Javascript is required
1.
Harvard University Web Publishing, What is the Food Supply Chain? [PDF docu- ment], Meant4Teachers: Toronto, available at http://meant4teachers.com/wpcontent/ uploads/2014/02/What-is-the-Food-Supply-Chain.pdf (accessed 16 November 2017).
2.
Govindan, K., Sustainable consumption and production in the food supply chain: a con- ceptual framework. International Journal of Production Economics [serial on the Inter- net], available at http://, 2017 (accessed 16 November 2017). [Crossref]
3.
Vecchione, M., Feldman, C. & Wunderlich, S., Consumer knowledge and attitudes about genetically modified food products and labelling policy. International Journal of Food Sciences & Nutrition [serial on the Internet], 66(3), pp. 329–335, 2015, available at SPORTDiscus with Full Text. [Crossref]
4.
León-Bravo, V., Caniato, F., Caridi, M. & Johnsen, T., Collaboration for sustainability in the food supply chain: a multi-stage study in Italy. Sustainability [Internet], 9(7), p. 1253, available at , 2017 (accessed 16 November 2017). [Crossref]
5.
Kini, V., Coca-Cola India Sustainability Report 2014 [Internet], Coca-Cola India Pvt. Ltd: Haryana, 100 p, available at https://www.coca-colaindia.com/stories/sustainability/ downloads/sustainability-report-2014, 2014.
6.
U.S. Department of Agriculture [Internet], U.S. Department of Agriculture: Washing- ton, DC. Biotechnology FAQs [about 4 screens], available at https://www.usda.gov/ topics/biotechnology/biotechnology-frequently-asked-questions-faqs, 2017 (accessed 16 November 2017).
7.
Hallman, W.K., Cuite, C.L. & Morin, X.K., Public Perceptions of Labeling Genetically Modified Foods (Working Paper No. 2013-1) [Internet], available at http://humeco.rut- gers.edu/documents_PDF/news/GMlabelingperceptions.pdf, 2013 (accessed 16 Novem- ber 2017).
8.
Non GMO Project [Internet], The Non-GMO Project: Bellingham, WA, Product Veri- fication, available at https://www.nongmoproject.org/product-verification/, 2016 (ac- cessed 16 November 2017).
9.
Blake, P., ABC News [Internet], ABC News Internet Ventures: New York, NY, Obama Signs Bill Mandating GMO Labeling, 29 July 2016 [about 1 screen], available at http:// abcnews.go.com/US/obama-signs-bill-mandating-gmolabeling/story?id=41004057, 2016 (accessed 16 November 2017).
10.
United States Department of Agriculture Agricultural Marketing Service [In- ternet], U.S. Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, Organic Labeling, available at https://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/organic/labeling, 2016 (accessed 16 November 2017).
11.
United States Department of Agriculture (Report) Office of Communication, [Inter- net]. United States Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, USDA Coexistence Factsheet: Conventional Farming, available at https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/ documents/coexistence-conventional-farming-factsheet.pdf, 2015 (accessed 16 No- vember 2017).
12.
Sax, J. & Doran, N., Food labeling and Consumer Associations with Health, Safety, and Environment. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics [serial on the Internet], 44(4), pp. 630–638, available at , 2016 (accessed 16 November 2017). [Crossref]
13.
Aleksejeva, I., An empirical study of Latvian consumers’ attitudes and perceptions towards genetically modified organisms. European Integration Studies [serial on the Internet], 10(10), pp. 157–168, available at http://eis.ktu.lt/index.php/EIS/article/ viewFile/14624/8518, 2016 (accessed 16 November 2017). DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.5755/j01.eis.0.10.14628.
14.
Turker, T., Kocak, N., Aydin, I., İstanbulluoğlu, H., Yildiran, N., Kilic, S., et al., De- termination of knowledge, attitude, behavior about genetically modified organisms in nursing school students. Gulhane Medical Journal [serial on the Internet], 55(4), pp. 297–304, available at http://gulhanemedj.org/abstract.php?id=776, 2013 (accessed 16 November 2017).
15.
Brown, J. & Kuzma, J., Hungry for information: public attitudes toward food nano- technology and labeling. Review of Policy Research [serial on the Internet], (5), p. 512, available at https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ropr.12035, 2013 (ac- cessed 16 November 2017).
16.
Wunderlich, S. & Gatto, K.A. Consumer perception of genetically modified organisms and sources of information. Advances in Nutrition [Internet], 6(6), pp. 842–851, avail- able at , 2015 (accessed 16 November 2017) [Crossref]
17.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Division on Earth and Life Studies; Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources; Committee on Genetically Engi- neered Crops: Past Experience and Future Prospects, National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine: Washington, DC, 606 p, available at https://www.nap.edu/ initiative/committee-on-genetically-engineered-crops-past-experience-and-future-pros- pects, 2016 (accessed 16 November 2017).
18.
Wunderlich, S., Gatto, K. & Smoller, M., Consumer knowledge about food production systems and their purchasing behavior. Environment, Development, and Sustainabil- ity [Internet], pp. 1–11, available at , 2016 (accessed 16 November 2017). [Crossref]
19.
Meier, M., Stoessel, F., Jungbluth, N., Juraske, R., Schader, C. & Stolze, M., Review: environmental impacts of organic and conventional agricultural products – are the dif- ferences captured by life cycle assessment?. Journal of Environmental Management [serial on the Internet], pp. 193–208, available at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub- med/25463583, 2015 (accessed 16 November 2017).
20.
Tsatsakis, A.. Nawaz, M., Kouretas, D., Balias, G., Savolainen, K., Chung, G., et al., Environmental impacts of genetically modified plants: a review. Environmental Research [serial on the Internet], 156, pp. 818–833, available at https://www.ncbi.nlm. nih.gov/pubmed/28347490, 2017 (accessed 16 November 2017).
21.
Wunderlich, S. & Smoller, M., Food supply chain in the United States: potential envi- ronmental impact. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Vol. 215, WIT Press: Southampton, ISSN 1743-3541, 2018.
22.
Bonroy, O. & Constantatos, C., The economics of labels: how their introduction affects the functioning of markets and welfare of all participants. American Journal of Agri- cultural Economics [Internet], 97(1), pp. 239–259, available at http://doi.10.1093/ajae/ aau088, 2015 (accessed 16 November 2017).
23.
Zechmeister, M., New Hope Network [Internet], New Hope Network: Boulder, CO Pre- diction: Organic foods and beverages market to reach $320 billion by 2025, available at https://www.newhope.com/news/prediction-organic-foods-and-beverages-market-reach- 320-billion-2025, 2017 (accessed 16 November 2017).
Search

