Genetically Modified Food Labeling Research Articles

Development and Validation of a New Robust Detection Method for Low-Content DNA Using ΔΔCq-Based Real-Time PCR with Optimized Standard Plasmids as a Control Sample.

Real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is the gold standard for DNA detection in many fields, including food analysis. However, robust detection using a real-time PCR for low-content DNA samples remains challenging. In this study, we developed a robust real-time PCR method for low-content DNA using genetically modified (GM) maize at concentrations near the limit of detection (LOD) as a model. We evaluated the LOD of real-time PCR targeting two common GM maize sequences (P35S and TNOS) using GM maize event MON863 containing a copy of P35S and TNOS. The interlaboratory study revealed that the LOD differed among laboratories partly because DNA input amounts were variable depending on measurements of DNA concentrations. To minimize this variability for low-content DNA samples, we developed ΔΔCq-based real-time PCR. In this study, ΔCq and ΔΔCq are as follows: ΔCq = Cq (P35S or TNOS) – Cq (SSIIb; maize endogenous gene), ΔΔCq = ΔCq (analytical sample) – ΔCq (control sample at concentrations near the LOD). The presence of GM maize was determined based on ΔΔCq values. In addition, we used optimized standard plasmids containing SSIIb, P35S, and TNOS with ΔCq equal to the MON863 genomic DNA (gDNA) at concentrations near the LOD as a control sample. A validation study indicated that at least 0.2% MON863 gDNA could be robustly detected. Using several GM maize certified reference materials, we have demonstrated that this method was practical for detecting low-content GM crops and thus for validating GM food labeling. With appropriate standards, this method would be applicable in many fields, not just food.

Willingness to Pay for Enhanced Mandatory Labelling of Genetically Modified Soybean Oil: Evidence from a Choice Experiment in China.

This study investigates consumers’ preferences for mandatory labelling conveying the health and safety attributes of genetically modified soybean oil. The enhanced mandatory labelling includes allergen presence labelling, nutrient and compositional change labelling and traceability codes. The data were collected from a consumer survey in the eastern, central and western regions of China, with a total sample size of 804 respondents. We evaluated consumer willingness to pay (WTP) for enhanced mandatory labelling using a choice experiment approach. The results show that Chinese consumers are most favorable to traceability codes with a WTP of RMB 8.92, followed by allergen presences labelling, with RMB 6.57. Eastern consumers would like to pay a higher premium for the three types of enhanced mandatory labelling information, while central consumers only show a positive preference for traceability codes. The results imply that the efforts and policy strategies for enhanced mandatory labelling will benefit residents. Further studies can be expended to other genetically modified (GM) foods. This study provides information for the agency to improve mandatory GM food labelling management. This paper contributes to the growing body of the GM food literature by explicitly investigating consumer preference and WTP for mandatory labelling conveying the health and safety attributes of the GM foods.

대구 지역 주부의 유전자변형식품 완전표시제에 대한 인식도 및 유전자변형식품 구매의도 분석

The purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions toward genetically modified (GM) foods and the full labeling of GM foods, and the factors influencing purchase intention of GM foods. The levels of subjective and objective knowledge of GM foods were not high, and both positive and negative attitudes toward GM foods were above the middle, but scores of negative attitudes were higher than those of positive attitudes. About half of the respondents answered that they heard of GM food labeling, and three-fifths of them responded knowing that GM food labeling was being implemented. In addition, about one-fourth of the respondents heard about the full labeling of GM foods, and all of them agreed to the need for full labeling. The reasons they supported the full labeling of GM foods were ‘guaranteed consumers right to know and choose their products’, followed by ‘the consumer can check whether the GM food ingredients were used’, and ‘reduce consumer

HOW TO DESIGN GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD LABELING REGULATION IN INDONESIA - TAKING SCIENCE, TRADE LAW, AND INDONESIAN DEMANDS SERIOUSLY

The paper critically evaluates the current Indonesian genetically modified (GM) food labeling regime as it is embedded in the international trade law and policy system. This research proposes a GM food labeling regulation for Indonesia based on the socio-economic demands of Indonesia on the one hand and the demands of international trade law and policy on the other. It answers the following research questions: What are the legislative requirements for labelling of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) according to Indonesian law? How should Indonesian law on GM food labelling be designed to meet the interests of its peoples and provide access to foreign markets? We highlight the major weaknesses of the Indonesian GM food labelling law from the perspective chosen in this paper, such as the dependence on regulation from bigger trading blocs, lack of consideration for the socio-economic characteristics of Indonesia, and a low level of compliance. To overcome these shortcomingss, we propose a novel GM food labeling regulation for Indonesia that is based on the concept of Food Safety Objective/Appropriate Level of Protection (FSO/ALOP) applicable to developing countries.

