Some consumers see ‘organic’ and ‘non-GM’ food labels as synonymous
Consumers are confused between foods labeled as “organic” and “non-genetically modified,” according to a recent study from researchers at the Univ. of Florida (UF) and Purdue University.
Consumers are confused between foods labeled as “organic” and “non-genetically modified,” according to a recent study from researchers at the Univ. of Florida (UF) and Purdue University. In fact, the researchers found that some consumers view the two labels as synonymous.
Brandon McFadden, a UF/IFAS assistant professor of food and resource economics, and lead author of the study, and Purdue Univ. agricultural economics professor Jayson Lusk conducted their research to find the best ways to communicate whether a food has genetically modified (GM) ingredients. This research has implications for which foods consumers will buy, McFadden said.
Specifically, the researchers wanted to know how much consumers were willing to spend on food labeled as “USDA Organic” vs. that labeled “Non-GMO Project Verified.” Genetically modified material is not allowed in food labeled “USDA Organic,” while “Non-GMO Project” means the food has no more than 0.9% GM characteristics, according to the study.
Researchers measured respondents’ willingness to pay for a box of 12 granola bars and a pound of apples. Granola bars represent a manufactured food commonly differentiated by its absence of GM material, while apples are a fresh fruit that requires companies to tell if they contain GM material, the study said.
In this study, when consumers looked at packages of Granola bars labeled “non-GMO Project,” they were willing to spend 35 cents more than for the boxes that had text that read, “contains genetically engineered ingredients.” With the “USDA Organic” label, consumers were willing to pay 9 cents more. With apples, respondents were willing to pay 35 cents more for those labeled “non-GMO Project” and 40 cents more for those labeled “USDA Organic.”
Participants’ responses led McFadden to conclude that consumers don’t distinguish definitions of the two food labels. “For example, it’s possible that a product labeled, ‘Non-GMO Project Verified’ more clearly communicates the absence of GM ingredients than a product labeled ‘USDA Organic,’” said McFadden.
The study “Effects of the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard: Willingness To Pay for Labels that Communicate the Presence or Absence of Genetic Modification” is published in Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy.