IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/gmcc15/211639.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Gaining Societal Acceptance of Biotechnology: The Case for Societal Engagement

Author

Listed:
  • Van Acker, Rene
  • Cici, S. Zahra H.
  • Lohuis, Michael
  • Ryan, Camille
  • Sachs, Eric

Abstract

The acceptance of GMO's by society is critical in terms of the evolution and use of the technology because without it, companies have no social license to operate. But gaining societal acceptance in the new media era may pose special challenges and require unique strategies. Public engagement is one strategy for gaining societal acceptance. Companies that deal directly with the majority of society (e.g. food companies) mount public engagement initiatives. Companies commercializing genetically modified (GM) crops have up till now mounted more traditional corporate affairs initiatives aimed at deregulation goals and not societal acceptance per se. Approaches including food democracy, GM labeling and transparency and dialogue will be required to achieve greater societal acceptance of GM crops.

Suggested Citation

  • Van Acker, Rene & Cici, S. Zahra H. & Lohuis, Michael & Ryan, Camille & Sachs, Eric, 2015. "Gaining Societal Acceptance of Biotechnology: The Case for Societal Engagement," GMCC-15: Seventh GMCC, November 17-20, 2015, Amsterdam, the Netherlands 211639, International Conference on Coexistence between Genetically Modified (GM) and non-GM based Agricultural Supply Chains (GMCC).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:gmcc15:211639
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.211639
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/211639/files/Van%20Acker_%20Cici_%20Lohuis_%20Ryan_%20Sachs%20-%20Gaining%20Societal%20Acceptance%20of%20Biotechnology%20-%20The%20Case%20for%20Societal%20Engagement%20%20GMCC-15.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.211639?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Kynda R. Curtis & Klaus Moeltner, 2006. "Genetically Modified Food Market Participation and Consumer Risk Perceptions: A Cross‐Country Comparison," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 54(2), pages 289-310, June.
    3. Lynn J. Frewer & Susan Miles & Roy Marsh, 2002. "The Media and Genetically Modified Foods: Evidence in Support of Social Amplification of Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(4), pages 701-711, August.
    4. Vigani, Mauro & Olper, Alessandro, 2013. "GMO standards, endogenous policy and the market for information," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 32-43.
    5. Unknown, 2015. "Towards A Sustainable Soil Fertility Strategy in Ghana," Miscellaneous Publications 212898, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    6. Jean-Marc Roda & Maxime Goralski & Anthony Benoist & Anaphel Baptiste & Valentine Boudjema & Theodoros Galanos & Marine Georget & Jean-Eudes Hévin & Simon Lavergne & Frédéric Eychenne & Kan Ern Liew &, 2015. "Sustainability of biojet-fuel in Malaysia," Selected Books, CIRAD, Forest department, UPR40, edition 1, volume 1, number 17 edited by Jean-Marc Roda.
    7. Klara Fischer & Elisabeth Ekener-Petersen & Lotta Rydhmer & Karin Edvardsson Björnberg, 2015. "Social Impacts of GM Crops in Agriculture: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-23, July.
    8. Unescap-Sswa, 2015. "Enhancing the sustainability of development," SSWA Policy Briefs 0005, United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) South and South-West Asia Office.
    9. Jill E. Hobbs & Marni D. Plunkett, 1999. "Genetically Modified Foods: Consumer Issues and the Role of Information Asymmetry," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 47(4), pages 445-455, December.
    10. Boldbaatar, Myagmarsuren & Lee, Choong Lyol, 2015. "Financial Accessibility and Economic Growth," East Asian Economic Review, Korea Institute for International Economic Policy, vol. 19(2), pages 143-166, June.
    11. Ipdev ., 2015. "Impacts of the IPR Rules on Sustainable Development," Working Papers id:7226, eSocialSciences.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Maëlle Tripon & Dorothée Boccanfuso & Marie-Eve Yergeau, 2020. "Agriculture urbaine, pratiques agricoles et impacts environnementaux et de santé publique," Cahiers de recherche 20-02, Departement d'économique de l'École de gestion à l'Université de Sherbrooke.
    2. My, Nguyen H.D. & Demont, Matty & Van Loo, Ellen J. & de Guia, Annalyn & Rutsaert, Pieter & Tuan, Tran Huu & Verbeke, Wim, 2018. "What is the value of sustainably-produced rice? Consumer evidence from experimental auctions in Vietnam," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 283-296.
