Korean Journal of Agricultural Science (농업과학연구)

Institute of Agricultural Science, CNU (충남대학교 농업과학연구소)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Perception of agricultural biotechnology according to information navigation activities on agricultural biotechnology

  • Bumkyu, Lee (Department of Environment Science & Biotechnology, Jeonju University) ;
  • Sung-Dug, Oh (Department of Agricultural Biotechnology, National Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Rural Development Administration) ;
  • Youn Sung, Cho (Department of Agricultural Biotechnology, National Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Rural Development Administration)
  • Received : 2021.09.01
  • Accepted : 2021.10.05
  • Published : 2021.12.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

A study was undertaken to identify variations in the level of awareness, the information collection status, the level of acceptance, and the characteristics of information collection as it pertains to agricultural biotechnology based on information collection in the field of agricultural biotechnology. When examining subjective awareness, objective awareness, and interest in agricultural biotechnology, the results showed that the levels of all three variables were higher in cases where information exploration of agricultural biotechnology had been experienced. Among the participants who have experience in voluntarily collecting information about agricultural biotechnology, helpful information at a rate of 51.6% and harmful information at a rate of 42.0% were acquired, values much higher than the 37% and 30% corresponding rates for participants who had no experience. However, it was also found that harmful information has a significantly greater impact on perceptions of the future. The characteristics of information collection for agricultural biotechnology indicated that those with experience in voluntary information collection particularly preferred the Internet, whereas those without any experience showed little difference with regard to television and/or the internet. According to a survey of participants' interest areas in agricultural biotechnology and their level of information acquisition, "Safety of human bodies" was rated the top interest area at 36.9%, which also had the highest level of information acquisition at 30.0%. In providing and sharing information in the future, this is a direct reference to the priorities and proportions of each field.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This study was carried out with the support of 'Research Program for Agricultural Science & Technology Development (Project No. PJ0157922021)', National Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Rural Development Administration, Republic of Korea.

References

  1. Chen MF, Hsiao LL. 2007. The consumer's attitude toward genetically modified foods in Taiwan. Food Quality and Preference 18:662-674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2006.10.002
  2. Costa-Font M, Gil JM. 2009. Structural equation modeling of consumer acceptance of genetically modified (GM) food in the Mediterranean Europe: A cross country study. Food Quality and Preference 20:399-409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2009.02.011
  3. Dean M, Shepherd R. 2007. Effects of information from sources in conflict and in consensus on perceptions of genetically modified food. Food Quality and Preference 18:460-469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2006.05.004
  4. Ghasemi S, Karami E, Azadi H. 2012. Knowledge, attitudes and behavioral intentions of agricultural professionals toward genetically modified (GM) foods: A case study in Southwest Iran. Science and Engineering Ethics 19:201-227.
  5. ISAAA (International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications). 2019. Global status of commercialized biotech/GM crops: 2017, BRIEF 53. Accessed in http://www.isaaa.org on 5 August 2021.
  6. Jiang S, Fang W. 2019. Misinformation and disinformation in science: Examining the social diffusion of rumours about GMOs. Cultures of Science 2:327-340. https://doi.org/10.1177/209660831900200407
  7. Kata A. 2010. A postmodern pandora's box: Anti-vaccination misinformation on the internet. Vaccine 287:1709-1716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2009.12.022
  8. KBCH (Korea Biosafety Clearing House). 2021. Stats of GM crops in Korea. Accessed in http://www.biosafety.or.kr on 5 August 2021. [in Korean]
  9. Keenan M, Dillenburger K. 2018. How 'fake news' affects autism policy. Societies 82:29. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc8020029
  10. Kim BY, Lee NK, Song NE. 2015. Assessment of stakeholders' attitude & ask a consumer for the green-bioperception towards GM foods in South Korea: Implications for ifferentiated risk communication & media management. East and West Studies 27:29-42. [in Korean]
  11. Kim HC, Kim MR. 2001. Consumers'recognition and information need about GMO in Youngnam region. Journal of East Asian Society of Dietary Life 11:247-258. [in Korean]
  12. Kim JM. 2019. Ask a consumer for the green-bio. Korea Public Management Institute, Hallymwon Publishing, Seoul, Korea. [in Korean]
  13. Lee B, Kim JM. 2020. Provision of efficient online information for agricultural biotechnology. Korean Journal of Agricultural Science 47:239-253. [in Korean]
  14. Lee B, Suh S. 2011. A study on the trends and biosafety assessment of genetically modified crops. Research of Environmental Law 33:1-25. [in Korean]
  15. Park SH. 1999. Genetically modified food and its safety assessment. Korea Soybean Digest 16:20-30. [in Korean]
  16. PG Economics. 2011. Sustainable, profitable and productive agriculture continues to be boosted by the contribution of biotech crops. PG Economic, Dorchester, UK.
  17. Prati G, Pietrantoni L, Zani B. 2012. The prediction of intention to consume genetically modified food: Test of an integrated psychosocial model. Food Quality and Preference 25:163-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2012.02.011
  18. Rodriguezentrena M, Salazarordonez M. 2013. Influence of scientific-technical literacy on consumers' behavioural intentions regarding new food. Appetite 60:193-202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2012.09.028
  19. Rosselli R, Martini M, Bragazzi NL. 2016. The old and the new: Vaccine hesitancy in the era of the web 2.0. Challenges and opportunities. Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene 571:47-50.
  20. Soh YJ. 2000. Institutionalization of risk communication: Focused on the nuclear technology. Social Science Review 39:27-63. [in Korean]
  21. Teng JT. 2009. Optimal ordering policies for a retailer who offers distinct trade credits to its good and bad credit customers. International Journal of Production Economics 119:415-423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2009.04.004
  22. Yuan X, Zhang YY, Palma MA, Ribeca LA. 2018. Understanding consumer response to GMO information. In 2018 Annual Meeting, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, February 2-6, 2018, Jacksonville, Florida, USA.