Consumer-perceived risk model for the introduction of genetically modified food in Spain

Martinez‐Poveda, África; Brugarolas, Margarita; Gomis, Francisco José del Campo; Martínez, Laura

doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2009.08.001

Cited by 68 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Resistance to pests and the herbicides used to control weeds have resulted in these new crops becoming popular with farmers so that millions of acres are being planted by them in the new millennium (Moon and Balasubramanian 2001;Huang et al 2004;Martinez-Poveda et al 2009). In 2008, GM crops were grown commercially by 13.3 million farmers on 125 million hectares spread across 25 countries.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Advocates of the use of genetic engineering techniques in food contend that this new biotechnology promises higher yields (Grunert et al 2000;Uzogara 2000;Moon and Balasubramanian 2001;Fritz et al 2003;Huang et al 2004;Chen and Li 2007;Martinez-Poveda et al 2009), lower prices (Huang et al 2004;Chen and Li 2007;Soregaroli et al 2003), less need for the use of both pesticides and herbicides (Grunert et al 2000;Moon and Balasubramanian 2001;Huang et al 2004;Martinez-Poveda et al 2009), longer shelf time (Zhong et al 2002); higher resistance to dry and excessive wet weather (Sheikhha et al 2006), improved nutritional quality and taste (Grunert et al 2000). Such benefits would promote agricultural productivity and hence increase food supplies for the growing population (Grunert et al 2000).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, some individuals see risks ranging from general concerns to specific fears in the use of biotechnology in food production. The general concerns include environmental pollution (Moseley 1999;Frewer et al 2000;Zhong et al 2002), crosspollination (Moseley 1999;Martinez-Poveda et al 2009), the possible creation of new viruses and toxins, limited access to seeds due to the patenting of GM plants, the threat to crop genetic diversity (Moon and Balasubramanian 2001;Martinez-Poveda et al 2009), religious, cultural, and ethical concerns (Thompson 1999 and also unknown consequences (Uzogara 2000).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Specific dark thoughts that haunt individuals' minds include the alteration in the nutritional quality of foods, potential toxicity, possible antibiotic resistance from GM crops (Moseley 1999) and potential allergenicity and carcinogenicity from consuming GM foods (Martinez-Poveda et al 2009). Critics also raise the possibility of gene transfer between GM and non-GM crops (Aerni 2001), a process that could have unpredictable results (Uzogara 2000).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Knowledge, Attitudes and Behavioral Intentions of Agricultural Professionals Toward Genetically Modified (GM) Foods: A Case Study in Southwest Iran

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While there has been a number of consumers' studies looking at factors that influence individuals' attitudes and behavior toward GM foods, few studies have considered agricultural professionals' intentions in this regard. This study illuminates agricultural professionals' insights toward GM foods in Southwest Iran. A random sample of 262 respondents was studied. The results indicated that the majority of the respondents had little knowledge about GM foods. They perceived few benefits or risks of GM foods.Their perceived benefits and trust in individuals and institutions had positive impacts on the behavioral intentions of the agricultural professionals. The results also revealed that the low knowledge level of the respondents had a negative impact on the behavioral intentions toward GM foods. This state of affairs is problematic, either GM foods have serious problems or the knowledge conveyed to the Iranian agricultural experts is inappropriate. We recommend a well defined communication strategy to provide 2 information in such a way that allows individuals to feel adequately informed about GM foods. Furthermore, the development of trust and knowledge regarding GM foods can be greater when risk analysis frameworks are transparent, risk assessment methodologies are objective, all stakeholders are engaged in the risk management process, and risk communication focuses on consumers.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Knowledge, Attitudes and Behavioral Intentions of Agricultural Professionals Toward Genetically Modified (GM) Foods: A Case Study in Southwest Iran

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Consumer concerns regarding GM products relate mostly to unanticipated health effects that may arise from direct consumption of GM products or products from animals fed GM ingredients (Malarkey, 2003;Dona and Arvanitoyannis, 2009;Martinez-Poveda et al, 2009). Before market release in the European Union GM products are subjected to comprehensive short-term risk assessment, which cannot predict the consequences arising from long-term consumption by a genetically diverse population (Wal et al, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of feeding genetically modified Bt MON810 maize to ∼40-day-old pigs for 110 days on growth and health indicators

Buzoianu

Walsh

Rea

et al. 2012

animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A total of 72 male weaned pigs were used in a 110-day study to investigate the effect of feeding genetically modified (GM) Bt MON810 maize on selected growth and health indicators. It was hypothesised that in pigs fed Bt maize, growth and health are not impacted compared with pigs fed isogenic maize-based diets. Following a 12-day basal period, pigs (10.7 ± 1.9 kg body weight (BW); ∼40 days old) were blocked by weight and ancestry and randomly assigned to treatments: (1) non-GM maize diet for 110 days (non-GM), (2) GM maize diet for 110 days (GM), (3) non-GM maize diet for 30 days followed by GM maize diet up to day 110 (non-GM/GM) and (4) GM maize diet for 30 days followed by non-GM maize diet up to day 110 (GM/non-GM). BW and daily feed intake were recorded on days 0, 30, 60 and 110 (n= 15). Body composition was determined by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (n= 10) on day 80. Following slaughter on day 110, organs and intestines were weighed and sampled for histological analysis and urine was collected for biochemical analysis (n= 10). Serum biochemistry analysis was performed on days 0, 30, 60, 100 and 110. Growth performance and serum biochemistry were analysed as repeated measures with time and treatment as main factors. Thesliceoption of SAS was used to determine treatment differences at individual time points. There was no effect of feeding GM maize on overall growth, body composition, organ and intestinal weight and histology or serum biochemistry on days 60 and 100 and on urine biochemistry on day 110. A treatment × time interaction was observed for serum urea (SU;P< 0.05), creatinine (SC;P< 0.05) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST;P< 0.05). On day 30, SU was lower for the non-GM/GM treatment compared with the non-GM, GM and GM/non-GM treatments (P< 0.05). On day 110, SC was higher for the non-GM/GM and GM/non-GM treatments compared with non-GM and GM treatments (P< 0.05). Overall, serum total protein was lower for the GM/non-GM treatment compared with the non-GM/GM treatment (P< 0.05). The magnitude of change observed in some serum biochemical parameters did not indicate organ dysfunction and the changes were not accompanied by histological lesions. Long-term feeding of GM maize to pigs did not adversely affect growth or the selected health indicators investigated.

show abstract

Maintaining a Supply of Non‐GM Feed – A Strategic Issue for European Regional Agriculture

Layadi¹

2012

Genetically Modified and Non‐Genetically Modified Food Supply Chains: Co‐Existence and Traceability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Consumer-perceived risk model for the introduction of genetically modified food in Spain

Cited by 68 publications

References 35 publications

Knowledge, Attitudes and Behavioral Intentions of Agricultural Professionals Toward Genetically Modified (GM) Foods: A Case Study in Southwest Iran

Knowledge, Attitudes and Behavioral Intentions of Agricultural Professionals Toward Genetically Modified (GM) Foods: A Case Study in Southwest Iran

Effect of feeding genetically modified Bt MON810 maize to ∼40-day-old pigs for 110 days on growth and health indicators

Maintaining a Supply of Non‐GM Feed – A Strategic Issue for European Regional Agriculture

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About