IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/revage/v26y2004i2p186-208..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public Attitudes toward Agrobiotechnology: The Mediating Role of Risk Perceptions on the Impact of Trust, Awareness, and Outrage

Author

Listed:
  • Wanki Moon
  • Siva K. Balasubramanian

Abstract

Using Fishbein's multiattribute and mediation models as conceptual frameworks, we propose that the impact of trust, awareness, sense of outrage, and socio-demographic variables on attitudes toward agrobiotechnology are mediated by risk perceptions. The proposition was validated using large survey data collected in the United States and United Kingdom. Results show that trust, sense of outrage, and socio-demographic factors play an important role in shaping public attitudes about agrobitoechnology, largely via their links to risk perceptions. Moreover, risk perceptions exert a greater effect on public attitudes toward agrobiotechnology than benefit perceptions. Finally, the attitudes of U.K. consumers were more susceptible to negative attributes when compared with U.S. consumers.

Suggested Citation

  • Wanki Moon & Siva K. Balasubramanian, 2004. "Public Attitudes toward Agrobiotechnology: The Mediating Role of Risk Perceptions on the Impact of Trust, Awareness, and Outrage," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 26(2), pages 186-208.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:revage:v:26:y:2004:i:2:p:186-208.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/j.1467-9353.2004.00170.x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lusk, Jayson L. & Fox, John A., 2002. "Consumer Demand for Mandatory Labeling of Beef from Cattle Administered Growth Hormones or Fed Genetically Modified Corn," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 34(1), pages 27-38, April.
    2. Heiman, Amir & Just, David R. & Zilberman, David, 2000. "The Role Of Socioeconomic Factors And Lifestyle Variables In Attitude And The Demand For Genetically Modified Foods," Journal of Agribusiness, Agricultural Economics Association of Georgia, vol. 18(3), pages 1-12.
    3. Wanki Moon & Wojciech J. Florkowski & Larry R. Beuchat & Anna V. A. Resurreccion & Manjeet S. Chinnan & Pavlina Paraskova & Jordan Jordanov, 1999. "Effects of product attributes and consumer characteristics on attitude and behavior: The case of peanuts in a transition economy," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(3), pages 411-425.
    4. Misra, Sukant K. & Huang, Chung L. & Ott, Stephen L., 1991. "Consumer Willingness To Pay For Pesticide-Free Fresh Produce," Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 16(2), pages 1-10, December.
    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. Owusu, Rebecca & Dadzie, Samuel Kwesi Ndzebah, 2021. "Heterogeneity in consumer preferences for organic and genetically modified food products in Ghana," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 16(2), June.
    2. Jae-Hwan Han & R. Wes Harrison, 2007. "Factors Influencing Urban Consumers' Acceptance of Genetically Modified Foods," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 29(4), pages 700-719.
    3. Ventura, Vera & Frisio, Dario G. & Ferrazzi, Giovanni, 2015. "How Scary! An analysis of visual communication concerning genetically modified organisms in Italy," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211921, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Han, Y. & Lam, J. & Guo, P. & Gou, Z., 2019. "What Predicts Government Trustworthiness in Cross-border HK-Guangdong Nuclear Safety Emergency Governance?," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1989, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    5. Harrison, R. Wes & Han, Jae-Hwan, 2005. "The Effects of Urban Consumer Perceptions on Attitudes for Labeling of Genetically Modified Foods," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 36(2), pages 1-10, July.