Designing enhanced labeling information to increase consumer willingness to pay for genetically modified foods

PurposeThe regulations for qualitative genetically modified (GM) food labeling do not effectively eliminate the information asymmetries pertaining to the consumption of GM products. China's GM food labeling law requires the presentation of certain categories of GM products on GMO labels on packages. Such information is invaluable for understanding whether the disclosure of more information on GM foods can help alleviate information asymmetry while reducing consumer fear and risk perceptions of GM foods, and thus cause changes in their behaviors. The purpose of this paper is to explore the heterogeneity of consumer preferences for enhanced GM food labeling, how consumer preferences are influenced by labeling information, and how these preferences vary in different consumers.Design/methodology/approachBoth descriptive statistics and econometric techniques, including the multivariate ordered Probit model, were applied to a sample of 566 urban consumers in the Yangtze River Delta region of China. All respondents were divided into two groups: people who would definitely not buy GM foods before selecting enhanced labeling information (“consumer group 1”, sample size 282) and people who would definitely not object to buying GM foods before selecting enhanced labeling information (“consumer group 2”, sample size 274).FindingsThe findings suggest that urban consumers have a preference for different types of enhanced labeling information about GM foods, that such a preference significantly influences their willingness to pay for GM foods, that there exists a large difference in the preferences of different consumer groups, and that enhanced GM food labeling information has a greater impact on those consumers who would not accept GM foods.Originality/valueThis research identifies the GM information disclosures that most affect consumer preferences and how these preferences vary across different segments of consumers, which is a current gap in the literature. The study has demonstrated that enhanced labels of GM foods with diverse information would not alter a consumer's WTP for GM foods who does not perceive the value of information from the enhanced labels, but change positively consumers with uncertainty willingness to pay before disclosure.

Public Perception on Labeling Genetically Modified (GM) Foods in Ghana: Implications for Food Policy

Labeling of genetically modified (GM) food and other food ingredients from GM source has become an important national policy issues receiving serious attention not only in Ghana but globally.   This paper focused on public perceptions of labeling of GM foods in Ghana as a way of garnering a view of the public understanding of the technology that has become so much controversial for which several millions of public sector money is spent on education in the last few years. The survey which elapsed over a period of three months, shows results that indicate a dearth of knowledge on the technology and yet a high demand for labelling of the products, even though not many people read the labels on food products. This leads to the question as to ‘who is doing the listening’. The authors conclude that the limited knowledge and technology essentials among others explain why the public seems to reject the technology and call for labelling of the products in spite of the fact that labelling is nothing but a choice variable, which has nothing to do with safety measure. Modifying the present attitude of the opponents of the technology and the demanders of labelling ignoring the cost that may be involved require extensive education and awareness creations throughout the country using tailor made communication forms to address various different groups.