    3. Song, Xiaoqing & Wang, Xiong & Hu, Shougeng & Xiao, Renbin & Scheffran, Jürgen, 2022. "Functional transition of cultivated ecosystems: Underlying mechanisms and policy implications in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    4. Sala-Garrido, Ramon & Mocholi-Arce, Manuel & Maziotis, Alexandros & Molinos-Senante, María, 2023. "The carbon and production performance of water utilities: Evidence from the English and Welsh water industry," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 292-300.
    5. Aghahosseini, Arman & Breyer, Christian, 2020. "From hot rock to useful energy: A global estimate of enhanced geothermal systems potential," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 279(C).
    6. Boräng, Frida & Jagers, Sverker C. & Povitkina, Marina, 2016. "Political determinants of electricity provision in small island developing states," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 725-734.
    7. van der Zwaan, Bob & Kober, Tom & Longa, Francesco Dalla & van der Laan, Anouk & Jan Kramer, Gert, 2018. "An integrated assessment of pathways for low-carbon development in Africa," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 387-395.
    8. Bakhshi, Parul & Babulal, Ganesh M. & Trani, Jean-Francois, 2018. "Education and disability in a conflict affected context: Are children with disabilities less likely to learn and be protected in Darfur?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 248-259.
    9. Kattumuri, Ruth & Kruse, Tobias, 2017. "Renewable technologies in Karnataka, India: jobs potential and co-benefits," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 86551, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    10. Lee, Susan E. & Braithwaite, Peter & Leach, Joanne M. & Rogers, Chris D.F., 2016. "A comparison of energy systems in Birmingham, UK, with Masdar City, an embryonic city in Abu Dhabi Emirate," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 1299-1309.
    11. Ponieman, Karen D. & Bongiovanni, Rodolfo & Battaglia, Martin L. & Hilbert, Jorge A. & Cipriotti, Pablo A. & Espósito, Gabriel, 2023. "Site-specific calculation of corn bioethanol carbon footprint with Life Cycle Assessment," Agri-Tech Economics Papers 344397, Harper Adams University, Land, Farm & Agribusiness Management Department.
    12. Ufer, Danielle J. & Ortega, David L. & Wolf, Christopher A. & McKendree, Melissa & Swanson, Janice, 2022. "Getting past the gatekeeper: Key motivations of dairy farmer intent to adopt animal health and welfare-improving biotechnology," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    13. Rodríguez-Entrena, Macario & Salazar-Ordóñez, Melania & Sayadi, Samir, 2013. "Applying partial least squares to model genetically modified food purchase intentions in southern Spain consumers," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 44-53.
    14. Anne-Célia Disdier & Lionel Fontagné, 2010. "Trade impact of European measures on GMOs condemned by the WTO panel," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 146(3), pages 495-514, September.
    15. Alessandro Olper & Johan Swinnen, 2013. "Mass Media and Public Policy: Global Evidence from Agricultural Policies," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 27(3), pages 413-436.
    16. Yek, Peter Nai Yuh & Cheng, Yoke Wang & Liew, Rock Keey & Wan Mahari, Wan Adibah & Ong, Hwai Chyuan & Chen, Wei-Hsin & Peng, Wanxi & Park, Young-Kwon & Sonne, Christian & Kong, Sieng Huat & Tabatabaei, 2021. "Progress in the torrefaction technology for upgrading oil palm wastes to energy-dense biochar: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    17. Songsore, Emmanuel & Buzzelli, Michael, 2014. "Social responses to wind energy development in Ontario: The influence of health risk perceptions and associated concerns," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 285-296.
    18. Hobbs, Jill E. & Plunkett, Marni D., 2000. "GMOs: The Economics of Consumer Food Safety Issues," CAFRI: Current Agriculture, Food and Resource Issues, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society, issue 1, pages 1-10, May.
    19. Giannakas, Konstantinos & Fulton, Murray, 2002. "Consumption effects of genetic modification: what if consumers are right?," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 27(2), pages 97-109, August.
    20. Skevas, Theodoros & Fevereiro, Pedro & Wesseler, Justus, 2010. "Coexistence regulations and agriculture production: A case study of five Bt maize producers in Portugal," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2402-2408, October.

    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:ags:gmcc15:211639. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iaaeeea.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.