    6. Canavari, Maurizio & Tisselli, Farid & Nayga, Rodolfo M., Jr. & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2009. "Italian Consumer Acceptance of Nutritionally Enhanced GM Food," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 51651, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Bocker, Andreas & Nocella, Giuseppe, 2005. "Trust in Authorities Monitoring the Distribution of Genetically Modified Foods: Dimensionality, Measurement Issues, and Determinants," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24605, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Moon, Wanki & Rimal, Arbindra & Balasubramanian, Siva K., 2004. "Willingness-to-Accept and Willingness-to-Pay for GM and Non-GM Food: UK Consumers," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20138, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    9. Moon, Wanki & Griffith, Jacob Wayne, 2011. "Assessing holistic economic value for multifunctional agriculture in the US," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 455-465, August.
    10. Moon, Wanki & Balasubramanian, Siva K. & Rimal, Arbindra, 2006. "WTP and WTA for Non-GM and GM Food: UK Consumers," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21057, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    11. Gabriella Vindigni & Iuri Peri & Federica Consentino & Roberta Selvaggi & Daniela Spina, 2022. "Exploring Consumers’ Attitudes towards Food Products Derived by New Plant Breeding Techniques," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-14, May.
    12. Boecker, Andreas & Nocella, Giuseppe, 2006. "A Critical Account of the Relationship between Institutional Trust, Risk Perception, and Technology Acceptance with an Application to Genetically Modified Foods," 99th Seminar, February 8-10, 2006, Bonn, Germany 7749, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. Martinez-Poveda, Africa & Molla-Bauza, Margarita Brugarolas & del Campo Gomis, Francisco Jose & Martinez, Laura Martinez-Carrasco, 2009. "Consumer-perceived risk model for the introduction of genetically modified food in Spain," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 519-528, December.
    14. Liuyang Yao & Qian Zhang & Kin Keung Lai & Xianyu Cao, 2020. "Explaining Local Residents’ Attitudes toward Shale Gas Exploitation: The Mediating Roles of Risk and Benefit Perceptions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-13, October.
    15. Ramu Govindasamy & Benjamin Onyango & William K. Hallman & Ho-Min Jang & Venkata Puduri, 2008. "Public approval of plant and animal biotechnology in South Korea: an ordered probit analysis," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(1), pages 102-118.
    16. Lingyi Zhou & Yixin Dai, 2017. "How Smog Awareness Influences Public Acceptance of Congestion Charge Policies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-15, September.
    17. Yawson, Robert M. & Quaye, Wilhemina & Williams, Irene E. & Yawson, Ivy, 2008. "A stakeholder approach to investigating public perception and attitudes towards agricultural biotechnology in Ghana," MPRA Paper 34924, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Simon Chege Kimenju & Hugo De Groote, 2008. "Consumer willingness to pay for genetically modified food in Kenya," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 38(1), pages 35-46, January.
    19. à frica Martínez-Poveda & Margarita Brugarolas Mollá-Bauzá & Francisco José del Campo Gomis & Laura Martínez Carrasco Martínez & Asunción Agulló Torres, 2019. "Consumer Perception of Gm Foods. Profiles of Potential Consumers and Non-Consumers in Spain," Current Investigations in Agriculture and Current Research, Lupine Publishers, LLC, vol. 7(3), pages 942-952, August.
    20. Timothy C. Earle, 2010. "Trust in Risk Management: A Model‐Based Review of Empirical Research," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(4), pages 541-574, April.
    21. Timothy C. Earle, 2010. "Distinguishing Trust from Confidence: Manageable Difficulties, Worth the Effort Reply to: Trust and Confidence: The Difficulties in Distinguishing the Two Concepts in Research," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(7), pages 1025-1027, July.
    22. Han, Jae-Hwan & Harrison, R. Wes, 2006. "Consumer Valuation of the Second Generation of Genetically Modified (GM) Foods with Benefits Disclosure," 2006 Annual Meeting, February 5-8, 2006, Orlando, Florida 35277, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    23. Jerrod Penn & Hannah Penn & Wuyang Hu, 2018. "Public Knowledge of Monarchs and Support for Butterfly Conservation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-16, March.
    24. Costa-Font, Montserrat & Gil, José M. & Traill, W. Bruce, 2008. "Consumer acceptance, valuation of and attitudes towards genetically modified food: Review and implications for food policy," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 99-111, April.