The Regulation of Genetically Modified Food in China

Biotechnology Law ReportVol. 38, No. 5 Original ArticlesFree AccessThe Regulation of Genetically Modified Food in ChinaBy Jiao Feng and Fan YangBy Jiao FengJiao Feng is a postdoctoral researcher at Zhe Jiang University Guanghua Law School and can be reached at *Both authors contributed equally to this article.Search for more papers by this authorEmail the corresponding author at fengjiaolingxiao@163.com and Fan YangFan Yang is a PhD candidate at Zhe Jiang University Guanghua Law School.*Both authors contributed equally to this article.Search for more papers by this authorPublished Online:11 Oct 2019https://doi.org/10.1089/blr.2019.29137.jfAboutSectionsPDF/EPUB Permissions & CitationsPermissionsDownload CitationsTrack CitationsAdd to favorites Back To Publication ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmail 1. INTRODUCTIONGenetically modified food has been controversial since it was first created. However, because of its enormous potential, it is also greatly respected in many countries. In 2016, CPC1 Central Committee and the State Council promulgated a document stipulating the guidelines for the development of genetically modified food in China. According to this document, more emphasis should be put into the development and supervision of genetically modified technology in agriculture, and its promotion should be deliberative and with the guarantee of safety.2Briefly speaking, genetically modified food is created by splicing the DNA of one organism into that of an entirely different species.3 In China, according to the Regulation on Administration of Safety of Agricultural Genetically Modified Organisms, when we refer to this concept, it mainly contains four categories, namely: (1) genetically modified animals, plants, and microorganisms; (2) products of genetically modified animals, plants, and microorganisms; (3) products directly processed from genetically modified agricultural products; and (4) seeds, breeding livestock and poultry, aquatic fry and seeds, pesticides, veterinary drugs, fertilizers, additives, and other products containing ingredients of genetically modified animals, plants, and microorganisms or their products. From this provision, it seems that the range of genetically modified food is quite wide in China. However, currently, before putting genetically modified organisms (GMOs) into commercial production, the product will be strictly scrutinized; as a result, the actual number of genetically modified foods is rather limited. Up to now, only cotton, rape, rice, corn, and papaya have been granted the safety certificate issued by the Ministry of Agriculture to import. Besides cotton and papaya, Escherichia coli and several other microorganisms are granted the safety certificate to produce.In general, genetically modified food has contributed a great deal to economic development and environment protection. With the use of gene modification, less pesticide needs to be used and biodiversity has been maintained. Moreover, it has showed great potential in increasing the output of grain, which is in urgent need by many countries. However, although genetically modified food has existed for several years and billions of people have consumed genetically modified food, the public still holds a rather skeptical view towards it. Some people think that it will cause health problems in the long run and there are many rumors regarding genetically modified food. Many such rumors have been debunked,4 but no absolute and convincing response has been given on this subject. In the interest of balancing perceived positive and negative consequences, different counties have adopted different paths to regulate the use of genetically modified food. This article will describe the measures adopted by Chinese government on this topic.Specifically, the article first will sort out the current regulations regarding genetically modified food in China and analyze their characteristics. Then the focus will turn to judicial practice by reviewing relevant cases to find out the problems experienced in the real world. By pointing out the gap between regulation and practice, this article will provide some suggestions for the reform of genetically modified food regulation in the end.2. CURRENT CHINESE REGULATIONSBefore the introduction of current Chinese regulations on genetically modified foods, it is necessary to have a general comprehension of the ideas of the CPC, which often play the guiding role in issues concerning Chinese people's livelihood. Initially, there is no public document of the CPC mentioning genetically modified foods, but on December 23, 2013, Chinese President Xi Jinping's speech at the Central Rural Work Conference focused on two aspects of genetically modified foods: that is, food safety and technical innovation.5 The thrust was that China should be bold in developing gene modification technology and be cautious in promoting genetically modified foods. Chinese President Xi Jinping said that the industrialization and commercialization of genetically modified products must be carried out in strict accordance with regulations formulated by the state to ensure the safety of genetically modified foods. Meanwhile, it is necessary to boldly innovate and win China's place in the market of genetically modified products.Even though Chinese President Xi Jinping attached much emphasis to the safety of genetically modified foods, there remains great room for improving the regulations regarding the safety of genetically modified foods. The earliest regulation on genetic modification in China is the Genetic Safety Management Measures promulgated by the Ministry of Science and Technology in 1993. In 1996, the Ministry of Agriculture formulated the Implementation Measures for Agricultural Bio-genetical Engineering Safety Management, which proposed the need for safety assessment of genetically modified foods. In 2001, the State Council enacted the Regulations on the Safety Management of Agricultural Genetically Modified Organisms, which provide for the establishment of a production permit system, a safety evaluation system, a business license system, and an import and export trade system for genetically modified foods. In order to implement the regulations, the Ministry of Agriculture quickly announced three implementation documents, namely, Administrative Measures for the Import Safety of Agricultural Genetically Modified Foods, Administrative Measures for the Safety Evaluation of Agricultural Genetically Modified Foods, and Administrative Measures for the Identification of Agricultural Genetically Modified Organisms. The above regulations are administrative rules rather than laws, and the legislative process can hardly catch up with the development of genetically modified foods in China.Not until 2009 did China introduce the first law regulating genetically modified foods, that is, the Food Safety Law, in which the risk assessment and labeling mechanism of genetically modified foods are established. The Food Safety Law amended in 2015 stipulates that the production and operation of genetically modified foods should be labelled as required.The above-mentioned laws and regulations constitute the basic framework of China's current regulation of genetically modified foods. In terms of this basic legal framework, there are still many shortcomings. For instance, the laws and regulations concerning the safety of genetically modified foods are found scattered in the articles of relevant laws and regulations instead of being in special laws or regulations, and there are mainly procedural regulations.3. PROBLEMS IN CHINESE PRACTICEBy searching the judgements published on the website of China Judgements Online,6 we can find some problems in Chinese judicial practice, that is, consumers' weak awareness of rights protections regarding genetically modified foods, the imperfect disclosure standard, the too-weak sanctions on producers for illegal conduct, and the disordered safety approval system.3.1. Consumers' awareness of rights protection is weakThrough literature search, we can find that the empirical research on the legal control of genetically modified foods is rather rare in China. Most articles focus on the search and criticism of legal norms, or reference foreign or international legal experience. It is