The Regulation of Genetically Modified Food in China

When will agricultural biotechnologies, such as genetically modified (GM) crops, reach Europe? This was the main question at the Agricultural Biotechnology International Conference (ABIC)—the largest of its kind—that took place in September this year in Cologne, Germany. Given that the ABIC was accompanied by a parallel conference organized by critics of GM crops and foods, this is an appropriate question. Most of the European Union (EU) member states have not yet approved the GM crops that are used widely and safely elsewhere in the world. Moreover, although the EU has finally lifted its moratorium on GM crops, and has passed new regulations for growing and marketing GM foods, national politics, legislation and ideological views about consumer and environmental protection have further hampered their use. European consumers remain wary of agricultural biotechnology and its products, as they do not see any direct benefits from GM crops and are, therefore, understandably reluctant to accept them. But it is only a matter of time before GM foods arrive on supermarket shelves across Europe, predicts Ashley O'Sullivan, President and CEO of Ag‐West Bio Inc. (Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada). “The reality for legislation to regulate agricultural biotechnology is that the train has left the station and there is no way of going back,” he added. > …to convince the cautious European public, agricultural biotechnology still has to […] offer products that directly benefit consumers But to convince the cautious European public, agricultural biotechnology still has to show that it can do more than increase the returns to farmers, and offer products that directly benefit consumers. The next wave of GM plants, which are currently being developed and tested in academic and industry laboratories around the world, including Europe, may soon do this. A range of new GM crops in the research pipeline will offer direct benefits to …

Genetically modified (GM) crops are now being grown extensively in North and South America and China, although not in Europe. Food produced from these crops has become a part of the normal diet in North and South America and in China, but not in Europe, where contention continues despite the fact that millions of US citizens eat GM soya without any ill effects in a very litigious society, and many Europeans have eaten GM soya while in the US without any adverse consequences. > Why has the British public, who normally so pragmatically welcome scientific advances, resisted the introduction of genetically modified crops? European consumers' continuous and ardent opposition to GM crops and foods has had serious repercussions for plant research, for the commercial development of new crops and, most importantly, for developing countries that could benefit most from GM crops. Several countries in Africa and elsewhere have resisted growing such crops, mainly for fear of being unable to export them to the European market ( The Economist , 2002). It is therefore worthwhile to investigate what actually went wrong in the debate about GM food and crops in Europe and how these foods have earned such a bad name. Such an analysis could not only help to overcome public fears of this technology, but also help scientists and policy makers to address similar concerns in the future, such as the growing debate over nanotechnology. The concerns of European consumers about the potential health and environmental threats of GM crops have resulted in an unprecedented effort to investigate those anxieties and communicate with the wider public, particularly in the UK, where the use of public consultation has been extensively developed. The first of these initiatives was the extensive Farm Scale Evaluations of three GM crops (herbicide‐resistant beet, oil seed rape and maize), whose …

PurposePrevious studies have mainly focused on public opinions regarding genetically modified (GM) technology and GM food. The purpose of this paper is to assess scientists’ attitudes on whether China needs to develop its national agricultural GM technology and their willingness to buy GM food.Design/methodology/approachA stratified sampling method was used to select and interview 806 scientists from six major agricultural universities and 20 research institutes under two national academies in China in 2013. Based on these data, the authors use both descriptive statistics and multivariate regression analysis to examine scientists’ attitudes toward agricultural GM technology and food, using GM soybean oil as an example of GM foods.FindingsThe survey results show that nearly three-quarters of scientists agree that China needs to develop its agricultural GM technology, but their attitudes differ largely. Only 29 percent of scientists are willing to buy GM soybean oil, similar to urban consumers (25 percent) in China. The knowledge of biology is extensive for some scientists but varies significant among scientists and correlates positively with their attitudes toward agricultural GM technology and GM soybean oil. Younger and male scientists with higher professional titles, and those involved in GM research are more in favor of China’s GM technology compared to other scientists. Female scientists, scientists with lower professional titles, those that have never engaged in GM research or are from non-agricultural scientific disciplines are less willing to buy GM soybean oil. Interestingly, their low willingness to buy GM soybean oil is inconsistent with the fact that it is the most common edible oil in China.Originality/valueThis study is the first to examine scientists’ attitudes toward GM technology and food in China. The results of this study contribute to understanding the current debates on GM technology and the relevance of research, based on the willingness to buy GM food, for decision making regarding the commercialization of GM technology.