Acadlore takes over the publication of IJEI from 2025 Vol. 8, No. 5. The preceding volumes were published under a CC BY 4.0 license by the previous owner, and displayed here as agreed between Acadlore and the previous owner. ✯ : This issue/volume is not published by Acadlore.

Open Access
Research article

Consumer Awareness and Knowledge About Food Sources and Possible Environmental Impact

s. wunderlich,
m. smoller
Department of Nutrition and Food Studies, Montclair State University, United States of America
International Journal of Environmental Impacts
|
Volume 2, Issue 1, 2019
|
Pages 85-96
Received: N/A,
Revised: N/A,
Accepted: N/A,
Available online: N/A
View Full Article|Download PDF

Abstract:

This study investigates consumer awareness and knowledge about two methods of food production and possible environmental impact, specifically organic farming and genetically modified or engineered food production. Consumers are often unaware of the details of the first step of the food supply chain, which is the food production method and its environmental impact. It is believed that organic farming causes the least damage to the environment as it uses no pesticides or herbicides in agriculture. How- ever, genetically modified food is used frequently in the United Sates to increase yield and to meet the growing demand for food. Consumers generally are becoming more interested to learn about the food they purchase and the possible environmental impact of how it was produced. An online survey was conducted to evaluate consumers’ knowledge about the production systems and their preferences. Two hundred and four adult participants answered all the questions on the survey. The survey questions in- cluded demographic data and general questions about their knowledge of and their beliefs regarding dif- ferent food production systems, particularly the genetically modified food and potential environmental impact. Almost half (48%) of the participants believed that genetically modified food production has a harmful impact on the environment, while 31.4% had no knowledge about this method of food production and possible environmental impact. A c2 test showed a significant association between preference for non-genetically modified food and individuals’ beliefs on how this food production system may impact the environment (c2 (1) = 29.592, p = 0.001). Seventy-five percent, of the 98 participants who believedthatgeneticallymodifiedfoodproductionhasaharmfulimpactontheenvironment,preferred foods to be labeled. A majority (almost 80%) of participants acknowledged that their food purchasing decisions are contingent on the method of food production and its possible impact on the environment.