found that the rare empirical research is largely attributed to the fact that there are too-few relevant cases in China. When we search the keyword of “genetically modified” on the website of China Judgements Online, there are only 765 civil cases in total all over China, among which the real disputes concerning genetically modified foods are much fewer.7 The small amount of data also reflect that Chinese consumers' awareness of the rights about genetically modified foods is relatively weak.3.2. The disclosure standard is imperfectThe disclosure standard of genetically modified products is closely related to consumers' right to know. In China, the Regulations on the Safety Management of Agricultural Genetically Modified Organisms and the Administrative Measures on the Labeling of Agricultural Genetically Modified Organisms expressly stipulate that genetically modified foods should be “obviously” labelled. The amended Food Safety Law has specifically added a provision that “production and operation of genetically modified foods should be obviously labelled in accordance with regulations.” However, there is no specific description of the standard of “obviousness.” The only standards applied in the judicial practice is the “869 Standard of Ministry of Agriculture,” which requires only a label height of not less than 1.8 mm. In one case, the consumer argued that the height of 1.8 mm (less than one-fifth of a centimeter or approximately one-twelfth of an inch) cannot be obvious and noticeable for an ordinary consumer and so is not conducive to protecting consumers' right to know and choose.What's more, China's relevant laws and regulations fail to stipulate thresholds and label exemptions for genetically modified food labels. Not setting a threshold means zero tolerance for genetically modified products, which not only creates difficulties in implementation, but also blurs the boundaries between GM foods and non-GM foods. In the legal sense, it means that there is no legal exemption for GM foods.8 As long as the food contains genetically modified components which are enumerated on a government promulgated list (“identification list”), it needs to be labelled as genetically modified food. In terms of genetically modified components in the identification list, it seems that the consumer's right to know has been greatly expanded with no restrictions and the one-size-fits-all standard in the system reflects the government's excessive intervention in the genetically modified food market.9 However, only foods with components in the identification list, which only specifies five categories of 17 crops, are required to be labelled. Therefore, the scope of the labeling requirement is too narrow at the same time that it is overbroad in some other ways, and the list of ingredients for which labeling is mandated can scarcely keep pace with the development of genetically modified food.3.3. Sanctions for violations of the law or regulations are not severe enoughThe first paragraph of Article 148 of the Food Safety Law stipulates that consumers who have suffered any loss from food failing to meet the food safety standards may claim damages against the trader or producer. The second paragraph of Article 148 stipulates that in addition to claiming damages, a consumer may require a producer of food failing to meet the food safety standards or a trader knowingly dealing in such food to pay an indemnity of ten times the price paid or three times the loss; or if the amount of the additional compensation is less than 1,000, it shall be 1,000 yuan, except in the case of a defect in the labels or instructions of the food which neither impairs food safety nor misleads consumers.From the above clauses, we can see that consumers can claim ten times the payment price or three times the loss of compensation, which are insignificant amounts when compared to the sales of producers and traders. Many traders and producers don't care about this punishment at all—it is simply a cost of doing business. By contrast, in Taiwan, violations regarding genetically modified foods have been raised to the level of crime. In 2008, scholars in Taiwan conducted a survey of the general public in regard to their attitudes about genetically modified products. The results showed that Taiwanese people's acceptance of genetically modified non-food products is much higher than that of genetically modified food products. Because of citizens' concerns about the proliferation of genetically modified foods,10 Taiwan has continuously improved its regulation of crimes involving genetically modified food. In contrast, the punishment for offenders in mainland China is limited to requiring them to pay civil compensation, which is much lighter than the criminal responsibility in Taiwan.3.4. The safety approval system is disorderedThe safety approval system for genetically modified foods is of great significance for controlling the safety risks of genetically modified foods. Compared to countries and regions such as the European Union, the United States, and Japan, China's research and application of genetically modified technologies and regulation of genetically modified foods started late. China's safety management agencies for the safety approval system involve the Ministry of Agriculture, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Environmental Protection, the Food and Drug Administration, and the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection, and Quarantine, among which the Ministry of Agriculture plays a leading role.11Because there are many departments responsible for the safety regulation of genetically modified foods in China, China has not been able to effectively coordinate the respective functions of the above-mentioned departments and has found it difficult to ensure the effectiveness of safety supervision of genetically modified products. The supervision of genetically modified foods is under the control of the Ministry of Agriculture, but the Ministry of Agriculture is mainly responsible for the research and safety approval of genetically modified products. The Ministry of Agriculture does not supervise the whole process of environmental protection and food safety. Because the Ministry of Agriculture is responsible for both research on genetically modified products and the approval of genetically modified crops, the Ministry of Agriculture has dual, conflicting roles: it is (so to speak) being both an athlete and a referee.There is no unified coordination between the various departments, which greatly weakens the intensity of supervision. As is mentioned above, the safety approval of genetically modified products in China is mainly, but not entirely, the responsibility of the Ministry of Agriculture; other agencies are involved, too. However, the functional provisions of the various laws and regulations regarding the roles and responsibilities of the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Environmental Protection, the Food and Drug Administration, and the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection, and Quarantine are relatively vague. What's more, China implements a hierarchical management evaluation system for agricultural genetically modified products, which are divided into four types according to the degree of danger to humans, animals, plants, microorganisms, and ecological environment. In practice, the Ministry of Agriculture is mainly responsible for the safety approval of genetically modified products, and its members in the National Agricultural Genetically Modified Organisms Safety Committee are mostly genetic scientists. In contrast, there are extremely few members from the fields of environmental protection or food and drug safety. As a result, it is hard for the National Agricultural Genetically Modified Organisms Safety Committee to make a comprehensive and systematic evaluation of the safety of genetically modified products for its influence on humans, animals, and plants, and especially on the ecological environment.124. PROSPECTSGenetically modified food offers promise for the future, although there are still issues. In China, in terms of genetically modified food, as stated above, both regulation and judicial practice have faced some difficulties that call for urgent correction. In the future, the following measures should be taken.4.1. Promoting