Consumer Autonomy and Availability of Genetically Modified Food

Siipi, Helena; Uusitalo, Susanne

doi:10.1007/s10806-010-9250-x

Cited by 16 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, it has been asserted that "produced using genetic engineering" labels not only provide consumers with information, but may also send a signal that influences individual preferences. If labels signal more than information by influencing consumer preferences either for or against Genetically engineered (GE) foods, consumers lose autonomy and self-determination in their decision making (Siipi and Uusitalo 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How consumers use mandatory genetic engineering (GE) labels: evidence from Vermont

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Food labels legislated by the U.S. government have been designed to provide information to consumers. It has been asserted that the simple disclosures "produced using genetic engineering" on newly legislated U.S. food labels will send a signal that influences individual preferences rather than providing information. Vermont is the only US state to have experienced mandatory labeling of foods produced using genetic engineering (GE) via simple disclosures. Using a representative sample of adults who experienced Vermont's mandatory GE labeling policy, we examined whether GE labels were seen by consumers and whether the labels provided information or influenced preferences. Nearly one-third of respondents reported seeing a label. Higher income, younger consumers who search for information about GE were more likely to report seeing a label. We also estimated whether labels served as information cues that helped reveal consumer preferences through purchases, or whether labels served as a signal that influenced preferences and purchases. For 50.5% of consumers who saw a label, the label served as an information cue that revealed their preferences. For 13% of those who saw the label, the label influenced preferences and behavior. Overall, for 4% of the total sample, simple GE disclosures influenced preferences. For a slight majority of consumers who used a GE label, simple disclosures were an information signal and not a preference signal. Searching for GE information, classifying as female, older age and opposing GE in food production significantly increased the probability that GE labels served as an information source. Providing such disclosures to consumers may be the least complex and most transparent option for mandatory GE labeling.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How consumers use mandatory genetic engineering (GE) labels: evidence from Vermont

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Actually, the debate on consumer responsibility is more demanding than the debate about a fair share of goods. Many now claim that it is not the market, but the consumer who could achieve a turn-around in the economic sphere (Siipi and Uusitalo 2011). Since the system of the market depends on consumer choices, a shift of preferences and responsible behavior would be a very powerful mechanism in order to change market structures.…”

Section: Consumer Citizenshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Normative Limits of Consumer Citizenship

Kallhoff

2015

J Agric Environ Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the underlying technology behind the GM food technology was deemed to be unique and subject to patent protection. Thus, in the United States a policy developed which separated the process of GM technology from the actual product itself (Siipi & Uusitalo, 2011). By way of contrast, in a 2001 ruling the Food and Drug Administration allowed for the voluntary labeling of organic and natural foods-in effect, logically combining the process and the product but only for non-GM products.…”

Section: Global Trends In Gm Labeling Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, this is not an ultimate decision as each of the individual countries can then over-rule the decision of the European Commission and institute a ban on a national basis (Carlsson, Frykblom, & Lagerkvist, 2007). The net effect of this set of regulatory procedures combined with the mandatory labeling policy in the European Union has resulted in the near absence of GM food products in the retail marketplace (Siipi & Uusitalo, 2011).…”

Section: Global Trends In Gm Labeling Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The rationales supporting the provision of consumer information differ depending on the type of regulation adopted. Significant debate has addressed whether GM food labeling supports the principle of consumer autonomy (McKay & Veeman, 2007), which is usually associated with product labeling (Siipi & Uusitalo, 2011). Labeling policies focused on production process are supported by the belief that purchase decisions are based, not only on product related issues, but on environmental, religious, or ethical concerns (Gruere & Rao, 2007).…”

Section: Introduction mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Will California Proposition 37 Affect Genetically Modified Food Labeling Policy in the United States

2013

CUBR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Foods derived from genetically modified (GM) crops include fruits, vegetables, and grains and are the result of a process by which foreign genes are spliced into a related or non-related species resulting in a genetically modified organism. Genetically modified foods have been a part of the food chain in the United States for more than a decade while incurring little of the controversy exhibited in European countries. Paralleling this divergence in consumer attitudes are differences in national policies regarding labeling of GM foods. While the countries of the European Union and others have adopted a policy of mandatory labeling of GM content the United States has followed a policy of voluntary disclosure. California Proposition 37 called for the implementation of mandatory labeling of GM foods within the state and has major implications regarding policy in the rest of the United States. This paper examines the literature regarding national policies toward GM food labeling in the United States, Canada, Europe, Australia, Japan and other economies and is followed by a discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of GM labeling policies that has been developed in this research stream. The results of the recent election in California are presented and analyzed on a county by county basis. Finally, the implications for policy changes in the United States are explored.

show abstract

Consumer Autonomy and Availability of Genetically Modified Food

Abstract: The European Union's policies regarding genetically modified food (GMF hereafter) are based on the precautionary principle and the requirement of respecting consumers' autonomy. We ask whether the requirement of respecting consumers' autonomy regarding GMF implies that both GMF and non-GMF

Cited by 16 publications

References 29 publications

How consumers use mandatory genetic engineering (GE) labels: evidence from Vermont

How consumers use mandatory genetic engineering (GE) labels: evidence from Vermont

The Normative Limits of Consumer Citizenship

Will California Proposition 37 Affect Genetically Modified Food Labeling Policy in the United States

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About