Testing Public Policy Concepts to Inform Consumers about Genetically Engineered Foods

Although U.S. farmers have rapidly adopted genetically engineered (GE) soybeans, corn, and cotton over the last decade, American consumers remain relatively unaware that ingredients derived from these GE crops are in over 70% of the processed foods they buy. Surveys indicate that consumers are more concerned about GE applications in animals than in plants and that presence of a consumer benefit is likely to increase acceptance (Hallman et al., 2003; PEW, 2002). Despite incidents (Monarch butterflies, Starlink, Prodigene) that reveal weaknesses in managing and regulating GE crops and the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) use of voluntary rather than mandatory regulatory review of GE food products, the public seems open to more applications of genetic engineering entering the food system. A test case is on the horizon. In 2000, AQUA Bounty (now called AQUA Bounty Technologies, Inc.) submitted a petition to the FDA to permit its GE fast growing Atlantic salmon to enter the U.S. food system. This salmon was genetically engineered to enable the continuous production of growth hormone, instead of seasonal production as in conventional salmon. The resulting GE Atlantic salmon reaches market weight in roughly half the time required for conventional Atlantic salmon used in fish farming. Using focus groups in 20032004, we discovered that consumers could envision a range of consequences resulting from approval of this ‘animal’ application. They expressed great concern about impacts on human health and the environment, indicating a situation where outrage could drive public opinion (Qin & Brown, submitted). Consumer response will determine the success or failure of this GE salmon if approved by the FDA. One antidote to opinions driven by outrage is balanced information, which might support more informed opinions. However, most readily available information presents, at best, one perspective on the issue of use of GE foods in the U.S. food system. Information from the biotechnology industry offers arguments and data in support of adoption, while that from some environmental and consumer groups raises concerns and supports a ban until certain conditions are met. Information from scientific academies and organizations is harder to find and, once located, is often difficult to understand and represents only the scientific perspective, giving little recognition to the values and social norms that also contribute to opinions. Readily available media reports also tend to be biased to whatever view makes the story newsworthy. We sought a framework for presenting print information about GE fast growing Atlantic salmon that would provide a balanced view on the issue of FDA approval.