Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk...
Transcript of Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk...
![Page 1: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Labeling and Consumer Behavior
Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair
Oklahoma State University [email protected]
www.jaysonlusk.com @JaysonLusk
![Page 2: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Introduction
• Difficult to find a more heavily research topic than consumer aversion to GM food – Search for ‘consumer GM food’ yielded 277,000 hits on
googlescholar.com (212% increase since 2010) – Search for ‘WTP GM food’ yielded 6,060 hits on
googlescholar.com (57% increase since 2010) – were it not for consumer concerns about GM food, the
economic analysis of GM food would amount to little more than a traditional analysis of technology adoption
– on the one hand there seems to be general consensus that information is needed on consumer preferences for GM food, and yet on the other hand such work is difficult to summarize and is often looked upon with distrust
![Page 3: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Background
• State ballot initiatives mandating GM labels – Oregon (30% vs. 70%) in 2003 – California (48.6% vs. 51.4%) in 2012 – Washington (48.9% vs. 51.1%) in 2013 – Colorado (34% vs. 66%) in 2014 – Oregon (49.8% to 50.2%) in 2014 – all have failed
![Page 4: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Background
• State legislative action has been more successful − Connecticut and Maine in 2013 (with contingency) − Vermont (no contingency) in 2014 (effective July 1, 2016) − Jackson and Josephine Counties in Oregon banned in 2014 − Maui County in Hawaii banned in 2014 − Some are being legally contested
• To come? − New York, New Mexico, . . . − Federal legislation
“Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2015” backed by many farm groups would block state efforts to mandate labeling; passed House but not yet the Senate
“Genetically Engineered Food Right-to-Know Act of 2015”
![Page 5: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
![Page 6: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
![Page 7: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Labeling: The Issues
• Pro Label – Very popular (polls with
80%+ favorability) – “right to know” – adding labels is
practically costless – GMOs are “scary”
• Anti Label – payday for trial lawyers
and special interests – choice already exists – labels will be costly for
consumers (maybe?) – science supports GMO
safety – mandatory labels are
misleading suggesting GMOs are unsafe
– lack precision
![Page 8: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Effect on Choice
• Will mandatory labeling increase choice? – There currently is some choice in the US market
via voluntary labeling – The EU experience is revealing though not
perfectly analogous – Could labels increase perceived control and
reduce risk perception?
![Page 9: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Labeling Costs
• How expensive is mandatory labeling? – Adding a small label is indeed a trivial cost
A few dollars per person each year
– The much larger costs depend on: Enforcement and administrative costs
WA study: $3.4 million over six years in WA alone How consumers respond to the label How food companies respond to the label If competitive pressures among companies leads to a move
away from GM ingredients: Lesser study: $500 per family per year across US Alston/Sumner study: $1.2 billion per year in CA alone
Impacts on innovation
![Page 10: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Signaling Effect
• What does the addition of a mandatory label imply to the average consumer about the technology?
“Legally mandating such a label can only serve to mislead and falsely alarm
consumers.” http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2012/media/AAAS_GM_statement.pdf
![Page 11: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
“GM labels may well mislead and alarm consumers,
especially (though not only) if the government requires
them. Any such requirement would inevitably lead many consumers to suspect that public officials, including scientists, believe that
something is wrong with GM foods -- and perhaps that they pose a health risk.”
“Government typically
requires labeling because it has identified such a risk (as in the case of tobacco). . . A compulsory GM label would
encourage consumers to think that GM foods should
be avoided.”
![Page 12: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Context
![Page 13: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Context
• Large volume of economic research suggests the gains from biotech adoption are sizable; removal of gains would have negative economic consequences
![Page 14: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Context
• Meta analysis by Klumper and Qaim (2014) – “On average, GM technology adoption has
reduced chemical pesticide use by 37%, increased crop yields by 22%, and increased farmer profits by 68%. Yield gains and pesticide reductions are larger for insect-resistant crops than for herbicide-tolerant crops. Yield and profit gains are higher in developing countries than in developed countries.”
![Page 15: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Opportunity Costs
• If market environment is hostile to biotechnology, what future innovations might we give up?
