Literature DB >> 12969412

Consumer risk perceptions toward agricultural biotechnology, self-protection, and food demand: the case of milk in the United States.

Lydia Zepeda1, Robin Douthitt, So-Ye You.   

Abstract

This study is an econometric systems approach to modeling the factors and linkages affecting risk perceptions toward agricultural biotechnology, self-protection actions, and food demand. This model is applied to milk in the United States, but it can be adapted to other products as well as other categories of risk perceptions. The contribution of this formulation is the ability to examine how explanatory factors influence risk perceptions and whether they translate into behavior and ultimately what impact this has on aggregate markets. Hadden's outrage factors on heightening risk perceptions are among the factors examined. In particular, the article examines the role of labeling as a means of permitting informed consent to mitigate outrage factors. The effects of attitudinal, economic, and demographic factors on risk perceptions are also explored, as well as the linkage between risk perceptions, consumer behavior, and food demand. Because risk perceptions and self-protection actions are categorical variables and demand is a continuous variable, the model is estimated as a two-stage mixed system with a covariance correction procedure suggested by Amemiya. The findings indicate that it is the availability of labeling, not the price difference, between that labeled milk and milk produced with recombinant bovine Somatotropin (rbST) that significantly affects consumer's selection of rbST-free milk. The results indicate that greater availability of labeled milk would not only significantly increase the proportion of consumers who purchased labeled milk, its availability would also reduce the perception of risk associated with rbST, whether consumers purchase it or not. In other words, availability of rbST-free milk translates into lower risk perceptions toward milk produced with rbST.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12969412     DOI: 10.1111/1539-6924.00374

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Risk Anal        ISSN: 0272-4332            Impact factor:   4.000


  4 in total

1.  Beyond Risk Considerations: Where and How Can a Debate About Non-safety Related Issues of Genome Editing in Agriculture Take Place?

Authors:  Sarah Bechtold
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2018-11-26       Impact factor: 5.753

2.  Public attitudes towards genetically modified polled cattle.

Authors:  Emilie McConnachie; Maria Jose Hötzel; Jesse A Robbins; Adam Shriver; Daniel M Weary; Marina A G von Keyserlingk
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-05-10       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Bioengineering microbial communities: Their potential to help, hinder and disgust.

Authors:  Diane Sivasubramaniam; Ashley E Franks
Journal:  Bioengineered       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 3.269

4.  Mandatory labels can improve attitudes toward genetically engineered food.

Authors:  Jane Kolodinsky; Jayson L Lusk
Journal:  Sci Adv       Date:  2018-06-27       Impact factor: 14.136

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.