a uniform law regarding genetically modified foodAccording to the Legislation Law of the People's Republic of China, the Constitution has the supreme legal effect, and after the Constitution, the effect of laws are higher than that of administrative regulations, local regulations, and rules. However, in regard to genetically modified food, no specific law has been enacted and all the regulations are scattered and often of low effect. Compared with traditional food, genetically modified food has its own characteristics and thus needs special attention. In the near future, the genetically modified food law should be promulgated to set the basic framework for the regulation of genetically modified food. Within this framework, different government departments can make out interpretative provision from its own perspective. Only in this way would the regulation for genetically modified food be adequate and coherent.4.2. Strictly following the disclosure standardA survey in China showed that more than half of the interviewees did not know much about genetically modified food and more than half of them held a skeptical attitude towards genetically modified food.13 The labeling requirement is undoubtedly an effective way to guarantee customers' right to know. However, until now, both Chinese and United States law had not imposed specific labeling requirements on food that contained GM ingredients or was derived from GM techniques.14Theoretically, the disclosure standard should be more specific. The label should clearly distinguish between food derived from genetically modified techniques and food that just contains genetically modified components. This can be realized by the use of different sizes of labels or labeling with different colors. With different labels to clarify disclosure, customers' rights would be better protected.4.3. Increasing illegal cost for the producerBefore taking actions, a rational person would balance between the potential cost and benefit. Increasing the cost to producers of illegal acts would accordingly be an effective way to deter the possible actions. This can be accomplished in two ways. First, consumers' awareness of their rights should be improved. Nowadays, besides individual consumers, the People's Procuratorate can also file suits for the genetically modified food. The Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Procuratorial Public Interest Litigation Cases stipulates that in the course of everyday work, if the People's Procuratorate finds that customers' legal rights have been infringed in the field of food and drug, the People's Procuratorate can start public interest litigation. In 2018, the People's Procuratorate in Fujian Province found out that an oil producer had used genetically modified oil without labeling; the Procuratorate sent a procuratorial proposal to the Market Supervision Management Bureau. Ultimately, the oil makers were fined more than millions.Second, criminal liability should be imposed if the case is serious. From a global perspective, several countries (including but not limited to Finland, Spain, and France) have explicitly stipulated criminal offences related to the genetically modified food. Currently, in China, crimes involving genetically modified food have been categorized into different crimes, such as the crime of illegal business operations, the crime of manufacturing or selling fake and inferior products, and so on. However, such crimes cannot cover all the aspects of genetically modified food, such as the illegal development of genetically modified technology. After establishing explicit standards, the criminal law should perform a role in regulating genetically modified food.4.4. Designating a department to supervise the safety approval systemActually, the quality of genetically modified food regulation will be affected by a number of issues, such as agency financial and personnel resources, agency priorities, agency decision-making structures, agency capture, political pressure, and so on.15 In China, the system of interministerial joint conference for the administration of agricultural genetically modified organisms safety is responsible for the discussion and coordination among agencies of major issues involved in the administration of agricultural genetically modified organisms safety. However, this system does not work effectively as designed. In the future, a routine department which contains experts from all relevant fields should be formed in the Ministry of Agriculture so that all the possible effects can be comprehensively evaluated before marketing genetically modified food. In order to effectively supervise genetically modified food, the State Administration for Market Regulation should take this responsibility.1 CPC is short for Communist Party of China.2 See Article 3 of Several Opinions of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council on the Implementation of New Concepts on the Development and the Acceleration of the Agricultural Modernization for the Realization of the Moderate Prosperity in All Respects.3 Josh Glasgow, Genetically Modified Organisms, Religiously Motivated Concerns: The Role of the “Right to Know” in the GM Food Labeling Debate, 20 Drake J. Agric. L. 115,116 (2015).4 For example, in 2010, a website in China published an article saying that the consumption of genetically modified corn had damaged the fertility of a college student in Guangxi; however, it was subsequently confirmed that there was never genetically modified corn in Guangxi and that the article was false. Another rumor originated in Shanxi and Jilin Province: allegedly, the planting of genetically modified corn had led to abortion in sows and a reduction in the number of rats. In the end, however, it was again found that there was no genetically modified corn in these two provinces.5 See Xi Jinping's speech at the Central Rural Work Conference on December 23, 2013.6 In order to enhance judicial openness, the website of China Judgments Online was officially opened on January 1, 2014, and the judgments of cases which can be published according to laws will be disclosed here.7 China Judgments Online, https://wenshu.court.gov.cn/ (last visited Apr. 22, 2019).8 Xiao Peng, Convergent Trend of Genetically Modified Food Labeling Systems in European Union and the United States and the Countermeasures of China, 10 Law Science Magazine 139 (2018).9 Zhang Zhongmin, On the Jurisprudential Basis and Improvement of the System of Genetically Modified Food Labeling, 5 Political Science and Law 126 (2016).10 Guo Wei, Observation on the Crime of Genetically Modified Food in Taiwan, 1 Journal of Wuling 80 (2018).11 Kong Qingjiang, Yang Yuhan, Safety License System of Genetically Modified Products in the U.S., EU and Japan and Its Implication to China, 6 Science Technology and Law 63 (2017).12 Id.13 Xin Ming, Cognitive Attainment and Acceptance Intention of Henan Consumers on Genetically Modified Food, 9 China Soft Science 60(2018).14 Angela Foster, Genetically Modified Food—Truth or Fiction?, 307 N.J. Lawyer 28, 31 (Aug. 2017).15 Gregory N. Mandel, Toward Rational Regulation of Genetically Modified Food, 4 Santa Clara J. Int'l L. 21 (2006).FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited byAgricultural genetically modified organisms (GMOs) regulation in ChinaGeneration of Gene Edited Pigs23 August 2022Current Applications of Enzymes in GM (Genetically Modified) Food Development and Food Chain22 September 2022Differential Assembly and Shifts of the Rhizosphere Bacterial Community by a Dual Transgenic Glyphosate-Tolerant Soybean Line with and without Glyphosate Application8 October 2021 | Horticulturae, Vol. 7, No. 10Impact of a G2-EPSPS & GAT Dual Transgenic Glyphosate-Resistant Soybean Line on the Soil Microbial Community under Field Conditions Affected by Glyphosate ApplicationMicrobes and Environments, Vol. 35, No. 4 Volume 38Issue 5Oct 2019 InformationCopyright 2019, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishersTo cite this article:By Jiao Feng and Fan Yang.The Regulation of Genetically Modified Food in China.Biotechnology Law Report.Oct 2019.289-293.http://doi.org/10.1089/blr.2019.29137.jfPublished in Volume: 38 Issue 5: October 11, 2019Online Ahead of Print:September 16, 2019Keywordsgenetically modified foodsafety approval systemdisclosure standardPDF download

