IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iaae09/51029.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

‘GMO-Free’ Labels – Enhancing Transparency or Deceiving Consumers?

Author

Listed:
  • Henseleit, Meike
  • Kubitzki, Sabine

Abstract

Since most consumers particularly in industrialised countries are concerned about the application of genetic engineering in food production, producers in many nations got the opportunity to label products as free of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) by the introduction of legal regulations. Standards of these regulations for labelling food products ‘GMO-free’ usually relate to product itself, not to the process of production. Therefore, it is quite possible that consumers’ understanding of ‘GMO-free’ differs from what the label actually stands for, especially regarding animal products. We conducted a consumer survey in order to explore potential gaps between their ideas of ‘GMO-free’ food and what the label actually stands for at the example of the German regulation covering the labelling of foods as ‘GMO-free’.

Suggested Citation

  • Henseleit, Meike & Kubitzki, Sabine, 2009. "‘GMO-Free’ Labels – Enhancing Transparency or Deceiving Consumers?," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 51029, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:iaae09:51029
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.51029
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/51029/files/IAAE_2009_final_Henseleit.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.51029?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. Lusk, Jayson L. & Rozan, Anne, 2008. "Public Policy and Endogenous Beliefs: The Case of Genetically Modified Food," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 33(2), pages 1-20.
    2. Mittal, Banwari & Lee, Myung-Soo, 1989. "A causal model of consumer involvement," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 363-389, November.
    3. Bansal, Sangeeta & Ramaswami, Bharat, 2007. "The economics of GM food labels: An evaluation of mandatory labeling proposals in India," IFPRI discussion papers 704, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    4. Hallman, William K. & Adelaja, Adesoji O. & Schilling, Brian J. & Lang, John T., 2002. "Public Perceptions Of Genetically Modified Foods: Americans Know Not What They Eat," Research Reports 18176, Rutgers University, Food Policy Institute.
    5. Wachenheim, Cheryl J. & Vanwechel, Tamara, 2004. "The Influence Of Environmental-Impact Information On Consumer Willingness To Pay For Products Labeled As Free Of Genetically Modified Ingredients," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 35(2), pages 1-13, July.
    6. repec:ags:inpuer:188880 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. House, Lisa & Lusk, Jayson L. & Jaeger, Sara & Traill, W. Bruce & Moore, Melissa & Valli, Carlotta & Morrow, Bert & Yee, Wallace M.S., 2004. "Objective And Subjective Knowledge: Impacts On Consumer Demand For Genetically Modified Foods In The United States And The European Union," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20125, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    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. Kubitzki, S. & Henseleit, M. & Herrmann, R., 2010. "Informationsgewinn und Markttransparenz durch Labeling? – Eine kritische Würdigung der neuen Lebensmittelkennzeichnung „Ohne Gentechnik“," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 45, March.
    2. Jane Kolodinsky & Sean Morris & Orest Pazuniak, 2019. "How consumers use mandatory genetic engineering (GE) labels: evidence from Vermont," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 36(1), pages 117-125, March.
    3. Jin, Hyun Joung & Han, Dae Hee, 2014. "Interaction between message framing and consumers’ prior subjective knowledge regarding food safety issues," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 95-102.
    4. O'Cass, A., 2000. "An assessment of consumers product, purchase decision, advertising and consumption involvement in fashion clothing," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 21(5), pages 545-576, October.
    5. Andreea-Ionela Puiu & Anca Monica Ardeleanu & Camelia Cojocaru & Anca Bratu, 2021. "Exploring the Effect of Status Quo, Innovativeness, and Involvement Tendencies on Luxury Fashion Innovations: The Mediation Role of Status Consumption," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-18, May.
    6. Marco Costanigro & Yuko Onozaka, 2020. "A Belief‐Preference Model of Choice for Experience and Credence Goods," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(1), pages 70-95, February.
    7. Lokesh Jasrai, 2014. "Measuring Mobile Telecom Service Innovativeness Among Youth," Paradigm, , vol. 18(1), pages 103-116, June.
    8. Eigenraam, Anniek W. & Eelen, Jiska & Verlegh, Peeter W.J., 2021. "Let Me Entertain You? The Importance of Authenticity in Online Customer Engagement," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 53-68.
    9. Onyango, Benjamin M. & Govindasamy, Ramu & Nayga, Rodolfo M., Jr., 2004. "Measuring U.S. Consumer Preferences For Genetically Modified Foods Using Choice Modeling Experiments: The Role Of Price, Product Benefits And Technology," Research Reports 18181, Rutgers University, Food Policy Institute.
    10. Andrew Knight, 2007. "Intervening Effects of Knowledge, Morality, Trust, and Benefits on Support for Animal and Plant Biotechnology Applications," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(6), pages 1553-1563, December.
    11. Tibert Verhagen & Daniel Bloemers, 2018. "Exploring the cognitive and affective bases of online purchase intentions: a hierarchical test across product types," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 537-561, September.
    12. Franziska Rumpel & Michael Knuth & Micheal Schaefer, 2008. "Neural correlates for price involvement in purchase decisions with regards to fast-moving-consumer-goods," FEMM Working Papers 08033, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    13. Morone, Andrea & Nemore, Francesco & Schirone, Dario Antonio, 2018. "Sales impact of servicescape's rational stimuli: A natural experiment," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 256-262.
    14. Hallman, William K. & Onyango, Benjamin M. & Govindasamy, Ramu & Jang, Ho-Min & Puduri, Venkata S., 2004. "Public Approval Of Plant And Animal Biotechnology In Korea: An Ordered Probit Analysis," Research Reports 18180, Rutgers University, Food Policy Institute.
    15. Kaneko, Naoya & Chern, Wen S., 2006. "Identification of Consumer Segments and Its Implication on the Willingness-to-Pay Distribution: The Case of Demand for Non-Genetically Modified Vegetable Oil in the United States," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21194, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    16. Xiaoqin Zhu & Xiaofei Xie, 2015. "Effects of Knowledge on Attitude Formation and Change Toward Genetically Modified Foods," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(5), pages 790-810, May.
    17. Kentaka Aruga, 2014. "An intervention analysis on the Tokyo Grain Exchange non-genetically modified and conventional soybean futures markets," Cogent Economics & Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(1), pages 1-11, December.
    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. 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.
    20. Damien Rousselière & Samira Rousselière, 2010. "On the impact of trust on consumer willingness to purchase GM food:Evidence from a European survey," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 91(1), pages 5-26.

    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:iaae09:51029. 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.