Attitude gaps between conventional plant breeding crops and genetically modified crops, and psychological models determining the acceptance of the two crops

Yutaka Tanaka

Journal of Risk Research, 2013, vol. 16, issue 1, 69-80

Abstract: Thus far, people's attitudes toward biotechnology and genetically modified (GM) crops have been investigated in the European Union, USA, Japan, and other nations. However, direct comparisons between people's attitudes toward conventional plant breeding crops and their attitudes toward GM crops will show the characteristics of people's attitudes toward GM crops more clearly, and this will bring about valuable suggestions considering risk communication about GM crops. The first purpose of this study was to show attitude gaps between conventional plant breeding crops and GM crops. Referring to preceding studies related to the acceptance of biotechnology, a causal model was constructed to predict the acceptance of GM crops and plant breeding crops. Four factors -- perceived risk, perceived benefit, trust, and sense of bioethics -- were set up as important psychological factors determining the acceptance of GM crops and plant breeding crops in the structural equation models. The second purpose of this study was to verify the validity of these causal models. A social survey was administered in Tokyo, Japan, with a sample of 600 men and women aged 20 years or older who participated. The results showed that people have a more negative attitude toward GM crops than toward conventional plant breeding crops in every factor, that is, perceived risk, perceived benefit, trust, sense of bioethics, and acceptance. The plausibility of the causal models was tested by using structural equation modeling, and the results indicated that the four factors explain the acceptance very well in both models. Moreover, although perceived risk is the most important factor in the acceptance of GM crops, trust is the most important factor in the acceptance of conventional plant breeding crops.

Date: 2013
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13669877.2012.726236 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:16:y:2013:i:1:p:69-80

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RJRR20

DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2012.726236

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Risk Research is currently edited by Bryan MacGregor

More articles in Journal of Risk Research from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().