The Chinese public\u2019s awareness and attitudes toward genetically modified foods with different labeling

sThis paper analyzes the awareness and attitudes of the Chinese public toward genetically modified (GM) foods with different types of labeling and evaluates the impact of public confidence in the government management of GM food labeling has on their attitude. From 2015 to 2016, we conducted a series of surveys to collect data from 1730 respondents, which included consumers, farmers, media, and local agricultural officials in agricultural departments. The results show ~60% of the Chinese public do not know that they usually consume or purchase GM products or products containing GM ingredients. Nearly 80% of the Chinese public are accepting foods labeled as not containing GM ingredients, 57% are accepting foods without labeling, and ~40% are accepting GM-labeled foods. The respondents with a lack of confidence in the government are less likely to embrace GM foods. Those that are more aware of GM products are more likely to accept GM labeled foods. The group having the most positive attitude toward GM-labeled foods is the media, followed by agricultural officials, while the group having the most negative attitude toward GM labeled foods is farmers. Our findings provide an empirical basis to inform GM food labeling policy discussions and possible revisions, which may promote the development of GM foods in China.

Why Consumers Don't see the Benefits of Genetically Modified Foods, and what Marketers can do about It

Evidence from four studies suggests that the moral opposition toward genetically modified (GM) foods impedes the perception of their benefits, and critically, marketers can circumvent this moral opposition by employing subtle cues to position these products as being “man-made.” Specifically, if consumers view the GM food as man-made, and if they understand why it was created, moral opposition to the product diminishes, and the GM food's perceived benefits increase, which subsequently increases purchase intentions for the product. This effect is replicated in the field (in both controlled and naturalistic settings), in a laboratory experiment, and with an online consumer panel. The results suggest that marketers can help consumers better consider all information when assessing the merits of GM foods by using packaging and promotion strategies to cue consumers to view the GM food for what it is (i.e., a man-made object created with intent). The findings have implications for the recent GM food labeling debate.

Developing and implementing policy for the mandatory labelling of genetically modified food in South Africa

Like many other countries, South Africa has come under public pressure to introduce mandatory labelling for genetically modified (GM) foods. Although there is increased understanding of the social and political implications of GM labelling in developed countries, implications for the global South are still poorly understood. South Africa, as a country that consumes, produces and trades GM food, represents a fitting case study of these dimensions in the context of a developing economy. Via policy analysis, stakeholder interviews and document inquiry we offer an overview of the evolution of GM labelling, investigate the central influences on its development and implementation, determine the critical issues and identify the factors impeding or facilitating implementation. Our findings reveal that many significant events and decisions influenced the policy on mandatory GM food labelling in South Africa. They also suggest that several pertinent and problematic issues arose during its development as a result of the contentious nature of GM food labelling; stakeholder opinions, influences, and conflicted positions; and its practical complexity. Key implementation issues included divergent interpretations, and thus high levels of ambiguity; an inefficient National Consumer Commission; a lack of recourse for non-compliance; and the absence of a government-enforcement agency. Lower capacity in developing countries underscores the importance of a participation process that is believable by and inclusive of all actors. Stakeholders’ opinions about the policy development process were affected by their predetermined viewpoints about GMOs. Findings emphasise the  influence of larger policy debates about the acceptability of GMOs on participatory processes, and the importance of contextualising GM labelling policies within such debates.
 Significance:
 
 The first review of the evolution of mandatory GM food labelling policy in South Africa is provided.
 A knowledge gap with regard to GM food labelling in developing countries is filled.
 The importance of procedural fairness in determining the degree of stakeholder satisfaction with policy decisions is revealed.

