Analyzing the Relative Value of Food Labelling on Organic and Origin of Tofu

Yang, Sung-Bum

doi:10.11625/kjoa.2014.22.2.229

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…And, for both products, the relative importance of the origin of raw material was higher than the production technology. This is similar to the findings of Stanton et al [ 41 ] and Yang [ 44 ], in which the preference for the origin of raw materials was greater than that for the production method (e.g., whether or not the raw material is organic) when purchasing apples and tofu, implying that the respondents are more confident in food safety represented by the raw material’s origin than by the production method.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Consumer Acceptance of Gene-Edited versus Genetically Modified Foods in Korea

Son

Lim

2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Food made with gene-editing has received considerable attention in recent years because it is claimed to be a little different from traditional genetically modified breeding methods concerning safety. However, consumer acceptance of these novel foods and their potential market uptake remains to be answered. This study aims to assess differences in the acceptance of gene-edited and genetically modified foods in Korea. The choice-based conjoint analysis is adopted to estimate part-worth functions for the soybean oil attributes with 200 surveyed samples. The estimated part-worth values reveal how much each attribute affects consumers’ decision-making. Estimated results suggest that consumers tend to accept gene-editing more than genetically modified foods. The acceptance of novel technology is shown to correspond closely to the degree of consumers’ scientific knowledge, highlighting the importance of revealing relevant information regarding the technology. Results also show that country of origin is a significant food-specific attitudinal factor in shaping consumer preferences.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%