• Larger costs may be the forgone innovations we never see
• Competitive positions in agriculture relative to ROW?
![Page 16: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
How Concerned are Consumers?
Is Concern Increasing or Decreasing?
![Page 17: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Food Demand Survey (FooDS)
Awareness in News
16.02
3.01-2.30 -3.21 -2.95 -2.34 -2.01
-4.00-1.94
-5.57
0.00-2.57
-5.14 -5.25 -6.13-4.67
-6.03
-10%
-5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
1
2
3
% C
hang
e
Mea
n (%
)(R
anki
ng: 1
= N
othi
ng; 5
= A
Gre
at D
eal)
Last Year: November 2014 Last Month: October 2015 Nov-15 % Change (October 2015 - November 2015)
![Page 18: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Food Demand Survey (FooDS)
Concern when eating food
-0.99
-2.96
-4.04
-5.80
-3.98
-4.82 -5.10
-4.26-4.68
-5.20-5.87
-4.75-5.31
-6.67
-4.00-4.62
-5.19
-8%
-7%
-6%
-5%
-4%
-3%
-2%
-1%
0%
1
2
3
4
% C
hang
e
Mea
n (%
)(R
anki
ng: 1
= V
ery
Unc
once
rned
; 5 =
Ver
y Co
ncer
ned)
Last Year: November 2014 Last Month: October 2015 Nov-15 % Change (October 2015 - November 2015)
![Page 19: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Food Demand Survey (FooDS)
Concern when eating food
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
Average Concern (1 = very unconcerned; 5 = very concerned)
Relative Concern (Concern for GMO/Mean concern for allother issues)
![Page 20: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Preferences Measured by WTP
• Most studies suggest consumers are willing to pay premiums to avoid GM foods
• Yet foods advertised as “GM free” have almost no market penetration in the US
![Page 21: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
WTP Premiums for non-GM food
Distribution of Willingness-to-Pay Premiums for Non-Genetically Modified Foods over Genetically Modified Foods from Fifty-Seven Studies Reviewed by Lusk et al. (2005)
![Page 22: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
WTP
• Results from meta analyses: Lusk et al. (2005); 46 estimates; average premium for non-
GM foods 42% (weighted estimate = 25%) Dannenberg (2008); 108 estimates; average premium for
non-GM food of 46% Results vary widely by type of study; decreasing over time
• With such high WTP, why so little “non-GM” in U.S.?
– Fernandez-Cornejo and Caswell (2006), “In the United States, many products contain GE ingredients, and the demands for these products apparently have been unaffected by negative opinions about biotechnology expressed in surveys. A few specialty brands are marketed as ‘GE free,’ but they represent a small percentage of supermarket sales.”
![Page 23: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Grocery Scanner Data
![Page 24: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
WTP – what gives?
• Are the WTP estimates obtained from surveys and experiments wrong?
• Are the costs of supplying GM food prohibitively high compared to WTP?
• Is demand for “GM free” cannibalized by demand for “organic?”
• Is it a lack of information? – consumers lack the information that would translate the
WTP observed in consumer studies into market behavior – consumer research, by asking people what they are WTP
for non-GM food, serves to inform people about modern agricultural production practices
![Page 25: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Consumer Preferences for GMO Labels
![Page 26: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Preferences for GMO Labeling
• GMO labeling very popular in polls (Jan 2015)
86.51
83.93
82.28
80.44
69.11
63.77
59.05
55.60
46.65
39.09
13.49
16.07
17.72
19.56
30.89
36.23
40.95
44.40
53.35
60.91
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Mandatory country of origin labels for meat
A requirement that school lunches must contain two servings of fruits and vegetables
Mandatory labels on foods produced with genetic engineering
Mandatory labels on foods containing DNA
Mandatory calorie labels on restaurant menus
Calorie limits for school lunches
A ban on the sale of raw, unpasteurized milk
A ban on the sale of food products made with transfat
A ban on the sale of marijuana
A tax on sugared sodas
Support Oppose
![Page 27: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Preferences for GMO labeling
• But . . . • Consumers rarely mention biotechnology
when asked open ended questions about labeling
• Consumers are rarely presented with costs
![Page 28: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Prop 37 Survey
• People are sensitive to cost (CA, Oct 2012)
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
Perc
ent i
n Fa
vor
of P
rop
37
Food Price Increase Caused by Prop 37
Break-even price increase
11.9%
![Page 29: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Prop 37 Survey
• Many people are sensitive to cost
To avoid higher food costs
35%
To avoid needless lawsuits by trial
lawyers11%
Because genetically
modified foods are not harmful
17%
Because it will impose unneeded costs on farmers
22%
Other15%
What is the primary reason you plan to vote NO on Proposition 37?
![Page 30: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
86.51
83.93
82.28
80.44
69.11
63.77
59.05
55.60
46.65
39.09
13.49
16.07
17.72
19.56
30.89
36.23
40.95
44.40
53.35
60.91
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Mandatory country of origin labels for meat
A requirement that school lunches must contain two servings of fruits and vegetables
Mandatory labels on foods produced with genetic engineering
Mandatory labels on foods containing DNA
Mandatory calorie labels on restaurant menus
Calorie limits for school lunches
A ban on the sale of raw, unpasteurized milk
A ban on the sale of food products made with transfat
A ban on the sale of marijuana
A tax on sugared sodas
Support Oppose
Preferences for GMO Labeling
• BUT . . .
![Page 31: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Preferences for GMO Labeling
• When asked in isolation (Feb 2015)
![Page 32: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Preferences for GMO Labeling
• How should issue of mandatory GMO labeling be decided? (May 2015)
![Page 33: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Preferences for GMO Labeling
• Decisions about labeling of GMO food should be mainly based on . . . (July 2014)
![Page 34: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Actual Votes on GMO Labeling
• We don’t need to ask questions about preferences for labeling
• Look at the votes – all give state iniatives have failed
![Page 35: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
What does this tell us?
• Consumers don’t know much about GMOs • They don’t trust their fellow consumers
with votes on GMO labeling • Consumers are persuaded by information
![Page 36: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Low Knowledge
3.0%
4.1%3.6%
5.7% 5.7%
7.4% 7.1%
3.1%
5.2%
2.3%
15.2%
1.6%
5.6%
3.1% 3.1%
6.4%5.7%
2.1%
5.6%
2.6%2.0%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95 1
Perc
enta
ge o
f Lik
ely V
oter
s
Proportion of Soybean Acres Believed to be GE
How much of the soybeans planted in the U.S. is GE?
• California, Oct 2012
![Page 37: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Low Knowledge
4.9%
3.2%
5.2%
3.7%
5.3%
6.3%5.7%
3.4%
6.8%
3.2%
16.9%
3.3%
5.4%
2.1%
4.8%
5.8% 6.1%
1.6%
4.4%
0.9%1.0%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95 1
Perc
enta
ge o
f Lik
ely V
oter
s
Proportion of Wheat Acres Believed to be GE
How much of the wheat planted in the U.S. is GE?
• California, Oct 2012
![Page 38: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Low Knowledge
• FooDs (Feb 2015)
58.6
47.86
46.0
41.43
36.98
36.78%
35.35
41.4
52.14
54.0
58.57
63.02
63.22
64.65
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Yeast for brewing beer contains living organisms
All vegetables contain DNA
The US government requires genetically engineeredfoods to be labeled as such
Genetically engineered animals are always bigger thanordinary ones
Corn always had the same genes before geneticengineering came along
The US government requires foods with DNA to belabeled as such
Ordinary tomatoes do not contain genes whilegenetically modified tomatoes do
TRUE FALSE
![Page 39: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Low knowledge
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
None 1 to 4 genes 5 to 9 genes 10 to 19 genes 20 or more genes I don't know
Mea
n (%
)
Selection Hybridization Genetic marker assisted breeding Genetic modification Mutagenesis
• FooDs (July 2015)
Number of Genes Affected by Plant Breeding Technique
![Page 40: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Information Matters
![Page 41: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Info on reason for GM How desirable is a food or crop genetically engineered to . . .
Lusk, J.L., B. McFadden, B.J. Rickard. “Which Biotech Foods Are Most Acceptable to the Public?” Biotechnology Journal. 2015
![Page 42: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Effect of Information on Labels
![Page 43: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Control N=213
Attributes Color: green vs. red Blemish: yes vs. no
Price: $1.40 vs. $2.80 Label: Ripened with Ethylene vs. blank
8 choice questions
![Page 44: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
Treatment 1 (N=217) Mandatory GMO Labeling
(negative labeling)
Attributes Color: green vs. red Blemish: yes vs. no
Price: $1.40 vs. $2.80 Label: Genetically engineered vs. blank
8 choice questions
![Page 45: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
Treatment 2 (N=217) Voluntary GMO Labeling
(positive labeling)
Attributes Color: green vs. red Blemish: yes vs. no
Price: $1.40 vs. $2.80 Label: Not genetically engineered vs. blank
8 choice questions
![Page 46: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
Labels didn’t affect beliefs
• “Genetically engineered foods are safe to eat”
2.89 2.97 3.06
1
2
3
4
5
ethylene labeling voluntary (positive)GMO labeling
mandatory (negative)GMO labeling
Strongly Agree
Strongly Disagree
ANOVA p-value = 0.30 Wilcoxon Rank sum p-value = 0.30
![Page 47: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
WTP by Info on Label
WTP for . . .
mandatory (negative)
GMO labeling
voluntary (positive)
GMO labeling
ethylene labeling
No Damage vs. Damage $1.61 $1.60 $2.15 Red vs. Greed $0.41 $0.32 $0.45 Genetically engineered vs. unlabeled
-$1.98
Not genetically engineered v. unlabeled
$0.81
Ripened with ethylene vs. unlabeled
-$1.91
• Implied WTP for non-GM vs. GM is 144% higher when framed in a negative (mandatory) vs. positive (voluntary) way Differential labels signal something different about the
relative desirability of the unlabeled product
Costanigro, M. and J.L. Lusk (2014). The signaling effect of mandatory labels on genetically engineered food. Food Policy, 49, 259-267.
![Page 48: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
Least Appealing Area Control Treatment
![Page 49: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
Results – Study 2
• “Genetically engineered foods are safe to eat”
ANOVA p-value = 0.73 Wilcoxon Rank sum p-value = 0.60
2.89 2.85
1
2
3
4
5
control mandatory (negative) GMO labeling
Strongly Agree
Strongly Disagree
![Page 50: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
Info from voting ads
• “NO” ads were more effective than “YES”
McFadden, B. R., & Lusk, J. L. (2013). Effects of cost and campaign advertising on support for California’s Proposition 37. JARE 38(2), 174-186.
![Page 51: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
Response to Scientific Information
Label Description Percent Believers Participants who believe GM foods are safe to eat 31.9%
Deniers Participants who deny GM foods are safe to eat 36.6%
Neutrals Participants who neither believe nor deny GM foods are safe to eat 31.5%
McFadden, B. R., & Lusk, J. L. (2015). Cognitive biases in the assimilation of scientific information on global warming and genetically modified food. Food Policy, 54, 35-43.
![Page 52: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
Scientific Information
![Page 53: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
Response to Scientific Information
Label Description Percent
Conservative Participants whose beliefs about safety of GM was unchanged after scientific information. 43.4%
Convergent Participants whose beliefs about safety of GM converged to scientific information. 44.4%
Divergent Participants whose beliefs about safety of GM foods diverged from scientific information. 12.2%
McFadden, B. R., & Lusk, J. L. (2015). Cognitive biases in the assimilation of scientific information on global warming and genetically modified food. Food Policy, 54, 35-43.
![Page 54: Labeling and Consumer Behavior - WUR...1998/05/04 · Labeling and Consumer Behavior Jayson L. Lusk Regents Professor and Willard Sparks Endowed Chair Oklahoma State University jayson.lusk@okstate.edu](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071003/5fc0773a8599670ad967f11d/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
Conclusions
• Summary – cost implications of mandatory labels are highly
uncertain – “gut” reactions to GMOs are slightly negative
(labeling very positive) – consumers still largely unknowledgeable,
persuadable – New GMO applications may be most influential in
affecting public perception