{"title":"Gene Editing Versus Gene Modification: Awareness, Attitudes and Behavioral Intentions of Lithuanian Consumers, Producers, and Farmers","authors":"L. Bašinskienė, B. Šeinauskienė","doi":"10.3303/CET2187073","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Gene editing (GE) and gene modification (GM) technologies demonstrate noticeable differences. GE technologies introduce changes in DNA, which are intrinsic to the species, while GM technologies incorporate changes from foreign species. The potential benefits of GE have been highlighted in a number of recent scientific studies, pointing to the opportunities that are opening up in addressing the food availability problems as a result of the growing world population. However, the implementation of GE technology in food production would rely on public awareness, acceptance, and attitudes toward genetically modified and genetically edited food products. Based on the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA), we surveyed Lithuanian consumers, farmers, and producers for their awareness, attitudes, and behavioural intentions towards GM and GE food. The 251 consumers, 50 farmers, and 56 food producers participated in the survey. Consistent across all samples (consumers, farmers, and producers, respectively), GM technology-related products’ self-assed awareness was significantly higher than the level of self-assed awareness of GE products. Awareness of GEO in all samples is relatively low. The level of support for GMO and GEO is also low in all groups of respondents. All groups – consumers, farmers, and producers – are less negative about food produced from GE than from GM raw materials. There was a statistically significantly higher overall likelihood for future use of GEO than the GMO. Producers would be less likely than consumers and farmers to use GMOs in the future. The same inclinations are observed with regard to GEO, with statistically significant differences in the sample of consumers, farmers, and producers.","PeriodicalId":9695,"journal":{"name":"Chemical engineering transactions","volume":"53 1","pages":"433-438"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chemical engineering transactions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3303/CET2187073","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Chemical Engineering","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Abstract
Gene editing (GE) and gene modification (GM) technologies demonstrate noticeable differences. GE technologies introduce changes in DNA, which are intrinsic to the species, while GM technologies incorporate changes from foreign species. The potential benefits of GE have been highlighted in a number of recent scientific studies, pointing to the opportunities that are opening up in addressing the food availability problems as a result of the growing world population. However, the implementation of GE technology in food production would rely on public awareness, acceptance, and attitudes toward genetically modified and genetically edited food products. Based on the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA), we surveyed Lithuanian consumers, farmers, and producers for their awareness, attitudes, and behavioural intentions towards GM and GE food. The 251 consumers, 50 farmers, and 56 food producers participated in the survey. Consistent across all samples (consumers, farmers, and producers, respectively), GM technology-related products’ self-assed awareness was significantly higher than the level of self-assed awareness of GE products. Awareness of GEO in all samples is relatively low. The level of support for GMO and GEO is also low in all groups of respondents. All groups – consumers, farmers, and producers – are less negative about food produced from GE than from GM raw materials. There was a statistically significantly higher overall likelihood for future use of GEO than the GMO. Producers would be less likely than consumers and farmers to use GMOs in the future. The same inclinations are observed with regard to GEO, with statistically significant differences in the sample of consumers, farmers, and producers.
期刊介绍:
Chemical Engineering Transactions (CET) aims to be a leading international journal for publication of original research and review articles in chemical, process, and environmental engineering. CET begin in 2002 as a vehicle for publication of high-quality papers in chemical engineering, connected with leading international conferences. In 2014, CET opened a new era as an internationally-recognised journal. Articles containing original research results, covering any aspect from molecular phenomena through to industrial case studies and design, with a strong influence of chemical engineering methodologies and ethos are particularly welcome. We encourage state-of-the-art contributions relating to the future of industrial processing, sustainable design, as well as transdisciplinary research that goes beyond the conventional bounds of chemical engineering. Short reviews on hot topics, emerging technologies, and other areas of high interest should highlight unsolved challenges and provide clear directions for future research. The journal publishes periodically with approximately 6 volumes per year. Core topic areas: -Batch processing- Biotechnology- Circular economy and integration- Environmental engineering- Fluid flow and fluid mechanics- Green materials and processing- Heat and mass transfer- Innovation engineering- Life cycle analysis and optimisation- Modelling and simulation- Operations and supply chain management- Particle technology- Process dynamics, flexibility, and control- Process integration and design- Process intensification and optimisation- Process safety- Product development- Reaction engineering- Renewable energy- Separation processes- Smart industry, city, and agriculture- Sustainability- Systems engineering- Thermodynamic- Waste minimisation, processing and management- Water and wastewater engineering