European Consumers\u27 Attitudes Towards Cisgenic Rice

The enhancement of existing plant breeding techniques, such as cisgenesis, allows plant breeders to enhance an existing cultivar quicker and with little to no genetic drag. Cisgenesis is the genetic modification of a recipient plant with natural gene(s) from a sexually compatible plant. Unlike transgenesis, which is the genetic modification of a recipient plant with gene(s) from any non‐plant organism, or from a donor plant that is sexually incompatible with the recipient plant, the results of cisgenesis could occur naturally over time. Currently, both cisgenic and transgenic products are classified as genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and are labeled as such in countries which require mandatory GMO labeling. Critics claim that cisgenic products should be exempt from the GMO legislation and therefore no mandatory labeling should apply for cisgenic products. This study analyzes European consumers\u27 attitudes towards a cisgenic product, rice, and estimates consumers\u27 willingness-to-pay (WTP) for rice labeled as GM, as cisgenic, as with environmental benefits or as any combination of these attributes. The data were collected from 3,002 respondents through an online survey administrated in Belgium, France, the Netherlands, Spain and the United Kingdom in 2013. Censored regression models were used to estimate consumers\u27 WTP in each country. The results highlight significant differences across countries in terms of attitudes towards and between cisgenic and transgenic rice, WTP and demographics affecting the WTP. In all the five studied countries, consumers are willing-to-pay a premium to avoid consuming rice labeled as GM. In all the studied countries except Spain, consumers have a significantly different and lower WTP to avoid to consume rice labeled as cisgenic compared to rice labeled as GM. In addition, consumers in Spain and in France are willing-to-pay a premium for rice labeled as having environmental benefits compared to conventional rice. Finally, the results suggest that consumers differentiate cisgenic and transgenic products and that they tend to have a more positive attitude towards cisgenic rice than transgenic rice. This seems to indicate that not all GMOs are the same in consumers\u27 eyes and thus, can have important policy implications in terms of labeling and importation of cisgenic products

Innovate webinar : a customer-centric lens for good agricultural practices : MEDA innovate learning series

The presentation presents the Chithumba model to illustrate adaptive good agricultural practices (GAP), and how some applications and innovations are more supportive and more readily adopted by farmers. It focuses on the customer-centric approach, analysing incentives for farmers to adopt new practices and buy into them. In order to usefully target famers, it helps to understand that different markets represent different market specifications. These market specifications will help determine which GAP standards to implement, how to design effective policy and financial services, and which agricultural innovations result in enhanced crop yields

Revisiting GMOs : are there differences in European consumers' acceptance and valuation for cisgenically vs transgenically bred rice?

Both cisgenesis and transgenesis are plant breeding techniques that can be used to introduce new genes into plant genomes. However, transgenesis uses gene(s) from a non-plant organism or from a donor plant that is sexually incompatible with the recipient plant while cisgenesis involves the introduction of gene(s) from a crossable-sexually compatible-plant. Traditional breeding techniques could possibly achieve the same results as those from cisgenesis, but would require a much larger timeframe. Cisgenesis allows plant breeders to enhance an existing cultivar more quickly and with little to no genetic drag. The current regulation in the European Union (EU) on genetically modified organisms (GMOs) treats cisgenic plants the same as transgenic plants and both are mandatorily labeled as GMOs. This study estimates European consumers' willingness-to-pay (WTP) for rice labeled as GM, cisgenic, with environmental benefits (which cisgenesis could provide), or any combination of these three attributes. Data were collected from 3,002 participants through an online survey administered in Belgium, France, the Netherlands, Spain and the United Kingdom in 2013. Censored regression models were used to model consumers' WTP in each country. Model estimates highlight significant differences in WTP across countries. In all five countries, consumers are willing-to-pay a premium to avoid purchasing rice labeled as GM. In all countries except Spain, consumers have a significantly higher WTP to avoid consuming rice labeled as GM compared to rice labeled as cisgenic, suggesting that inserting genes from the plant's own gene pool is more acceptable to consumers. Additionally, French consumers are willing-to-pay a premium for rice labeled as having environmental benefits compared to conventional rice. These findings suggest that not all GMOs are the same in consumers' eyes and thus, from a consumer preference perspective, the differences between transgenic and cisgenic products are recommended to be reflected in GMO labeling and trade policies

Ghanaian Consumers’ Attitudes toward Cisgenic Rice: Are all Genetically Modified Rice the Same?

In Ghana the cultivation of cisgenic rice could potentially decrease the current  growing gap between domestic supply and demand. Using a consumer survey, the study tested if Ghanaians view cisgenic and transgenic rice differently and  estimated consumers’ willingness-to-pay for rice labeled as genetically modified (GM), cisgenic or  environmentally beneficial. Employing an interval regression on the survey data showed that consumers were willing to pay a premium for  environmentally beneficial rice and a discount for GM and cisgenic rice. In addition, a Likert scale and simple t test was used to show that respondents had a less negative attitude towards cisgenic rice relative to transgenic rice; and perceived cisgenic rice to be different from GM rice, but not  different from transgenic rice. Based on the findings of this study and the high  skepticism that Ghanaians have towards GM crops, labeling cisgenic as transgenic could mean that Ghanaians would reject cisgenic crops. Further, consumer perception and acceptance are important factors in improving the country’s food security status. Therefore, the Government of Ghana should also make an effort to implement programme that would help increase awareness among Ghanaians about GM and the different types of GM products.Keywords: Rice, Rice Breeding, Cisgenics, GM

Descriptions of Variety A attributes.

<p>Descriptions of Variety A attributes.</p

Socioeconomic characteristics by country and for the total sample (%).

<p>All results are presented in percent save for the mean age that is presented in years.</p><p>^a This education category encompasses participants who have obtained a degree equivalent to 3 or 4 years of additional studies after the completion of high school.</p><p>^b In the United Kingdom, all monetary units were presented in equivalent pounds £.</p><p>^c Net income represents the income after taxes.</p><p>Socioeconomic characteristics by country and for the total sample (%).</p

Descriptions of Variety A attributes.

<p>Descriptions of Variety A attributes.</p

Willingness to consume GM and cisgenic food by country (%).

<p>Willingness to consume GM and cisgenic food by country (%).</p

Ordering of information treatments for Variety A.

<p>Ordering of information treatments for Variety A.</p