After more than 25 years of research and development on the genetic modification of a wide range of crops for food and fodder, China has reached a decision point as to whether it should accept, reject, or go slow with the use of genetically modified (GM) technology to produce the food and feed needed to sustain its population growth and economic renaissance. Here, we report a consumer survey on GM food that includes input from all provinces in China. Chinese consumers were surveyed for their awareness, knowledge, and opinion on GM food. The survey resulted in 11.9, 41.4, and 46.7% of respondents having a positive, neutral, or negative view on GM food, respectively. A minority of respondents (11.7%) claimed they understood the basic principles of GM technology, while most were either “neutral” or “unfamiliar with GM technology”. Most respondents (69.3%) obtained their information on GM food through the Internet and 64.3% of respondents thought that media coverage was predominately negative on GM food. The reasons given by consumers in favor of, or against, the use of GM food, were complex, as seen by the response of 13.8% of respondents who felt GM technology was a form of bioterrorism targeted at China. China’s Ministry of Agriculture and the science community generally expressed a positive attitude toward GM food, but the percentage of respondents that trusted the government and scientists was only 11.7 and 23.2%, respectively. Post-survey comments of respondents made suggestions on how the industrialization of GM technology might impact the future of China’s food supply and value chains. Finally, the impact of emerging technologies like genome editing and genome-edited organisms (GEOs) on the GM food debate is discussed.

Strategic approaches to communicating with food consumers about genetically modified food

Safety and nutritional assessment of GM plants and derived food and feed: The role of animal feeding trials

Agrochemical multinationals hail them as a panacea for everything from world hunger to pesticide pollution. Environmental organizations dismiss them as "Frankenfoods" which poison consumers and destroy the world's ecosystems. The Nairobi-based United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) is attempting to help developing countries weigh up the pros and cons for themselves. The argument is about genetically modified (GM) crops. In mid-January, UNEP kicked off a three-year project that will support up to 100 developing countries to prepare for the entry into force of the UN Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (see Box 1. The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety). It will also help these countries put into practice the principles of risk assessment for GM foods announced in March by a task force of the Codex Alimentarius, a world reference body for food safety (see Box 2. UN agrees principles for GM food risk analysis). Box 1. The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety Adopted in January 2000 the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety is the first international, legally binding environmental treaty. The Protocol seeks to protect biological diversity from the potential risks from genetically modified organisms (GMO) by regulating all transboundary movements of GMOs. The Protocol also establishes a so-called advance informed agreement procedure, which requires GMO-exporting countries to provide all pertinent information about the GMOs in question so that the importing countries can make an informed decision as to whether to accept the shipment or not. As one of its key elements the Protocol is to set up a biosafety clearing house, an Internet database containing all necessary-information about any given GMO such as movements and transports of GMOs, release documents and risk assessments. So far more than 100 countries have signed the Protocol but only 11 have ratified it. As soon as 50 countries have ratified it, the Cartagena Protocol will enter into force worldwide. MH Box 2. UN agrees principles for GM food risk analysis After two years of deliberations, a UN task force on GM foods reached its final conclusions this March: a set of principles proposing that such foods be subjected to extensive pre-market safety assessments, combined with methods to overcome uncertainties in risk assessment, for example by monitoring potential effects after a product has been marketed. Investigations should identify new or altered hazards relevant to human health, especially in relation to key nutrients and potential allergies, said the Intergovernmental Task Force on Foods Derived from Biotechnology in early March in Yokohama, Japan. This Task Force of the FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission--a world reference body for food safety--says that their principles should be seen as providing an overall framework for evaluating the safety and nutritional aspects of GM foods in any country. The principles also provide guidance on analytical methods and other tools to be used in risk management. FAO and WHO say that the task force "reached a very important new agreement concerning the tracing of GM products for the purpose of facilitating withdrawal from the market when a risk to human health has been identified." The task force also adopted detailed requirements for assessing the safety of GM plants, including tests for allergenicity, and recommended that efforts be made to improve the capability of regulatory authorities--particularly in developing countries--to assess and manage GM foods. This is where the UNEP biosafety project will be helpful (see feature). RW The environment "is different everywhere, and that's why GM crops have to be tested locally" says Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, the lead author of last year's Human Development Report, issued annually by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), which advocated a cautious application of biotechnology as a means to reduce world poverty. …

