The U.S. Department of Agriculture expects companies to disclose genetically modified (GM) ingredients in foods and beverages by January 2022. While food companies fear that the stigma of GM labels could cause GM food sales to decline, eco-labeling could lessen the impact of GM-labeling. The results of the present research indicate that neither the eco-labeling alone nor the eco-labeling accompanied by information about the environmental benefits of GM crops influence consumers’ willingness to buy. Based on the mediation analysis, however, trust of eco-labels mediates the relationship between GM foods’ environmental friendliness information and consumers’ willingness to buy eco-labeled GM food. The theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.
AndrewsJ., BurtonS., KeesJ., 2011. Is simpler always better? Consumer evaluations of front-of-package nutrition symbols. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing30 (2), 175–190.
2.
BarrowsG., SextonS. & ZilbermanD. (2014). Agricultural biotechnology: the promise and prospects of genetically modified crops. J. Econ. Perspect., 28(1), 99–120.
3.
BurtonS., GarretsonJ.A. & VelliquetteA.M. (1999). Implications of accurate usage of nutrition facts panel information for food product evaluations and purchase intentions. J. Acad. Mark. Sci., 27(4), 470–480.
4.
CaiZ. & AguilarF.X. (2013). Meta-analysis of consumer's willingness-to-pay premiums for certified wood products. J. Forest Econ., 19(1), 15–31.
5.
ChristouP., CapellT., KohliA., GatehouseJ.A. & GatehouseA.M. (2006). Recent developments and future prospects in insect pest control in transgenic crops. Trends Plant Sci., 11(6), 302–308.
FrewerL.J., van der LansI.A., FischerA.R., ReindersM.J., MenozziD., ZhangX., van den BergI. & ZimmermannK.L. (2013). Public perceptions of agri-food applications of genetic modification–a systematic review and meta-analysis. Trends Food Sci. Technol., 30(2), 142–152.
10.
GertzR. (2005). Eco-labelling—a case for deregulation?. Law Probab. Risk, 4(3), 127–141.
11.
GleimM.R., SmithJ.S., AndrewsD. & CroninJ.J.Jr (2013). Against the green: a multi-method examination of the barriers to green consumption. J. Retail., 89(1), 44–61.
12.
GodfrayH. C. J., BeddingtonJ. R., CruteI. R., HaddadL., LawrenceD., MuirJ. F., ToulminC. (2010). Food security: the challenge of feeding 9 billion people. Science, 327(5967), 812–818.
HalfordN.G. & ShewryP.R. (2000). Genetically modified crops: methodology, benefits, regulation and public concerns. Br. Med. Bull., 56(1), 62–73.
15.
HallmanW.K., AdelajaA.O., SchillingB.J. & LangJ.T. (2002). Public perceptions of genetically modified foods: Americans know not what they eat (No. 1327-2016-103626).
HauserD.J. & SchwarzN., (2016). Attentive Turkers: MTurk participants perform better on online attention checks than do subject pool participants. Behav. Res. Methods, 48(1), 400–407.
18.
HawsK.L., WinterichK.P. & NaylorR.W. (2014). Seeing the world through GREEN-tinted glasses: Green consumption values and responses to environmentally friendly products. J. Consum. Psychol., 24(3), 336–354.
19.
HayesA. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: a regression-based approach. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
20.
HayesA. F., & PreacherK. J. (2014). Statistical mediation analysis with a multicategorical independent variable. Br. J. Math. Stat. Psychol., 67(3), 451–470.
21.
HossainF. & OnyangoB. (2004). Product attributes and consumer acceptance of nutritionally enhanced genetically modified foods. Int. J. Consum. Stud., 28(3), 255–267.
JamesC., 2015. Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops, 2014 (Vol. 49). Ithaca, NY: ISAAA.
24.
JanssenM. & HammU. (2012). Product labelling in the market for organic food: Consumer preferences and willingness-to-pay for different organic certification logos. Food Qual. Prefer., 25(1), 9–22.
25.
KimJ., HwangE., PhillipsM., JangS., KimJ. E., SpenceM. T., & ParkJ. (2018). Mediation analysis revisited: practical suggestions for addressing common deficiencies. Aust. Mark. J., 26(1), 59–64.
26.
KolodinskyJ., DeSistoT.P. and LabrecqueJ. (2003). Understanding the factors related to concerns over generically engineered food products: are national differences real?. Int. J. Consum. Stud., 27(4), 266–276.
27.
LeeM. S. W., ConroyD., & MotionJ. (2012). Brand avoidance, genetic modification, and brandlessness. Aust. Mark. J., 20(4), 297–302.
MaghariB.M. & ArdekaniA.M. (2011). Genetically modified foods and social concerns. Avicenna J. Med. Biotechnol., 3(3), 109.
30.
MardeS. & Verite-MasserotC. (2018). Antecedents of green consumption: a scale of measure. J. Consumer Marketing, 35(4), 414–425.
31.
MontuoriP., TriassiM., & SarnacchiaroP. (2012). The consumption of genetically modified foods in Italian high school students. Food Qual. Prefer., 26, 246–251.
32.
MorganR.M. & HuntS.D. (1994). The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. J. Mark., 58(3), 20–38.
33.
MüllerC.E. & GausH. (2015). Consumer response to negative media information about certified organic food products. J. Consum. Policy, 38(4), 387–409.
34.
NazarkoO.M., Van AckerR.C. & EntzM.H. (2005). Strategies and tactics for herbicide use reduction in field crops in Canada: a review. Can. J. Plant Sci., 85(2), 457–479.
35.
OatesC., McDonaldS., AlevizouP., HwangK., YoungW. & McMorlandL.A. (2008). Marketing sustainability: use of information sources and degrees of voluntary simplicity. J. Mark. Commun., 14(5), 351–365.
ÖlanderF. & ThøgersenJ. (1995). Understanding of consumer behaviour as a prerequisite for environmental protection. J. Consum. Policy, 18(4), 345–385.
38.
PadelS. & FosterC. (2005). Exploring the gap between attitudes and behaviour: Understanding why consumers buy or do not buy organic food. Br. Food J., 107(8), 606–625.
39.
PhippsR.H. & ParkJ.R. (2002). Environmental benefits of genetically modified crops: global and European perspectives on their ability to reduce pesticide use. J. Anim. Feed Sci., 11(1), 1–18.
40.
Pickett-BakerJ. & OzakiR. (2008). Pro-environmental products: marketing influence on consumer purchase decision. J. Consum. Mark., 25(5), 281–293.
41.
PrakashD., VermaS., BhatiaR. & TiwaryB.N. (2011). Risks and precautions of genetically modified organisms. ISRN Ecol..
42.
QaimM. (2009). The economics of genetically modified crops. Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ., 1(1), 665–693.
43.
RashidN.R.N.A. (2009). Awareness of eco-label in Malaysia's green marketing initiative. Int. J. Bus. Manag., 4(8), 132–141.
44.
RexE. & BaumannH. (2007). Beyond ecolabels: what green marketing can learn from conventional marketing. J. Cleaner Prod., 15(6), 567–576.
45.
RobertsJ.A. (1996). Green consumers in the 1990s: profile and implications for advertising. J. Bus. Res., 36(3), 217–231.
46.
RousuM., HuffmanW.E., ShogrenJ.F. & TegeneA. (2007). Effects and value of verifiable information in a controversial market: evidence from lab auctions of genetically modified food. Econ. Inq., 45(3), 409–432.
47.
SirdeshmukhD., SinghJ. & SabolB. (2002). Consumer trust, value, and loyalty in relational exchanges. J. Mark., 66(1), 15–37.
48.
SønderskovK.M. & DaugbjergC. (2011). The state and consumer confidence in eco-labeling: organic labeling in Denmark, Sweden, The United Kingdom and The United States. Agric. Hum. Values, 28(4), 507–517.
49.
SörqvistP., MarshJ.E., HolmgrenM., HulmeR., HagaA. & SeagerP.B. (2016). Effects of labeling a product eco-friendly and genetically modified: a cross-cultural comparison for estimates of taste, willingness to pay and health consequences. Food Quality Prefer., 50, 65–70.
50.
SteinhartY., AyalonO. & PutermanH. (2013). The effect of an environmental claim on consumers' perceptions about luxury and utilitarian products. J. Clean. Prod., 53, 277–286.
51.
TaufiqueK.M.R., VocinoA. & PolonskyM.J. (2017). The influence of eco-label knowledge and trust on pro-environmental consumer behaviour in an emerging market. J. Strat. Mark., 25(7), 511–529.
52.
TeislM.F., RadasS. & RoeB. (2008). Struggles in optimal labelling: how different consumers react to various labels for genetically modified foods. Int. J. Consum. Stud., 32(5), 447–456.
53.
TeislM.F., RoeB. & HicksR.L. (2002). Can eco-labels tune a market? Evidence from dolphin-safe labeling. J. Environ. Econ. Manag., 43(3), 339–359.
ThøgersenJ. (2000). Psychological determinants of paying attention to eco-labels in purchase decisions: model development and multinational validation. J. Consum. Policy, 23(3), 285–313.
56.
ThøgersenJ., HaugaardP. & OlesenA. (2010). Consumer responses to ecolabels. Eur. J. Mark., 44(11/12), 1787–1810.
57.
SecretariatU.N.C.T.A.D., 1994. International Cooperation on Eco-Labelling and Eco-Certification Programmes and Market Opportunities for Environmentally Friendly Products. TD/B/WG. 6/2, October 6.
58.
Van AckerR.C., McLeanN. & MartinR.C. (2007). Development of quality assurance protocols to prevent GM-contamination of organic crops. In Handbook of Organic Food Safety and Quality, pp. 466–489. Woodhead Publishing.
59.
Van AckerR., RahmanM. & CiciS.Z.H. (2017). Pros and cons of GMO crop farming. Environ. Sci., 1–26.
60.
WhiteK., HabibR., & HardistyD. J. (2019). How to SHIFT consumer behaviors to be more sustainable: a literature review and guiding framework. J. Mark., 83(3), 22–49.
61.
WilliamsP. D., & HammittJ. K. (2001). Perceived risks of conventional and organic produce: pesticides, pathogens, and natural toxins. Risk Anal., 21, 319–330.
