Yawson, Robert M. and Kuzma, Jennifer (2010): Evidence review and experts’ opinion on consumer acceptance of agrifood nanotechnology. Published in: International Conference on Food and Agricultural Applications of Nanotechnologies, Sao Carlos, Brazil, : pp. 1-23.
Download (168kB) | Preview
Nanotechnology is becoming increasingly important for the food sector, and advances and products are already being made in the areas of food packaging and food safety. However, there are several potential issues associated with the commercialization of agricultural and food (agrifood) nanotechnology that may limit its full potential, including uncertainty about whether consumers will accept or reject its products. Thus, this study aims to better understand key variables that are likely to affect consumer acceptance of agrifood nanotechnology, so that policies and programs can be better designed to address issues important to consumers prior to market entry. Factors that may influence consumer acceptance of agrifood nanotechnology were identified by examining historical experiences with other emerging technologies in food and agriculture and eliciting the opinions of experts and stakeholders. In this work, perceived risks and benefits and trust in regulatory agencies and industry were identified as the key factors influencing consumer acceptance. Our results compare favorably with other published studies in this area, and collectively they suggest that increasing consumer knowledge of agrifood nanotechnology products;ensuring high consumer benefits; minimizing risks; and increasing trust in decision makers and producers are important for consumer acceptance and the success of the emerging agrifood nanotechnology industry.
|Item Type:||MPRA Paper|
|Original Title:||Evidence review and experts’ opinion on consumer acceptance of agrifood nanotechnology|
|Keywords:||Food Economics; Trust; Expert Elicitation; Nanotechnology; Risk Perception; Uncertainty; Consumers|
|Subjects:||D - Microeconomics > D8 - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty > D81 - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
N - Economic History > N6 - Manufacturing and Construction
L - Industrial Organization > L6 - Industry Studies: Manufacturing
L - Industrial Organization > L6 - Industry Studies: Manufacturing > L66 - Food ; Beverages ; Cosmetics ; Tobacco ; Wine and Spirits
O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O3 - Innovation ; Research and Development ; Technological Change ; Intellectual Property Rights > O33 - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences ; Diffusion Processes
O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O1 - Economic Development > O14 - Industrialization ; Manufacturing and Service Industries ; Choice of Technology
A - General Economics and Teaching > A1 - General Economics > A11 - Role of Economics ; Role of Economists ; Market for Economists
Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q1 - Agriculture > Q18 - Agricultural Policy ; Food Policy
O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O1 - Economic Development
A - General Economics and Teaching > A3 - Collective Works > A30 - General
Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q1 - Agriculture
Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q1 - Agriculture > Q16 - R&D ; Agricultural Technology ; Biofuels ; Agricultural Extension Services
D - Microeconomics > D8 - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty
O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O3 - Innovation ; Research and Development ; Technological Change ; Intellectual Property Rights
|Depositing User:||Prof. Robert M Yawson|
|Date Deposited:||22 Aug 2012 13:30|
|Last Modified:||20 May 2016 17:15|
Alhakami, A.S., Slovic, P., 1994. A psychological study of the inverse relationship between perceived risk and perceived benefits. Risk Anal. 14: 1085–1096.
Bugusu, B., et al., eds., 2006. Proceedings of the First IFT International Food Nanotechnology Conference, Orlando, Fla. The Society for Food science and technology, Institute of Food Technologists
Cardello, A.V., Schutz, H.G., Lesher, L.L., 2007. Consumer perceptions of foods processed by innovative and emerging technologies: A conjoint analytic study. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies 8(1): 73–83.
Chaudhry, Q., et al., 2008. Applications and implications of nanotechnologies for the food sector. Food Addit Contam, Part A 25(3): 241 — 258
Chen, H., Weiss, J., Shahidi, F., 2006. Nanotechnology in nutraceuticals and functional foods. Food Technol. 60(3): 30-36.
Chen, M-F., Li, H-L., 2007. The consumer’s attitude toward genetically modified foods in Taiwan. Food Qual Prefer 18 (4): 662 – 674.
Downey, L., 2006. EU Agri-Food Industries & Rural Economies by 2025 – Towards a Knowledge Bio-Economy – Research & Knowledge-Transfer Systems. http://ec.europa.eu/research/agriculture/scar/pdf/scar_foresight_rural_economy_en.pdf [Accessed on: March 03, 2009]
DTI, 2003. GM Nation? The findings of the public debate. The Department for Trade and industry (DTI), London http://www.aebc.gov.uk/reports/gm_nation_report_final.pdf [Accessed on: July 08, 2009]
Ebbesen, M., 2008. The Role of the Humanities and Social Sciences in Nanotechnology Research and Development. Nanoethics 2: 1–13
ETC Group, 2004. Down on the Farm: The Impact of Nano-Scale Technologies on Food and Agriculture. ETC Group, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Garber, C., 2007. Nanotechnology food coming to a fridge near you. Nanowerk Spotlight Copyright 2007 Nanowerk LLC http://www.nanowerk.com/spotlight/spotid=1360.php [Accessed on: February 20, 2009]
Hart Research Associates, Inc., 2008. Awareness of and Attitudes toward Nanotechnology and Synthetic Biology: A Report of Findings Based on a National Survey Among Adults Conducted On Behalf of the Project On Emerging Nanotechnologies, The Woodrow Wilson International Center For Scholars, Washington D.C.
Hoffmann, S., Fischbeck, P., Krupnick, A., McWilliams, M., 2006. Eliciting Information on Uncertainty from Heterogeneous Expert Panels: Attributing U.S. Foodborne Pathogen Illness to Food Consumption. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC, www.rff.org
IFST, 2009 The House of Lords Science and Technology Committee Inquiry into the Use of Nanotechnologies in the Food Sector 2009: Written evidence submitted by the Institute of Food Science & Technology (IFST), 5 Cambridge Court, 210 Shepherds Bush Road, London, UK
Jasanoff, S., 2005. Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ.
Kahan, D.M., Braman, D., Slovic, P., Gastil J., Cohen, G., 2009. Cultural cognition of the risks and benefits of nanotechnology. Nat Nanotech 4: 87–90
Kahan, D.M., Slovic, P., Braman, D., Gastil, J., Cohen, G.L., 2007. Affect, Values, and Nanotechnology Risk Perceptions: An Experimental Investigation. Cultural Cognition Working Paper No. 22. 2nd Annual Conference on Empirical Legal Studies Paper
Kahan, D.M., Slovic, P., Braman, D., Gastil, J., Cohen, G.L., Kysar, D., 2008. Biased assimilation, polarization and cultural credibility: an experimental study of nanotechnology risk perceptions. The Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies, Brief No. 3, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington D.C.
Kuzma, J., VerHage, P., (2006) Nanotechnology in Agriculture and Food Production: Anticipated Applications. Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington, DC.
Kuzma, J., Larson, J., Najmaie, P., 2009. Evaluating Oversight Systems for Emerging Technologies: A Case Study of Genetically Engineered Organisms, J Law Med Ethics [in press for volume 37(4)].
Kuzma, J., Romanchek, J., and Kokotovich, A., 2008. Upstream Oversight Assessment for Agrifood Nanotechnology: A Case Studies Approach. Risk Anal 28(4): 1081-1098
Lee, C-J., Scheufele, D.A., Lewenstein, B.V., 2005. Public attitudes toward emerging technologies: examining the interactive effects of cognitions and affect on public attitudes toward nanotechnology. Sci Commun 27(2): 240 – 267.
Lux Research, 2005. Benchmarking U.S. States for Economic Development from Nanotechnology. Lux Research Inc., New York, NY
Lyndhurst, B., 2009. An Evidence Review of Public Attitudes to Emerging Food Technologies. Social Science Research Unit, Food Standards Agency, UK
Macoubrie, J., 2005a. Informed Public Perceptions of Nanotechnology and Trust in Government. The Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and the Pew Charitable Trusts. Washington DC.
Macoubrie, J., 2005b. Nanotechnology: public concerns, reasoning and trust in government. Public Understand Sci 15: 221–241
Mellman Group, 2006. Public sentiment about genetically modified food. Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology: Washington, DC
Miller, G., Senjen, R., 2008. Out of the Laboratory and onto our Plates: Nanotechnology in Food & Agriculture. A report prepared for Friends of the Earth Australia, Friends of the Earth Europe and Friends of the Earth United States and supported by Friends of the Earth Germany. Friends of the Earth Australia Nanotechnology Project, Australia.