Public opposition to genetically modified (GM) food and crops is widely interpreted as the result of the public's misperception of the risks. With scientific assessment pointing to no unique risks from GM crops and foods, a strategy of accurate risk communication from trusted sources has been advocated. This is based on the assumption that the benefits of GM crops and foods are self-evident. Informed by the interpretation of some qualitative interviews with lay people, we use data from the Eurobarometer survey on biotechnology to explore the hypothesis that it is not so much the perception of risks as the absence of benefits that is the basis of the widespread rejection of GM foods and crops by the European public. Some respondents perceive both risks and benefits, and may be trading off these attributes along the lines of a rational choice model. However, for others, one attribute—benefit—appears to dominate their judgments: the lexicographic heuristic. For these respondents, their perception of risk is of limited importance in the formation of attitudes toward GM food and crops. The implication is that the absence of perceived benefits from GM foods and crops calls into question the relevance of risk communication strategies for bringing about change in public opinion.

Public opposition to genetically modified (GM) food and crops is widely interpreted as the result of the public's misperception of the risks. With scientific assessment pointing to no unique risks from GM crops and foods, a strategy of accurate risk communication from trusted sources has been advocated. This is based on the assumption that the benefits of GM crops and foods are self-evident. Informed by the interpretation of some qualitative interviews with lay people, we use data from the Eurobarometer survey on biotechnology to explore the hypothesis that it is not so much the perception of risks as the absence of benefits that is the basis of the widespread rejection of GM foods and crops by the European public. Some respondents perceive both risks and benefits, and may be trading off these attributes along the lines of a rational choice model. However, for others, one attribute-benefit-appears to dominate their judgments: the lexicographic heuristic. For these respondents, their perception of risk is of limited importance in the formation of attitudes toward GM food and crops. The implication is that the absence of perceived benefits from GM foods and crops calls into question the relevance of risk communication strategies for bringing about change in public opinion.

Purpose The spread of genetically modified (GM) foodstuffs is related to consumer scepticism in Europe, and particularly in Italy. Consumer scepticism in turn depends on the low level of public knowledge about the health consequences, in terms of risks and benefits, of consuming these GM foods. This paper aims, first and foremost, to investigate the phenomenon of GM foodstuffs consumption in Italy and, then, to construct a statistical model for analysing the Italian habits regarding this consumption. Furthermore, this model allows us to formalize the origins of behaviour regarding GM foodstuffs consumption and to detect the drivers of their purchase. Design/methodology/approach From January 2009 to May 2009, 1,061 public high school students in 25 randomly selected schools of a metropolitan area (Naples, South Italy) were questioned. More precisely, each student was given a questionnaire regarding, in the first part, school cultural characteristics and, then, awareness and GM food consumption. A Likert scale was used to answer the questions. After collecting data, the authors chose to apply structural equation modelling, as it is one of the general and powerful multivariate analysis technique useful to simultaneously analyse and evaluate multivariate hypotheses. Findings The findings showed that GM food consumption by Italian students depended on the knowledge of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and on the impact of this organisms both on human health and the environment. Therefore, in order to help consumers to choose whether or not to eat GM foods, a standardized evaluation system of human health and environmental consequences produced by GMO and GM foods should be created. In particular, the authors introduced a general framework that could help researchers/users to select and assess a hierarchy of the influence of factors on Italian habits regarding the consumption of GM foodstuffs. Originality/value In this research, the authors propose a structural equation model – full formative measurement model – that allows to define the origins of behaviour towards GM food consumption and to detect the drivers of their purchase. Particularly, the authors showed that GM food consumption depended on the knowledge of GMOs and on the impact of the GMOs on human health and the environment.

