs acceptent généralement plus la technologie d'édition de gènes que les technologies GM. Nos résultats montrent également que le gouvernement est le développeur préféré des pommes de terre, quelle que soit la technologie. Les résultats de cette étude peuvent aider à guider les secteurs public et privé pour l'introduction de nouveaux aliments lorsque les produits sont développés avec des technologies impopulaires.

Suggested Citation

  • Violet Muringai & Xiaoli Fan & Ellen Goddard, 2020. "Canadian consumer acceptance of gene‐edited versus genetically modified potatoes: A choice experiment approach," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 68(1), pages 47-63, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:canjag:v:68:y:2020:i:1:p:47-63
    DOI: 10.1111/cjag.12221
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/cjag.12221
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/cjag.12221?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Stephan S. Marette & Anne-Célia Disdier & John C Beghin, 2020. "A Comparison of EU and US consumers' willingness to pay for gene-edited food: Evidence from apples," PSE Working Papers halshs-02872222, HAL.
    2. John C. Beghin & Christopher R. Gustafson, 2021. "Consumer Valuation of and Attitudes towards Novel Foods Produced with New Plant Engineering Techniques: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-17, October.
    3. Rim Lassoued & Janet Music & Sylvain Charlebois & Stuart J. Smyth, 2023. "Canadian Consumers’ Perceptions of Sustainability of Food Innovations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-22, April.
    4. Kelvin Balcombe & Dylan Bradley & Iain Fraser, 2020. "The Economic Analysis of Consumer Attitudes Towards Food Produced Using Prohibited Production Methods: Do Consumers Really Care?," Studies in Economics 2004, School of Economics, University of Kent.
    5. repec:ags:aaea22:335499 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Stéphan Marette & John Beghin & Anne‐Célia Disdier & Eliza Mojduszka, 2023. "Can foods produced with new plant engineering techniques succeed in the marketplace? A case study of apples," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(1), pages 414-435, March.
    7. Bindu Paudel & Deepthi E. Kolady & David Just & Evert Van der Sluis, 2023. "Determinants of consumer acceptance of gene‐edited foods and its implications for innovators and policymakers," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(3), pages 623-645, July.
    8. 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.
    9. Hu, Yang & House, Lisa A. & Gao, Zhifeng, 2022. "How do consumers respond to labels for crispr (gene-editing)?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    10. Kelvin Balcombe & Dylan Bradley & Iain Fraser, 2021. "Do Consumers Really Care? An Economic Analysis of Consumer Attitudes Towards Food Produced Using Prohibited Production Methods," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(2), pages 452-469, June.
    11. J. Ross Pruitt & Kaitlyn M. Melton & Marco A. Palma, 2021. "Does Physical Activity Influence Consumer Acceptance of Gene Edited Food?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-12, July.
    12. Valerie Kilders & Vincenzina Caputo, 2021. "Is Animal Welfare Promoting Hornless Cattle? Assessing Consumer’s Valuation for Milk from Gene‐edited Cows under Different Information Regimes," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(3), pages 735-759, September.
    13. Gesa Busch & Erin Ryan & Marina A. G. Keyserlingk & Daniel M. Weary, 2022. "Citizen views on genome editing: effects of species and purpose," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(1), pages 151-164, March.
    14. Paudel, Bindu & Kolady, Deepthi Elizabeth & Just, David R. & Van Der Sluis, Evert, 2021. "Determinants of consumer acceptance of genetically modified and gene-edited foods: Market and policy implications," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 313905, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    15. Götz, Linde & Svanidze, Miranda & Tissier, Alain & Brand Duran, Alejandro, 2022. "Consumers’ willingness to Buy CRISPR gene-edited tomatoes: Evidence from a choice experiment case study in Germany," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 14(2).
    16. Yulian Ding & Jianyu Yu & Yangyang Sun & Rodolfo M. Nayga & Yunyun Liu, 2023. "Gene‐edited or genetically modified food? The impacts of risk and ambiguity on Chinese consumers' willingness to pay," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 54(3), pages 414-428, May.

    More about this item

    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:bla:canjag:v:68:y:2020:i:1:p:47-63. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/caefmea.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.