| dc.description |
In spite of a dearth of evidence that consuming genetically modified food can lead to negative health consequences, many United States citizens and pop culture voices express fear and concern about GM technology in the food supply. As issues surrounding genetically modified food gain salience in state- and national-level policy discourse, it is increasingly important for policymakers to understand the nature and source of anti-GM sentiments, and how these sentiments interact with demographic and political factors. In this paper, I use data from the General Social Survey, which contains a module on attitudes toward genetically modified food, to develop a statistical model for how attitudes toward science, government, and business relate to attitudes toward GM food. I also compare the model across political preferences and gender to assess differences in how these groups think about the relationships among GM technology, food, institutions, and health. Broadly, my results indicate that higher confidence in institutions is associated with a lower probability of identifying as anti-GM. By considering men versus women and liberals versus democrats, I find that there are significant differences in how these groups relate confidence in institutions to GM food, with women and liberals showing a stronger relationship between confidence in science and GM preferences, while conservatives showed a stronger relationship between confidence in business and GM preferences. These relationships indicate that the scientists, businesses, and government actors involved in the production of GM food may all have a role to play in changing perceptions of genetic engineering, and that opportunities for bipartisan, stakeholder-supported policy reforms remain. |
|