NNI, 2009. What is nanotechnology? National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI). Washington, DC http://www.nano.gov/html/facts/whatIsNano.html [Accessed on December 1, 2009]
OECD, 2009. Responsible Development of Nanotechnology: Turning Vision into Reality. The Business and Industry Advisory Committee to the OECD (BIAC) Expert Group on Nanotechnology – Vision Paper. http://www.biac.org/statements/nanotech/FIN09-01_Nanotechnology_Vision_Paper.pdf [Accessed on: July 08, 2009]
PEN, 2009. Consumer Products: An inventory of nanotechnology-based consumer products currently on the market. Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington, DC http://www.nanotechproject.org/inventories/consumer/ [Accessed May 03, 2009]
PMSEIC, 2005. Nanotechnology: Enabling Technologies for Australian Innovative Industries. Prepared by an independent working group for the Prime Minister’s Science, Engineering and Innovation Council (PMSEIC), http://www.dest.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/1E1B501A-727A-4153-85EF-134B2DAF0925/4112/nanotechnology_pmseic110305.pdf [Accessed on: July 07, 2009]
Pray, C., Huang, J., Hu, R., Rozelle, S., 2002. Five years of Bt cotton in China – the benefits continue. Plant J 31(4): 423-430.
Priest, S., 2006. The North American opinion climate for nanotechnology and its products: opportunities and challenges. J Nanopart Res 8: 563 – 568.
RNCOS, 2007. “The World Nanotechnology Market 2006,” Market Research Consultancy Services, <http://www.marketresearch.com/product/display.asp?productid=1324644&SID=48696894-409888317-445212675&kw=nanotechnology> [Accessed on: April 03, 2009].
Roco, M.C., Bainbridge, W.S., 2007. Nanotechnology: Societal Implications—Individual Perspectives. Published by National Science Foundation, Washington, DC.
Ronteltap, A., van Trijp, J. C. M., Renes, R. J., Frewer, L.J., 2007. Consumer acceptance of technology-based food innovations: Lessons for the future of nutrigenomics. Appetite 49: 1–17
Roseman, M., 2005. An Overview of Nanotechnology in Canada: A Review and Analysis of Foreign Nanotechnology Strategies Developed for the Prime Minister’s Advisory Council on Science and Technology (PMACST). Report 2. Toronto, Canada. http://www.nano.uwaterloo.ca/pdfs/Nano%20Foreign%20Strategy%20study%20Final.pdf [Accessed on: July 07, 2009]
Sanguansri, P., Augustin M.A., 2006. Nanoscale materials development - a food industry perspective. Trends Food Sci Technol 17(10): 547-556
Satterfield, T., Kandlikar, M., Beaudrie, C.E.H., Conti, J., Harthorn, B.H. 2009. Anticipating the perceived risk of nanotechnologies. Nat Nanotechnol, DOI: 10.1038/NNANO.2009.265
Siegrist, M., 1999. A causal model explaining the perception and acceptance of gene technology. J Appl Soc Psychol 29:2093–2106.
Siegrist M., 2000. The influence of trust and perceptions of risks and benefits on the acceptance of gene technology. Risk Anal 20: 195–203.
Siegrist, M., 2008. Factors influencing public acceptance of innovative food technologies and products. Trends Food Sci Technol 19(11): 603-608
Siegrist, M., Cvetkovich, G., 2000. Perception of hazards: The role of social trust and knowledge. Risk Anal 20: 713–719.
Sozer, N., Kokini, J.L., 2009. Nanotechnology and its applications in the food sector, Trends Biotechnol, 27(2): 82-89
Stilgoe, T., 2007. Nanodialogues: experiments in public engagement with science. London: Demos.
Tarver, T., 2008. Food Nanotechnology. Scientific Summary Synopsis, Food Technol 11(06): 22
The Royal Society, 2004. Nanoscience and nanotechnologies: opportunities and uncertainties. The Royal Society & the Royal Academy of Engineering, The Royal society, London, UK
USDA, 2003. Nanoscale science and engineering for agriculture and food systems. A Report Submitted to Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service (CSREES), United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), National Planning Workshop, November 18-19, 2002, Washington, DC
Van der Fels-Klerz, I.J.H., Goossens, L.H.J., Saatkamp, H.W., Horst, S.H.S., 2002. Elicitation of Quantitative Data from a Heterogeneous Expert Panel: Formal Process and Application in Animal Health. Risk Anal 22(1) 67–81.
Yawson, R. M., & Kuzma, J. (2010). Systems Mapping of Consumer Acceptance of Agrifood Nanotechnology. Journal of Consumer Policy, 33 (4): 299-322. DOI: 10.1007/s10603-010-9134-5