IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i17p9970-d629853.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Marketing Clues on the Label Raise the Purchase Intention of Genetically Modified Food

Author

Listed:
  • Dan Jiang

    (School of Economics and Management, Wuhan University, Wuhan 43000, China)

  • Guangling Zhang

    (School of Economics and Management, Wuhan University, Wuhan 43000, China)

Abstract

As more and more genetically modified foods (GMFs) must be labeled, adding more information to increase the willingness to buy genetically modified food has become the focus of scholars and enterprises. Most current studies have confirmed that the consumer attitudes and purchase intention toward GMFs are not good. This study aims to match consumers’ different information-processing mechanisms by adding marketing information clues and regulating their purchase intentions by contradictory attitudes towards GMFs. According to the interest demands of GMFs, the marketing clue information was divided into functional information and environmental information. Through two studies, we find that consumers are more inclined to environmental information than heuristic. Functional information is more attractive to males, and the young generation prefers ecological information. Consumers with high ambivalence towards genetically modified foods are more inclined to choose environmental attribute information.

Suggested Citation

  • Dan Jiang & Guangling Zhang, 2021. "Marketing Clues on the Label Raise the Purchase Intention of Genetically Modified Food," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-20, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:17:p:9970-:d:629853
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/17/9970/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/17/9970/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Popp, Jozsef & Olah, Judit & Fari, Miklos & Balogh, Peter & Lakner, Zoltan, 2018. "The GM-regulation game – the case of Hungary," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 21(7), March.
    2. David Wuepper & Philipp Wree & Goezde Ardali, 2019. "Does information change German consumers’ attitudes about genetically modified food?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(1), pages 53-78.
    3. L. J. Frewer & C. Howard & D. Hedderley & R. Shepherd, 1996. "What Determines Trust in Information About Food‐Related Risks? Underlying Psychological Constructs," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 473-486, August.
    4. Ashkan Pakseresht & Brandon R McFadden & Carl Johan Lagerkvist, 2017. "Consumer acceptance of food biotechnology based on policy context and upstream acceptance: evidence from an artefactual field experiment," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 44(5), pages 757-780.
    5. Smith, Pamela J. & Jamiyansuren, Bolormaa & Kitsuki, Akinori & Yang, Jooyoung & Lee, Jaeseok, 2018. "Determinants of Comparative Advantage in GMO Intensive Industries," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(3), pages 427-449, July.
    6. Bovay, John & Alston, Julian M., 2018. "GMO food labels in the United States: Economic implications of the new law," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 14-25.
    7. Sallie James & Michael Burton, 2003. "Consumer preferences for GM food and other attributes of the food system," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(4), pages 501-518, December.
    8. W. Bruce Traill, 2004. "Effect of information about benefits of biotechnology on consumer acceptance of genetically modified food: evidence from experimental auctions in the United States, England, and France," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 31(2), pages 179-204, June.
    9. Agnes Emberger‐Klein & Marina Zapilko & Klaus Menrad, 2016. "Consumers’ Preference Heterogeneity for GM and Organic Food Products in Germany," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(2), pages 203-221, April.
    10. Susan Miles & Christine Hafner & Suzanne Bolhaar & Eloina González Mancebo & Montserrat Fernández‐Rivas & André Knulst & Karin Hoffmann‐Sommergruber, 2006. "Attitudes Towards Genetically Modified Food with a Specific Consumer Benefit in Food Allergic Consumers and Non‐food Allergic Consumers," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(7), pages 801-813.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hwanseok Seo & Jaehyun Hwang, 2022. "Analysis of Decisive Elements in the Purchase of Alternative Foods Using Bivariate Probit Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-12, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Eunae Son & Song Soo Lim, 2021. "Consumer Acceptance of Gene-Edited versus Genetically Modified Foods in Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-17, April.
    2. Lusk, Jayson L. & Jamal, Mustafa & Kurlander, Lauren & Roucan, Maud & Taulman, Lesley, 2005. "A Meta-Analysis of Genetically Modified Food Valuation Studies," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 30(1), pages 1-17, April.
    3. Astrid Dannenberg & Sara Scatasta & Bodo Sturm, 2009. "Keine Chance für genetisch veränderte Lebensmittel in Deutschland? Eine experimentelle Analyse von Zahlungsbereitschaften," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 10(2), pages 214-234, May.
    4. Lynn J. Frewer & Chaya Howard & Duncan Hedderley & Richard Shepherd, 1998. "Methodological Approaches to Assessing Risk Perceptions Associated with Food‐Related Hazards," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(1), pages 95-102, February.
    5. McFadden, Brandon R. & Lusk, Jayson L., 2013. "Effects of Cost and Campaign Advertising on Support for California’s Proposition 37," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(2), pages 1-13, August.
    6. Su, Lianfan & Adam, Brian D. & Lusk, Jayson L. & Arthur, Frank, 2011. "A Comparison of Auction and Choice Experiment: An Application to Consumer Willingness to Pay for Rice with Improved Storage Management," 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 103975, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Li Zhao & Shumin Liu & Haiying Gu & David Ahlstrom, 2023. "Risk Amplification, Risk Preference and Acceptance of Transgenic Technology," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-22, September.
    8. Johanna Pfeiffer & Andreas Gabriel & Markus Gandorfer, 2021. "Understanding the public attitudinal acceptance of digital farming technologies: a nationwide survey in Germany," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(1), pages 107-128, February.
    9. Hu, R. & Deng, H., 2018. "A Crisis of Consumers’ Trust in Scientists and Influence on Consumer Attitude," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 276047, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Huffman, Wallace E., 2010. "Consumer Acceptance of Genetically Modified Foods: Traits, Labels and Diverse Information," Working Papers 93168, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    11. Anderson, Kym & Jackson, Lee Ann, 2004. "GM food technology abroad and its implications for Australia and New Zealand," 2004 Conference (48th), February 11-13, 2004, Melbourne, Australia 58365, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    12. GianCarlo Moschini, 2008. "Biotechnology and the development of food markets: retrospect and prospects," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 35(3), pages 331-355, September.
    13. Loureiro, Maria L. & Umberger, Wendy J., 2007. "A choice experiment model for beef: What US consumer responses tell us about relative preferences for food safety, country-of-origin labeling and traceability," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 496-514, August.
    14. Kliem, Lea & Sagebiel, Julian, 2023. "Consumers' preferences for commons-based and open-source produce: A discrete choice experiment with directional information manipulations," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    15. Hellyer, Nicole Elizabeth & Fraser, Iain & Haddock-Fraser, Janet, 2012. "Food choice, health information and functional ingredients: An experimental auction employing bread," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 232-245.
    16. Lee, Yunkyung & Perrin, Richard K. & Fulginiti, Lilyan E., 2022. "Potential Economic Impacts of Gene-edited High-oleic Soybeans," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322392, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    17. Alfnes, Frode & Steine, Gro, 2005. "None-of-These Bias in Stated Choice Experiments," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24761, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Hanna Valerie Wolf & Tanja Perko & Peter Thijssen, 2020. "How to Communicate Food Safety after Radiological Contamination: The Effectiveness of Numerical and Narrative News Messages," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-19, June.
    19. Wheeler, Sarah Ann, 2008. "What influences agricultural professionals' views towards organic agriculture?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 145-154, March.
    20. Colson, Gregory, 2009. "Improving nutrient content through genetic modification: Evidence from experimental auctions on consumer acceptance and willingness to pay for intragenic foods," ISU General Staff Papers 200901010800001872, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:17:p:9970-:d:629853. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.