Background: Genetic engineering has stimulated interest in a range of fields, including agribusiness, food technology, food product development, and nutrition. Even though the public opinion on genetically modified (GM) goods is polarizing, the majority of experts believe that the advantages outweigh any potential risks, if at all there are any. As a result, the role of science education is to prepare students to be citizens who have a fundamental understanding of genetic engineering. As the students of life sciences are the future scientific experts and scholars who progress in the subject of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), they need to have correct knowledge of GMOs, GM foods, and appropriate attitudes regarding the same.Methodology: To investigate the knowledge and attitudes of life-sciences university students (n= 203) concerning GM foods, a cross-sectional observational survey-based study was carried out by administering a structured questionnaire across three disciplines of life sciences - Biotechnology, Food Technology, and Nutrition for undergraduates, postgraduates, and post-graduate diploma students. The scores for knowledge and attitudes were divided into tertiles as high, moderate, and low scores.Results: 88.2% of the participants agreed to have read about GMOs in their curriculum and 76.8% had defined GM foods correctly. When the participants were categorized into tertiles, it was observed that out of all the high scorers, 45.5% were food technology majors and 43% were biotechnology majors and only 11.3% were nutrition majors. 63.1% of students were found to be in favor of GMOs and GM foods and had a positive attitude toward them. There was a moderately positive association of knowledge levels with attitudes toward GMOs and GM foods (p< 0.05).Conclusion: Although in general, the life-sciences students had the basic knowledge of GMOs and GM foods, the food technology, and biotechnology majors had better knowledge about GMOs and GM foods as compared to nutrition majors. The attitude scores were directly proportional to knowledge scores which emphasizes the need for robust science education on comprehending the topic better. Incorporating a GM-related curriculum for nutrition discipline can help students learn better about the issues surrounding transgenic technology, food safety, and nutrition.

Sales of organic foods are increasing due to public demand, while genetically modified (GM) and irradiated foods are often viewed with suspicion. The aim of this research was to examine consumer attitudes toward organic, GM and irradiated foods to direct educational efforts regarding their consumption Methods: A telephone survey of 1838 residents in Tennessee, USA was conducted regarding organic, GM, and irradiated foods. Approximately half of respondents (50.4%) purchased organic food during the previous 6 months ('consumers'). The most common beliefs about organic foods by consumers were higher cost (92%), and fewer pesticides (89%). Consumers were more likely than non-consumers to believe organic food tasted better (prevalence ratio 3.6; 95% confidence interval 3.02-4.23). A minority of respondents were familiar with GM foods (33%) and irradiated foods (22%). Organic food consumption is common in Tennessee, but knowledge about GM and irradiated foods is less common. Consumer health education should emphasize the benefits of these food options, and the safety of GM and irradiated foods.

