Browse > Article

Analysis on the Perception and Willingness to Purchase of College Students for Strategy for Risk Communication and Social Acceptance of Nanotechnology-Based Foods  

Kim, Hyochung (Dept. of Human Counseling & Welfare, The Institute of Human Environmental Welfare, Inje University)
Kim, Meera (Dept. of Food Science & Nutrition, Center for Beautiful Aging, Kyungpook National University)
Publication Information
Journal of the East Asian Society of Dietary Life / v.23, no.4, 2013 , pp. 496-507 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the perception and willingness to purchase of nanotechnology-based foods to find out the strategy for risk communication and social acceptance. The data were collected from 253 college students in Yeungnam region through a self-administered questionnaire. Frequency, Cronbach's ${\alpha}$, t test, one-way ANOVA, Duncan's multiple range test, Pearson's correlation coefficient analysis, and multiple regression analysis were conducted by SPSS Windows V.20.0. The level of concern about nanotechnology was relatively low, and the level of the perception about necessity for the development of nanotechnology-based foods was average. In addition, the respondents showed somewhat positive thoughts for the development of nanotechnology-based foods with beneficial effect, but they were worried about the risk for it. Percentage of correct answers on knowledge of nanotechnology and nanotechnology-based foods was not high, and the level of willingness to purchase them was average. According to the result of multiple regression analysis, factors affecting the willingness to purchase of nanotechnology-based foods were concern about health, perception about importance of food safety, perception about necessity for the development of nanotechnology-based foods, and perception about the development of nanotechnology-based foods with beneficial effect. On the basis of these results, it is necessary for consumers to offer the exact and reliable information on nanotechnology-based foods.
Keywords
Perception; willingness to purchase; nanotechnology-based foods; college students;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 3  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 신동화 (2007) 식품 안전 관리를 위한 Risk Communication. 식품위생안전성학회지, 2: 5-10.
2 지광석 (2011) 나노제품의 안전성 및 유통실태 조사. 한국소비자원 소비자안전센터 소비자안전국 식의약안전팀 보고서.
3 Bruhn CM (2008) Consumer acceptance of food innovations. Innovation: Management. Policy & Practice 10: 91-95.   DOI
4 Buzby JC (2010) Nanotechnology for food applications : More questions than answers. J Consumer Affairs 44: 528-545.   DOI
5 Chartier J, Gabler S (2001) Risk communication and government: Theory and application for the Canadian Food Inspection Agency(CFIA). Canadian Food Inspection Agency.
6 Cho SI (2009) Study of nano research trend on novel(nano) food materials and safety management research. Ministry of Food and Drug Safety research paper.
7 Chun HS, Chang HJ, Ko SH, O IU (2011) State-of-the-art of nanotechnology-based food products: Toxicity and risk assessment (1). Bulletin of Food Tech 24: 146-164.
8 Chung HR (2011) Development of action plans to ensure the safety of novel foods. Ministry of Food and Drug Safety research paper.
9 Cobb MD, Macoubrie J (2004) Public perceptions about nanotechnology: Risks, benefits and trust. J Nanopart Res 6: 395-405.   DOI
10 Cui D, Tian F, Coyer SR, Wang J, Pan B, Gao F, He R, Zhang Y (2007) Effects of antisense-myc-conjugated single walled carbon nanotubes on HL-60 cells. J Nanosci Nanotechnol 7: 1639-1646.   DOI
11 Dudo A, Choi DH, Scheufele, DA (2011) Food nanotechnology in the news: Coverage patterns and thematic emphases during the last decade. Appetite 56: 78-89.   DOI
12 Eurobarometer (2005) Social values, science and technology. Special Eurobarometer 225/Wave 63.1. Brussels: TNS Opinion & Social.
13 Fell D, Wilkins C, Kivinen E, Austin A, Fernandez M (2009) An evidence review of public attitudes to emerging food technologies. A Brook Lyndhurst Report for the Food Standards Agency.
14 Han JH, Kim SA (2011) Consumer acceptance of GM foods with different characteristics. Kor J Agri Man & Policy 38: 220-238.
15 Harris C, Jenkins M, Glaser D (2006) Gender differences in risk assessment: Why do women take fewer risks than men? Judgment & Decision Making 1: 48-63.
16 Hassan MHA (2005) Small things and big changes in the developing world. Sci 309: 65-66.   DOI
17 Jun SI (2011) Investigation of consumers' risk perception on novel foods. Ministry of Food and Drug Safety research paper.
18 Kim HJ, Hong HG (2010) Science teachers' perception and attitudes toward nanotechnology. J Kor Chem Soc 54: 633- 642.   DOI
19 Kim HJ, Hong HG, Hong JH (2011) High school students' perception and attitudes toward nanotechnology. J Kor Chem Soc 55: 104-111.   DOI
20 Lee JJ, Kim YH, Bae EJ, Lee SS, Kwak BK, Choi KH, Yi JH (2008) Public and experts perception about nanotechnology hazards in Korea. J Environ Toxicol 23: 247- 256.
21 Oberdorster G, Maynard A, Donaldson K, Castranova V, Fitzpatrick J, Ausman K, Carter J, Karn B, Kreyling W, Lai D, Olin S, Monteiro-Riviere N, Warheit D, Yang H (2005) Principles for characterizing the potential human health effects from exposure to nanomaterials: Elements of a screening strategy. Particle & Fibre Toxicol 2: 8-42.   DOI
22 Powers KW, Brown SC, Krishna VB, Wasdo SC, Moudgil BM, Roberts SM (2006) Research strategies for safety evaluation of nanomaterials: Part VI Characterisation of nanoscale particles for toxicological evaluation. Toxicol Sci 90: 296-303.
23 Smith WR, Torstensson M (1997) Gender differences in risk perception and neutralizing fear of crime: Toward resolving the paradoxes. Br J Criminol 37: 608-634.   DOI
24 http://www.thinkfood.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=2762 8. Accessed June 13, 2013.
25 So DS, Kim KY, Kang SK (2006) Analysis of the status of nanotechnology industrialization. Prospectives of Industrial Chem 9: 85-99.
26 http://www.kosen21.org/nwebzine/webzine_view.jsp?webzine_ seq=29&board_seq=246&data_seq=508. Accessed June 13, 2013.
27 http://www.law.go.kr/lsInfoP.do?lsiSeq=137315&efYd=201303 23#0000. Accessed June 10, 2013.