|dc.description.abstract||Widespread consumer resistance towards genetically modified (GM), particularly as expressed in the news media, has led to slow adoption of this technology outside of North America.
Much of the resistance appears to stem from public perceptions that GM crops benefit large multinational corporations, food producers, and typically have no apparent consumer benefits.
In order to test whether clearly defined consumer benefits would change consumer preferences, a purchasing experiment has been conducted in New Zealand where the GM issue has been highly politicized, with cherries labelled as spray free-GM, organic or conventional. These were offered for sale in a roadside stall, with price levels manipulated to test price sensitivity of the different options.
Approximately 27 percent of consumers proved willing to purchase GM labelled cherries at the prevailing market price and this percentage increased as the price dropped.||en_NZ
|dc.description.references||Bech-Larsen T and Grunert K. 2000. Can health benefits break down Nordic consumers' rejection of genetically modified foods? A conjoint study of Danish, Norwegian, Swedish and Finnish consumers' preferences for hard cheese. Australia and New Zealand Marketing Academy, Gold Coast, Australia.
Belk R. 1985. Issues in the intention-behaviour discrepancy. Research in Consumer Behaviour 1: 1-34.
Boccaletti S and Moro D. 2000. Consumer willingness-to-pay for GM food products in Italy. AgBioForum 3: 259-267.
Bredahl L. 2001. Determinants of consumer attitudes and purchase intentions with regard to genetically modified foods - results of a cross-national survey. Journal of Consumer Policy 24: 2361.
Bredahl L, Grunert K and Frewer L J. 1998. Consumer attitudes and decision-making with regard to genetically-engineered food products - a review of the literature and a presentation of models for future research. Journal of Consumer Policy 21: 251-277.
Campbell H, Fitzgerald R, Saunders C and Sivak L. 2000. Strategic issues for GMOs in primary production:Key economic drivers and emerging issues. Centre for the Study of Agriculture, Food and Environment, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Eichelbaum T, Allan J, Fleming J and Randerson R. 2001. Report of the Royal Commission on Genetic Modification. Wellington, New Zealand.
Fortin D and Renton M. 2003. Consumer acceptance of genetically modified foods in New Zealand. British Food Journal 105: 42-58.
Frewer L J, Howard C and Shepherd R. 1995. Genetic engineering and food: what determines consumer acceptance? British Food Journal 97: 31-36.
Frewer L J, Scholderer J and Bredahl L. 2003. Communicating about the risks and benefits of genetically modified foods. The mediating role of trust. Risk Analysis 23: 117-133.
Gamble J and Gunson A. 2002. The New Zealand Public's Attitudes Regarding Genetically Modified Food. HortResearch, Mt Albert, New Zealand.
Gaskell G, Allum N and Stares S. 2003. Europeans and Biotechnology in 2002: Eurobarometer 58.0.
Gaskell G, Allum N, Wagner W, Kronberger N, Torgersen H, Hamper J and Bardes J. 2004. GM foods and the misperception of risk perception. Risk Analysis 24: 185-194.
Grunert K G, Lahteenmaki L, Nielsen N A, Poulsen J B, Ueland O and Astrom A. 2000. Consumer perception of food products involving genetic modification: results from a qualitative study in four Nordic countries, Working Paper no 72. Nordic Industrial Fund, Denmark.
Halford N and Shewry P. 2000. Genetically modified crops: methodology, benefits, regulation and public concerns. British Medical Bulletin 56: 62-73.
James C, Global status of commercialized biotech/GM crops: 2004. 2005. http://www.isaaa.org/kc/CBTNews/press_release/briefs32/ESummary/Executive%20Summary%20(English).pdf [10 May 2005].
King D. 2003. GM Science Review: First Report. The GM Science Review Panel, London, UK.
Knight J, Holdsworth D and Mather D. 2003. Trust and Country Image: Perceptions of European Food Distributors Regarding Factors That Could Enhance or Damage New Zealand's Image - Including GMOs. University of Otago, Dunedin, NZ.
Knight J, Mather D and Holdsworth D. In Press. Genetically modified crops and country image of food exporting countries. British Food Journal
Laros F and Steenkamp J-B E M. 2004. Importance of fear in the case of genetically modified food. Psychology and Marketing 21: 889-908.
Marris C, Wynne B, Simmons P and Weldon S. 2001. Public Perceptions of Agricultural Biotechnologies in Europe: Final Report of the PABE Research Project. Commission of European Communities, Brussels, Belgium.
Mather D, Knight J and Holdsworth D. In Press. Pricing differentials for organic, ordinary and genetically modified food. Journal of Product and Brand Management
Miles S and Frewer L. 2003. Public perception of scientific uncertainty in relation to food hazards. Journal of Risk Research 6: 267-283.
Moon W and Balasubramanian S. 2003. Is there a market for genetically modified foods in Europe? Contingent valuation of GM and non-GM breakfast cereals in the United Kingdom. Journal of Agrobiotechnology Management & Economics 6: article 6.
Noussair C, Robin S and Ruffieux B. 2004. Do consumers really refuse to buy genetically modified food? The Economic Journal 114: 102-121.
Paarlberg R. 2002. The real threat to GM crops in poor countries: consumer and policy resistance to GM foods in rich countries. Food Policy 27: 247-250.
Pattison C, Hedderley D and Frewer L J, Modelling Public Risk Perceptions for Lifestyle and Technological Hazards. 1996. http://www.riskworld.com/Abstract/1996/sraeurop/ab6ad008.htm [7 August 2004].
Pottier J. 1999. Anthropology of Food: The Social Dynamics of Food Security. Polity Press: Cambridge, UK.
Powell D, Blaine K, Morris S and Wilson J. 2003. Agronomic and consumer considerations for Bt and conventional sweet-corn. British Food Journal 105: 700-714.
Preston I. 1992. The Scandalous Record of Avoidable Errors in Expert Evidence offered in FTC and Lanham At Deceptiveness cases. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing 11: 57-67.
Richards J and Preston I. 2001. Proving and disproving materiality of deceptive advertising claims. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing 11: 45-56.
Scully J. 2003. Genetic engineering and perceived levels of risk. British Food Journal 105: 59-77.
Slovic P. 2000. The Perception of Risk. Earthscan: London.
Subrahmanyan S and Cheng P. 2000. Perceptions and Attitudes of Singaporeans toward Genetically Modified Food. Journal of Consumer Affairs 34: 269-290.
Tester M. 2001. The dangerously polarized debate on genetic modification. British Food Journal 103: 785-790.
Townsend E and Campbell S. 2004. Psychological determinants of willingness to taste and purchase genetically modified food. Risk Analysis 24: 1385-1393.||en_NZ