Cargando…

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 introduct...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Delwaide, Anne-Cécile, Nalley, Lawton L., Dixon, Bruce L., Danforth, Diana M., Nayga, Rodolfo M., Van Loo, Ellen J., Verbeke, Wim
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4431710/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25973946
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0126060
_version_ 1782371392433422336
author Delwaide, Anne-Cécile
Nalley, Lawton L.
Dixon, Bruce L.
Danforth, Diana M.
Nayga, Rodolfo M.
Van Loo, Ellen J.
Verbeke, Wim
author_facet Delwaide, Anne-Cécile
Nalley, Lawton L.
Dixon, Bruce L.
Danforth, Diana M.
Nayga, Rodolfo M.
Van Loo, Ellen J.
Verbeke, Wim
author_sort Delwaide, Anne-Cécile
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4431710
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44317102015-05-27 Revisiting GMOs: Are There Differences in European Consumers’ Acceptance and Valuation for Cisgenically vs Transgenically Bred Rice? Delwaide, Anne-Cécile Nalley, Lawton L. Dixon, Bruce L. Danforth, Diana M. Nayga, Rodolfo M. Van Loo, Ellen J. Verbeke, Wim PLoS One Research Article 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. Public Library of Science 2015-05-14 /pmc/articles/PMC4431710/ /pubmed/25973946 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0126060 Text en © 2015 Delwaide et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Delwaide, Anne-Cécile
Nalley, Lawton L.
Dixon, Bruce L.
Danforth, Diana M.
Nayga, Rodolfo M.
Van Loo, Ellen J.
Verbeke, Wim
Revisiting GMOs: Are There Differences in European Consumers’ Acceptance and Valuation for Cisgenically vs Transgenically Bred Rice?
title Revisiting GMOs: Are There Differences in European Consumers’ Acceptance and Valuation for Cisgenically vs Transgenically Bred Rice?
title_full Revisiting GMOs: Are There Differences in European Consumers’ Acceptance and Valuation for Cisgenically vs Transgenically Bred Rice?
title_fullStr Revisiting GMOs: Are There Differences in European Consumers’ Acceptance and Valuation for Cisgenically vs Transgenically Bred Rice?
title_full_unstemmed Revisiting GMOs: Are There Differences in European Consumers’ Acceptance and Valuation for Cisgenically vs Transgenically Bred Rice?
title_short Revisiting GMOs: Are There Differences in European Consumers’ Acceptance and Valuation for Cisgenically vs Transgenically Bred Rice?
title_sort revisiting gmos: are there differences in european consumers’ acceptance and valuation for cisgenically vs transgenically bred rice?
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4431710/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25973946
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0126060
work_keys_str_mv AT delwaideannececile revisitinggmosaretheredifferencesineuropeanconsumersacceptanceandvaluationforcisgenicallyvstransgenicallybredrice
AT nalleylawtonl revisitinggmosaretheredifferencesineuropeanconsumersacceptanceandvaluationforcisgenicallyvstransgenicallybredrice
AT dixonbrucel revisitinggmosaretheredifferencesineuropeanconsumersacceptanceandvaluationforcisgenicallyvstransgenicallybredrice
AT danforthdianam revisitinggmosaretheredifferencesineuropeanconsumersacceptanceandvaluationforcisgenicallyvstransgenicallybredrice
AT naygarodolfom revisitinggmosaretheredifferencesineuropeanconsumersacceptanceandvaluationforcisgenicallyvstransgenicallybredrice
AT vanlooellenj revisitinggmosaretheredifferencesineuropeanconsumersacceptanceandvaluationforcisgenicallyvstransgenicallybredrice
AT verbekewim revisitinggmosaretheredifferencesineuropeanconsumersacceptanceandvaluationforcisgenicallyvstransgenicallybredrice