Predicament of Chinese legislation on genetically modified food (GMF) labeling management and solutions - from the perspective of the new food safety law.

This paper considers the background of Article 69 of the newly revised Food Safety Law in China in combination with the current situation of Chinese legislation on GMF labeling management, compared with a foreign genetically modified food labeling management system, revealing deficiencies in the Chinese legislation with respect to GMF labeling management, and noting that institutions should properly consider the GMF labeling management system in China. China adheres to the principle of mandatory labeling based on both product and processes in relation to GMFs and implements a system of process-centered mandatory labeling under a negotiation-construction form. However, China has not finally defined the supervision mode of mandatory labeling of GMFs through laws, and this remains a challenge for GMF labeling management when two mandatory labeling modes coexist. Since April 2015 and October 1, 2015 when the Food Safety Law was revised and formally implemented respectively, the applicable judicial interpretations and enforcement regulations have not made applicable revisions and only principle-based terms have been included in the Food Safety Law, it is still theoretically and practically difficult for mandatory labeling of GMFs in juridical practices and conflicts between the principle of GMF labeling and the purpose that safeguards consumers' right to know remain. The GMF labeling system should be legislatively and practically improved to an extent that protects consumers' right to know. © 2017 Society of Chemical Industry.

EVALUATION OF LITHUANIAN CONSUMERS’ ATTITUDES TO GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD

The aim of this investigation is to present the results obtained during the survey of Lithuanian consumers in order to identify their attitudes towards food with genetically modified organisms (GMO). Investigating the consumers approach to genetically modified (GM) food, the following were considered: consumers' opinions on GMO were analyzed, their knowledge about the presence of food containing GMO on the Lithuanian market, the mandatory GM food labelling, the behavior to a transgenic product while shopping, as well as consumers' willingness to purchase such products. Data were gathered through a survey of 1000 Lithuanian residents. The empirical results indicated that the majority of the respondents' attitudes towards food containing GMO are negative. The older consumers with less income are more against GM food compared to younger, wealthier households. 72% of consumers know that if the food contains GMO it must be indicated on the label. However, many consumers who oppose GMO do not try to avoid paying attention to the components of the product listed on its label. Only about a quarter of consumers while buying a product look for such information. This indicates that consumers are not really interested in whether or not the product contains GMO.

Genetically modified foods: Consumer awareness, opinions and attitudes in selected EU countries

AbstractThe dynamic development of biotechnology in recent years has raised serious public concerns about the possible risks arising from genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The aim of this study was to investigate consumer opinions regarding genetically modified (GM) foods. The research also aimed at verifying the differences in the attitudes of respondents from two, relatively culturally diverse research sites. To obtain empirical data a face‐to‐face survey was conducted in 2015. It covered a total of 976 randomly selected individuals. The study was performed in the capital of the United Kingdom—London and the Polish capital—Warsaw. The results of the study show that almost half of the respondents were familiar with the GMO concept. According to the respondents, the greatest benefits arising from the genetic modification are: enhanced shelf‐life of food and crops' resistance to extreme climatic conditions. The main disadvantages were: unpredictable consequences of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) modification, production of species‐specific toxins and food allergenicity. Over two thirds of people surveyed support the idea of the obligatory labeling of GM foods. The information presented on food packaging should primarily include potential contraindications to the consumption, indication that food was produced using transgenic sources and a warning about potential allergenicity. An almost equal number of respondents showed intention for purchasing GM food products, an intention to act otherwise, or was not decided. As many as 27.7% of survey participants showed negative attitudes toward GM foods, whereas only 19.8% predominantly positive. It is worth noticing that, with only one exception, no statistically significant differences were observed between the opinions of Polish and British respondents.

What consumers don't know about genetically modified food, and how that affects beliefs.

In the debates surrounding biotechnology and genetically modified (GM) food, data from consumer polls are often presented as evidence for precaution and labeling. But how much do consumers actually know about the issue? New data collected from a nationwide U.S. survey reveal low levels of knowledge and numerous misperceptions about GM food. Nearly equal numbers of consumers prefer mandatory labeling of foods containing DNA as do those preferring mandatory labeling of GM foods. When given the option, the majority of consumers prefer that decisions about GM food be taken out of their hands and be made by experts. After answering a list of questions testing objective knowledge of GM food, subjective, self-reported knowledge declines somewhat, and beliefs about GM food safety increase slightly. Results suggest that consumers think they know more than they actually do about GM food, and queries about GM facts cause respondents to reassess how much they know. The findings question the usefulness of results from opinion polls as a motivation for creating public policy surrounding GM food.-McFadden, B. R., Lusk, J. L. What consumers don't know about genetically modified food, and how that affects beliefs.