Keywords: Consumer preference, Education, Environment, Genetically modified organism (GMO), Green Food Supply Chain (GFSC), Labeling, organic, Purchasing decisions, Sustainability

1. Introduction

2. Materials and Methods

3. Results

4. Discussion

5. Conclusions

6. Vitae

References
1.
Harvard University Web Publishing, What is the Food Supply Chain? [PDF docu- ment], Meant4Teachers: Toronto, available at http://meant4teachers.com/wpcontent/ uploads/2014/02/What-is-the-Food-Supply-Chain.pdf (accessed 16 November 2017).
2.
Govindan, K., Sustainable consumption and production in the food supply chain: a con- ceptual framework. International Journal of Production Economics [serial on the Inter- net], available at http://, 2017 (accessed 16 November 2017). [Crossref]
3.
Vecchione, M., Feldman, C. & Wunderlich, S., Consumer knowledge and attitudes about genetically modified food products and labelling policy. International Journal of Food Sciences & Nutrition [serial on the Internet], 66(3), pp. 329–335, 2015, available at SPORTDiscus with Full Text. [Crossref]
4.
León-Bravo, V., Caniato, F., Caridi, M. & Johnsen, T., Collaboration for sustainability in the food supply chain: a multi-stage study in Italy. Sustainability [Internet], 9(7), p. 1253, available at , 2017 (accessed 16 November 2017). [Crossref]
5.
Kini, V., Coca-Cola India Sustainability Report 2014 [Internet], Coca-Cola India Pvt. Ltd: Haryana, 100 p, available at https://www.coca-colaindia.com/stories/sustainability/ downloads/sustainability-report-2014, 2014.
6.
U.S. Department of Agriculture [Internet], U.S. Department of Agriculture: Washing- ton, DC. Biotechnology FAQs [about 4 screens], available at https://www.usda.gov/ topics/biotechnology/biotechnology-frequently-asked-questions-faqs, 2017 (accessed 16 November 2017).
7.
Hallman, W.K., Cuite, C.L. & Morin, X.K., Public Perceptions of Labeling Genetically Modified Foods (Working Paper No. 2013-1) [Internet], available at http://humeco.rut- gers.edu/documents_PDF/news/GMlabelingperceptions.pdf, 2013 (accessed 16 Novem- ber 2017).
8.
Non GMO Project [Internet], The Non-GMO Project: Bellingham, WA, Product Veri- fication, available at https://www.nongmoproject.org/product-verification/, 2016 (ac- cessed 16 November 2017).
9.
Blake, P., ABC News [Internet], ABC News Internet Ventures: New York, NY, Obama Signs Bill Mandating GMO Labeling, 29 July 2016 [about 1 screen], available at http:// abcnews.go.com/US/obama-signs-bill-mandating-gmolabeling/story?id=41004057, 2016 (accessed 16 November 2017).
10.
United States Department of Agriculture Agricultural Marketing Service [In- ternet], U.S. Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, Organic Labeling, available at https://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/organic/labeling, 2016 (accessed 16 November 2017).
11.
United States Department of Agriculture (Report) Office of Communication, [Inter- net]. United States Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, USDA Coexistence Factsheet: Conventional Farming, available at https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/ documents/coexistence-conventional-farming-factsheet.pdf, 2015 (accessed 16 No- vember 2017).
12.
Sax, J. & Doran, N., Food labeling and Consumer Associations with Health, Safety, and Environment. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics [serial on the Internet], 44(4), pp. 630–638, available at , 2016 (accessed 16 November 2017). [Crossref]
13.
Aleksejeva, I., An empirical study of Latvian consumers’ attitudes and perceptions towards genetically modified organisms. European Integration Studies [serial on the Internet], 10(10), pp. 157–168, available at http://eis.ktu.lt/index.php/EIS/article/ viewFile/14624/8518, 2016 (accessed 16 November 2017). DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.5755/j01.eis.0.10.14628.
14.
Turker, T., Kocak, N., Aydin, I., İstanbulluoğlu, H., Yildiran, N., Kilic, S., et al., De- termination of knowledge, attitude, behavior about genetically modified organisms in nursing school students. Gulhane Medical Journal [serial on the Internet], 55(4), pp. 297–304, available at http://gulhanemedj.org/abstract.php?id=776, 2013 (accessed 16 November 2017).
15.