With highly negative publicity, GM food marketing in South Korea has become a major challenge for potential marketers who are interested in entering the South Korean market. Several consumer groups and non-government organizations (NGOs) in South Korea initiated anti-GM food campaigns. South Korean consumers are reported to be more concerned about potential risk associated with GM food compared to counterpart consumers in the U.S and Europe (KFDA, 2009). Many South Korean food processors and marketers are responding to this consumer concern by ignoring the labeling requirement of GM contents in their products. There is apparent lack of coordination in the South Korean food supply chain regarding GM food management with South Korean consumers' negative attitude toward GM foods and South Korean food suppliers' avoidance of GM food labeling. Despite the apparent benefits of GM food, GM food may not have sufficient market value in the market if consumers have distrust and insecurity toward such product. This paper develops a quantitative model which identifies major determinants of South Korean consumers' choice behavior for GM foods. The proposed model elicit constructs which form South Korean consumers' attitude which in turn affect their willingness to purchase GM foods. Our study developed a socio-cognitive model of South Korean consumers' behavior, using Fishbein's framework, which has two attitudinal constructs (Perceived Benefits and Perceived Risk) and one construct that capture effect of individual respondent's socioeconomic variance (Socio-Economic Status (SES). Consumers' beliefs and attitudes regarding the risks and benefits of GM foods and their individual socio-demographic status are hypothesized to be linked to consumers' choice behavior of GM foods. A sample of 360 consumers was drawn from a survey study in the capital city, Seoul. Results reveal that consumers' Socio-Economic Status (SES) and their Perceived Benefits associated GM food were found to be strong indicators of consumers' GM food purchase intention. This implies that consumer's background and diversity in South Korean demographic may have significant effect on their purchase intention for GM food. This suggests that further extensive study on South Korean consumer market need to be conducted in order to fully understand the difference among various South Korean consumer market segments in terms of how they respond to GM food issues. Comprehensive market segmentation on South Korean consumer market should be done in terms of their GM risk appetite, GM food knowledge, information search behavior and food consumption pattern. Our results show that favorable attributes of GM food such as medical benefits and nutritional enhancement were found to have significant influence on consumers' attitude toward GM food positively. Results show potentials for second generation GM food in South Korea, if specific of consumer benefits can be effectively developed and promoted to South Korean consumers. Regarding Perceived Risk of GM food, uncertainty/ lack of understanding on GM food and potential environmental hazard of GM food were found to affect consumers' attitude toward GM food negatively. Educating consumers about GM food may be a viable strategy to mitigate their concerns about unknown health risks and adverse environmental effects and the communication of scientific uncertainty is critical to improving consumers' negative attitude toward GM foods.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5755/j01.ee.23.2.1548

This study reports the perceptions and attitudes of geography teachers towards biotechnology and genetically-modified (GM) foods in Turkey. A survey was conducted with secondary school geography teachers attending teacher workshops in various parts of the country in 2008 and was responded to by 78 teachers from 31 different provinces. The study not only revealed important results about the perceptions of geography teachers towards biotechnology and GM foods but also provided an understanding of the current perceptions of the public towards these two fields in the country. The study revealed that teachers did not have enough information about biotechnology and GM foods. This lack of knowledge played an important role in determining teachers’ perceptions and attitudes towards these two fields. The majority of teachers supported the use of biotechnology for disease treatment and medicine production. However, their support declined very sharply with regard to cloning human cells, producing GM foods, and cloning animals. General attitudes of teachers to GM foods were mainly negative. The majority of teachers thought that GM foods were risky for human health and the environment. This negative attitude of teachers towards GM foods is likely to continue until the public becomes better informed about biotechnological applications and the positive outcomes of producing GM foods.

Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are an important nexus of biotechnology, agriculture, and research. GMOs have gained popularity because of their potential to address global food insecurity. However, the widespread adoption of GMOs has sparked debates and controversies. This study collected data on the threats and effects of the GMO ban and the status of implementation of Biosafety Act and Cartagena Protocol on biosafety in Kenya. A cross‐sectional survey was used with 216 participants sampled purposively and 16 key informants interviewed in a qualitative survey with triangulation of data from a scoping literature review. Fifty‐seven percent of the respondents indicated GMOs and genetically modified (GM) foods are a solution to food security in Africa. A majority believe that the introduction of GMO technology and the use of GM food is beneficial (52.3%). Fifty‐five percent of the respondents indicated that GM foods are safe. Most respondents (&gt;90%) indicated that there is a low threat of GMO technology on the environment, human health, and animal health. The respondents (54.3%) agreed there is good adherence to the Cartagena Protocol. The correlation between awareness of the Cartagena Protocol on biosafety and views on whether there are adequate legal and regulatory frameworks was r = 0.4, indicating a weak but positive relationship between the two. Respondents who reported that the legal and regulatory frameworks were adequate were, therefore, likely (r = 0.4) to be aware of the Cartagena Protocol. There was a moderate positive correlation (r = 0.67) on views that GM food is a solution to food insecurity. Understandably, the relationship between GM food health concerns and GM food as safe was moderately negative (r = −0.4591). The findings are important in addressing gaps in the current GMO regulations and implementation aimed at increasing awareness of GMO technology as well as informing policy on biotechnology.