    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. Jae-Hwan Han & R. Wes Harrison, 2007. "Factors Influencing Urban Consumers' Acceptance of Genetically Modified Foods," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 29(4), pages 700-719.
    2. Rodríguez, Elsa Mirta M. & Lacaze, María Victoria & Lupín, Beatriz, 2007. "Willingness to pay for organic food in Argentina: evidence from a consumer survey," Nülan. Deposited Documents 1300, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    3. Schulz, Lee L. & Schroeder, Ted C. & White, Katharine L., 2012. "Value of Beef Steak Branding: Hedonic Analysis of Retail Scanner Data," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 41(2), pages 1-14, August.
    4. Owusu, Victor & Owusu, Michael Anifori, 2010. "Measuring Market Potential for Fresh Organic Fruit and Vegetable in Ghana," 2010 AAAE Third Conference/AEASA 48th Conference, September 19-23, 2010, Cape Town, South Africa 95955, African Association of Agricultural Economists (AAAE).
    5. repec:zib:zbseps:v:2:y:2022:2:1:p:44-52 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Batie, Sandra S. & Swinton, Scott M. & Schulz, Mary A., 1999. "Fqpa Implementation To Reduce Pesticide Residue Risks: Part I: Agricultural Producer Concerns," Staff Paper Series 11813, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    7. Eric Giraud-Héraud & Cristina Grazia & Abdelhakim Hammoudi, 2012. "Explaining the Emergence of Private Standards in Food Supply Chains," Working Papers hal-00749345, HAL.
    8. Jayson L. Lusk & F. Bailey Norwood & J. Ross Pruitt, 2006. "Consumer Demand for a Ban on Antibiotic Drug Use in Pork Production," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(4), pages 1015-1033.
    9. Erjon Nexhipi, 2022. "The difference in consumer attitudes of locally grown apples with imported apples. the case of Korca Region, Albania:," Technium Social Sciences Journal, Technium Science, vol. 37(1), pages 250-264, November.
    10. Bazoche, P. & Deola, C. & Soler, Louis-Georges, 2008. "An experimental study of wine consumers’ willingness to pay for environmental characteristics," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 43651, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Riccardo SCARPA & Fiorenza SPALATRO & Maurizio CANAVARI, 2005. "Investigating Preferences For Environment Friendly Production," Others 0505003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. E. O. Chukwuma-Nwuba, 2013. "The Failure of Most Entrepreneurial Technological Innovations to Diffuse: What the Literatures Say," International Journal of Management Sciences, Research Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 1(11), pages 463-470.
    13. Dangelico, Rosa Maria & Alvino, Letizia & Fraccascia, Luca, 2022. "Investigating the antecedents of consumer behavioral intention for sustainable fashion products: Evidence from a large survey of Italian consumers," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    14. Pongsapak Chindasombatcharoen & Pattanaporn Chatjuthamard & Pornsit Jiraporn & Sirimon Treepongkaruna, 2022. "Achieving sustainable development goals through board size and innovation," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(4), pages 664-677, August.
    15. Maurizio Canavari & Andreas C. Drichoutis & Jayson L. Lusk & Rodolfo M. Nayga, Jr., 2018. "How to run an experimental auction: A review of recent advances," Working Papers 2018-5, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    16. Harrison, R. Wes & Mclennon, Everald, 2004. "Analysis of Consumer Preferences for Biotech Labeling Formats," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 36(1), pages 1-13, April.
    17. Fredrik Carlsson & Peter Frykblom & Carl-Johan Lagerkvist, 2004. "Consumer Benefits of Labels and Bans on GMO Foods: An Emprical Analysis Using Choice Experiments," Working Papers 04-02, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    18. Gautam, Ruskin & Gustafson, Christopher R. & Brooks, Kathleen R., 2017. "Label Position and it Impacts on WTP for Products Containing GMO," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258105, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    19. Schrettle, Stefan & Hinz, Andreas & Scherrer -Rathje, Maike & Friedli, Thomas, 2014. "Turning sustainability into action: Explaining firms' sustainability efforts and their impact on firm performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(PA), pages 73-84.
    20. Ravenswaay, Eileen O. van, 1993. "Research Needs in the Valuation of Food Safety and Nutrition," Staff Paper Series 201172, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    21. Verbeke, Wim & Ward, Ronald W., 2003. "Importance of EU Label Requirements: An Application of Ordered Probit Models to Belgium Beef Labels," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22077, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:revage:v:26:y:2004:i:2:p:186-208.. 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: Oxford University Press or Christopher F. Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    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.