Brown, J. & Kuzma, J., Hungry for information: public attitudes toward food nano- technology and labeling. Review of Policy Research [serial on the Internet], (5), p. 512, available at https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ropr.12035, 2013 (ac- cessed 16 November 2017).
16.
Wunderlich, S. & Gatto, K.A. Consumer perception of genetically modified organisms and sources of information. Advances in Nutrition [Internet], 6(6), pp. 842–851, avail- able at , 2015 (accessed 16 November 2017) [Crossref]
17.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Division on Earth and Life Studies; Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources; Committee on Genetically Engi- neered Crops: Past Experience and Future Prospects, National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine: Washington, DC, 606 p, available at https://www.nap.edu/ initiative/committee-on-genetically-engineered-crops-past-experience-and-future-pros- pects, 2016 (accessed 16 November 2017).
18.
Wunderlich, S., Gatto, K. & Smoller, M., Consumer knowledge about food production systems and their purchasing behavior. Environment, Development, and Sustainabil- ity [Internet], pp. 1–11, available at , 2016 (accessed 16 November 2017). [Crossref]
19.
Meier, M., Stoessel, F., Jungbluth, N., Juraske, R., Schader, C. & Stolze, M., Review: environmental impacts of organic and conventional agricultural products – are the dif- ferences captured by life cycle assessment?. Journal of Environmental Management [serial on the Internet], pp. 193–208, available at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub- med/25463583, 2015 (accessed 16 November 2017).
20.
Tsatsakis, A.. Nawaz, M., Kouretas, D., Balias, G., Savolainen, K., Chung, G., et al., Environmental impacts of genetically modified plants: a review. Environmental Research [serial on the Internet], 156, pp. 818–833, available at https://www.ncbi.nlm. nih.gov/pubmed/28347490, 2017 (accessed 16 November 2017).
21.
Wunderlich, S. & Smoller, M., Food supply chain in the United States: potential envi- ronmental impact. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Vol. 215, WIT Press: Southampton, ISSN 1743-3541, 2018.
22.
Bonroy, O. & Constantatos, C., The economics of labels: how their introduction affects the functioning of markets and welfare of all participants. American Journal of Agri- cultural Economics [Internet], 97(1), pp. 239–259, available at http://doi.10.1093/ajae/ aau088, 2015 (accessed 16 November 2017).
23.
Zechmeister, M., New Hope Network [Internet], New Hope Network: Boulder, CO Pre- diction: Organic foods and beverages market to reach $320 billion by 2025, available at https://www.newhope.com/news/prediction-organic-foods-and-beverages-market-reach- 320-billion-2025, 2017 (accessed 16 November 2017).
Cite this:
APA Style
IEEE Style
BibTex Style
MLA Style
Chicago Style
GB-T-7714-2015
Wunderlich, S. & Smoller, M. (2019). Consumer Awareness and Knowledge About Food Sources and Possible Environmental Impact. Int. J. Environ. Impacts., 2(1), 85-96. https://doi.org/10.2495/EI-V2-N1-85-96
S. Wunderlich and M. Smoller, "Consumer Awareness and Knowledge About Food Sources and Possible Environmental Impact," Int. J. Environ. Impacts., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 85-96, 2019. https://doi.org/10.2495/EI-V2-N1-85-96
@research-article{Wunderlich2019ConsumerAA,
title={Consumer Awareness and Knowledge About Food Sources and Possible Environmental Impact},
author={S. Wunderlich and M. Smoller},
journal={International Journal of Environmental Impacts},
year={2019},
page={85-96},
doi={https://doi.org/10.2495/EI-V2-N1-85-96}
}
S. Wunderlich, et al. "Consumer Awareness and Knowledge About Food Sources and Possible Environmental Impact." International Journal of Environmental Impacts, v 2, pp 85-96. doi: https://doi.org/10.2495/EI-V2-N1-85-96
S. Wunderlich and M. Smoller. "Consumer Awareness and Knowledge About Food Sources and Possible Environmental Impact." International Journal of Environmental Impacts, 2, (2019): 85-96. doi: https://doi.org/10.2495/EI-V2-N1-85-96
WUNDERLICH S， SMOLLER M. Consumer Awareness and Knowledge About Food Sources and Possible Environmental Impact[J]. International Journal of Environmental Impacts， 2019， 2(1)： 85-96. https://doi.org/10.2495/EI-V2-N1-85-96