This article examines the factors that condition citizens’ attitudes toward genetically modified (GM) foods by considering individual-level attitudes in 15 European Union member states. Previous research has shown that European attitudes toward GM foods are influenced by overall levels of scientific literacy, consumer exposure to media coverage, and broader socio-political preferences. This article seeks to expand on this literature by testing some of these explanations in a multivariate analysis. To test our propositions, we develop and estimate a logistic regression model using data derived from Eurobarometer surveys. While the sources of information that people value and their attitudes toward EU policy in related areas explain to some extent support for GM foods, our strongest finding confirms the importance of public understanding of science as a basis for support for this emerging technology.
AugoustinosMCrabbSShepherdR (2010) Genetically modified food in the news: Media representations of the GM debate in the UK, Public Understanding of Science19(1): 98–114.
3.
AziakouG (1998) Farm biotechnology: Panacea or dangerous science?Agence France Presse, Dec. 16.
4.
BauerM (2005a) Public perceptions and mass media in the biotechnology controversy, International Journal of Public Opinion Research17(1): 5–22.
5.
BauerM (2005b) Distinguishing red and green biotechnology: Cultivation effects of the elite press, International Journal of Public Opinion Research17(1): 63–89.
BonnyS (2003) Why are most Europeans opposed to GMOs? Factors explaining rejection in France and Europe, Electronic Journal of Biotechnology6(1): 50–71.
8.
BredahlL (2001) Determinants of consumer attitudes and purchase intentions with regard to genetically modified foods: Results of a crossnational survey, Journal of Consumer Policy24(1): 23–61.
9.
CEC (North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation) (2004) Maize and biodiversity: The effects of transgenic maize in Mexico. Final report to be presented to CEC Council in June 2004.
10.
CeccoliS (2004) Pill Politics: Drugs and the FDA. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
11.
CharlesD (2001) Lords of the Harvest: Biotech, Big Money, and the Future of Food. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Publishing.
12.
Chemical Week (2007) Global biotech crop area grows beyond 100 million hectares. January31, p. 7.
13.
ChristensenT (2002) Eurobarometer 55.2: Science and Technology, Agriculture, the Euro, and Internet Access, May–June 2001 [computer file]. ICPSR version. Brussels: European Opinion Research Group EEIG [producer], 2001. Cologne, Germany: Zentralarchiv fur Empirische Sozialforschung / Ann Arbor, MI: Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributors], 2002.
14.
CookGRobbinsPTPieriE (2006) Words of mass destruction: British newspaper coverage of the genetically modified food debate, expert and non-expert reactions, Public Understanding of Science15: 5–29.
15.
Costa-FontMGilJMTraillWB (2008) Consumer acceptance, valuation of and attitudes towards genetically modified food: Review and implications for food policy, Food Policy33: 99–111.
16.
Delli CarpiniMKeeterS (1996) What Americans Know about Politics and Why It Matters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
17.
DurantJEvansGThomasG (1989) The public understanding of science, Nature340, 6July.
18.
The Economist (2008) The next Green Revolution. February23.
19.
EinsiedelE (1994) Mental maps of science-knowledge and attitudes among Canadian adults, International Journal of Public Opinion Research6 (Spring): 35–44.
European Council (1990) Decision of 25 April 1990 Concerning the Administration of Bovine Somatotrophin, 90/218/EEC, JOL 1990/116, p. 27.
22.
European Council (1999) Decision of 17 December 1999 Concerning the Placing on the Market and Administration of Bovine Somatotrophin, 99/879/EEC, JOL 1999/331, p. 71.
23.
European Union (2004) Questions and Answers on the Regulation of GMOs in the EU, Memo/04/16, Brussels, 28January.
24.
EvensonR (2002) Agricultural biotechnology. In: SteilBVictorDNelsonR (eds) Technological Innovation and Economic Performance. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 367–84.
25.
GaskellGAllumNStaresS (2003) Europeans and Biotechnology in 2002. Report to the EC Directorate General for Research from the project Life Sciences in European Society, QLG7-CT-1999-00286, March212003.
26.
GaskellGBauerMDurantJAllumNC (1999) Worlds apart? The reception of genetically modified foods in Europe and the US, Science285(July161999): 384–7.
27.
GaskellGEinsiedelEPriestSEyckTAllumNTorgersenH (2001) Troubled waters: The Atlantic divide on biotechnology policy. In: GaskellGBauerM (eds) Biotechnology 1996–2000: The Years of Controversy. London: NMSI Trading Ltd, Science Museum, pp. 96–115.
28.
GraberD (1988) Processing the News: How People Tame the Information Tide. New York: Longman.
29.