GMO food labeling bill stalls in the Senate

Legislation that would block states from requiring labels on genetically modified (GMO) foods faltered in the Senate last week. The measure, which was offered as an amendment to an unrelated bill (S. 764), would prohibit states from requiring labels on GMO foods and establish a federal voluntary labeling standard. In a 48-49 vote, the bill failed to garner enough support for the Senate to move it forward. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) left open the possibility of holding a vote on the GMO food labeling legislation at a later date. Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), who introduced the legislation, and supporters of his proposal, including the food industry, are anxious to get the measure enacted before a law requiring labels on GMO foods goes into effect in Vermont on July 1. Other states are also planning similar laws. The food industry claims that a patchwork of state labeling laws will

Transparency in the food aisle: the influence of procedural justice on views about labeling GM foods

Issues of transparency lay at the center of the debate surrounding the labeling of genetically modified (GM) food products in the USA. These issues include not only the argument that consumers should be allowed to make purchasing choices based on full disclosure of product ingredients but also that they should have access to the process that makes decisions about labeling. This study examines the influence of procedural justice on perceived decision legitimacy and decision support regarding GM food labeling decisions. Using a 2 × 2 factorial design, participants recruited from an online Qualtrics panel (N = 450) were randomly assigned to read a fictitious news article about an agricultural company’s decision about whether to label their food products as having GM ingredients. Articles varied by the company’s labeling decision (label versus no label) and whether the company listened to public input prior to making the decision (public input versus no public input). The results showed significant main effects on decision support and perceived legitimacy for articles that mentioned public input. Specifically, when participants read articles stating that the company made its decision after listening to public input, they were more supportive of the decision and perceived the decision as more legitimate. Moreover, this main effect occurred irrespective of whether or not the company’s decision was to label GM foods. Our results confirm the influence of procedural justice perceptions in fostering support and perceived legitimacy for controversial risk-related decisions.

What Shapes Corporate Involvement in Voter Referendums? The Case of Opposition to GM Food Labeling

What propels the involvement of large U.S. corporations into statewide voter referendums? We test the argument of whether corporate political behavior is characterized by firm-level factors or more relational sectoral and classwide networks. Using the 2012 ballot proposition to mandate labeling of genetically modified (GM) foods in California as a case, we analyze corporate donation patterns. We find that while individual interests are significant predictors of involvement, these are eclipsed by relational factors. Corporate embeddedness in sectoral and classwide networks are strong predictors of political involvement, fostering greater opposition to GM food labeling. In addition, using dyadic analysis, we find these networks enable greater unity among these corporations. These findings have implications for our understanding of corporate involvement in voter referendums and on the collective political action of large corporations.

Organismos Geneticamente Modificados em alimentos: desafios metodológicos em função dos avanços tecnológicos e da rotulagem

The cultivated area and extent of genetically modified (GM) plants and the development of new genetic constructs that give rise to new events have considerably increased in Brazil as well as worldwide. This panorama is expected to continue. The main challenges faced by food analysts, particularly those from public health laboratories, arise from many technological advances in the inserted genetic constructs on plant development and legislative issues related to the labeling of these products. This article addresses the need to revise Decree 4680/2003 (labeling of GM foods), the lack and high cost of access to reference materials used in analyses, the difficulty in initiating new event-specific screening, quantitative techniques as well as high-throughput detection systems, and the limited number of official laboratories working in this area in Brazil. The shift in this analytical framework will require improved investments in financial and human resources for more effective sanitary surveillance actions.

Pivotal Point For Biotech Crops

Enthusiasm for genetically modified (GM) crops appears to be waning. Opponents of the technology, which was once hailed for reducing the use of pesticides, say the benefits are rapidly disappearing. Many weeds and insects are now resistant to the limited number of traits that have been commercialized. Consumers in the U.S., who paid little attention to government oversight of GM crops when they first hit the market in the 1990s, are beginning to question the safety of foods that contain GM ingredients. A growing number of advocacy groups are calling for mandatory labeling of GM foods so consumers know what they are buying and eating. Farmers are also raising warning flags about the technology. They are concerned because some traits that are approved in the U.S. are not approved in other countries, including China, which was once a large export market for U.S. corn. China is now rejecting shipments of ...

Commercial Free Speech Trumps the Politics of Food Labeling: The Legacy of rbST-Free Milk Mandate and Prohibition Cases for Genetic Engineering Disclosure Laws

Commercial speech rights have expanded under federal court decisions dating back to the 1970s. This paper examines application of commercial free speech precedents to two contemporary dairy labeling cases, where states required or prevented labeling of products derived from cows treated with genetically-modified hormones. Decisions in both cases strengthened commercial speech freedom regarding food products and processes and limited state regulatory power, though the outcomes for anti-genetic engineering interest groups were divergent. The courts struck down Vermont’s labeling mandate as unconstitutional compulsory speech and found consumer “right to know” an inadequate state interest. In striking down Ohio’s labeling prohibition, the courts protected voluntary speech to label dairy products as “rbST-free” as long as labels were not false or misleading. The author projects the likely negative impact of these court rulings on the constitutionality of genetically-modified food labeling mandates proposed in many states and considers future directions of genetically-engineered food labeling regulation in competitive and politically-contested environments.