GuttelingJ (2005) Mazur’s hypothesis on technology controversy and media, International Journal of Public Opinion Research17(1): 23–41.
30.
HendersonROrsenigoLPisanoG (1999) The pharmaceutical industry and the revolution in molecular biology: Interactions among scientific, institutional, and organizational change. In: MoweryDNelsonR (eds) Sources of Industrial Leadership: Studies of Seven Industries. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 267–311.
31.
IyengarS (1991) Is Anyone Responsible? How Television Frames Political Issues. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
32.
JamesC (2009) Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2009. International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications. ISAAA Briefs No. 41-2009.
33.
KingG (1989) Unifying Political Methodology: The Likelihood Theory of Statistical Inference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
34.
KlotzR (2004) The Politics of Internet Communication. Boulder, CO: Rowman and Littlefield.
35.
KnightJMatherDHoldsworthDErmenD (2007) Acceptance of GM food – An experiment in six countries, Nature Biotechnology25(2) (May): 507–8.
36.
LassenJMadsenKSandoeP (2001) Ethics and genetic engineering: Lessons to be learned from GM foods, Bioprocess and Biosystems Engineering, September.
37.
LeanG (2010) The GM war in Europe starts here, Daily Telegraph, March13, p. 22.
38.
LiaoTF (1994) Interpreting Probability Models: Logit, Probit, and Other Generalized Linear Models. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
39.
LipsetSMSchneiderW (1983) The Confidence Gap: Business, Labor and Government in the Public Mind. New York: The Free Press.
40.
LonerE (2008) The importance of having a different opinion: Europeans and GM foods, Archives Européennes de Sociologie49(1): 31–62.
41.
McEneaneyE (2003) The worldwide cachet of scientific literacy, Comparative Education Review47(2): 217–28.
42.
MazurA (1981) Media coverage and public opinion on scientific controversies, Journal of Communication31(2): 106–15.
43.
MillerJ (1993) Scientific literacy: A conceptual and empirical review, Daedalus112 (Spring): 29–48.
44.
MillerJ (1998) The measurement of civic scientific literacy, Public Understanding of Science7 (July): 203–23.
45.
NestleM (2002) Food Politics: How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition and Health. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
46.
NestleM (2003) Safe Food: Bacteria, Biotechnology, and Bioterrorism. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
47.
PageBShapiroR (1992) The Rational Public: Fifty Years of Trends in Americans’ Policy Preferences. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
PollackMShafferG (2001) The challenge of reconciling regulatory differences: Food safety and GMOs in the transatlantic relationship. In: PollackMShafferG (eds) Transatlantic Governance in the Global Economy. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
50.
PollackMShafferG (2009) When Cooperation Fails: The International Law and Politics of Genetically Modified Foods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
51.
PoulterS (2005) Coming to our plates, the GM corn that harmed rats, Daily Mail (London), May23, p. 20.
52.
PrewittK (1982) The public and science policy, Science, Technology, and Human Values39 (Spring): 5–14.
53.
PrewittK (1983) Scientific illiteracy and democratic theory, Daedalus112 (Spring): 49–64.
54.
RifkinJ (1998) The Biotech Century: Harnessing the Gene and Remaking the World. New York: Jeremy Tarcher.
55.
ScholdererJ (2005) The GM foods debate in Europe: History, regulatory solutions, and consumer response research, Journal of Public Affairs5(3–4): 263–74.
56.
ShamosM (1995) The Myth of Scientific Literacy. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
57.
ShanahanJScheufeleDLeeE (2001) Attitudes about agricultural biotechnology and genetically modified organisms, Public Opinion Quarterly65: 267–81.
58.
SpecterM (2002) The Pharmageddon Riddle, New Yorker, 10April, pp. 58–71.
59.
ThomasGDurantJ (1987) Why should we promote the public understanding of science? In: ShortlandM (ed.) Scientific Literacy Papers. Oxford: Department of External Studies, pp. 1–14.
60.
UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization) (2000) Science and technology education: Philosophy of Project 2000+. The full UNECSO report, Project 2000+: Scientific and Technological Literacy for All, is available at www.UNESCO.org.
61.
WalbergH (1993) Scientific literacy and economic productivity in international perspective, Daedalus112(Spring): 1–28.
62.
WestD (2001) The Rise and Fall of the Media Establishment. Boston, MA: Bedford/St Martins.
63.
WienerJRogersM (2002) Comparing precaution in the United States and Europe, Journal of Risk Research5(4), pp. 317–49.
64.
WildavskyA (1995) But Is It True? A Citizen’s Guide to Environmental Health and Safety Issues. London: Cambridge University Press.
65.
ZallerJ (1992) Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.
