Progress 01/01/04 to 12/31/04
Outputs
In 2004, 23 workshops on a variety of topics in agricultural biotechnology were conducted across the 5 states of the consortium. These included 4 workshops hosted by tribal college partners. 970 individuals participated in the workshops, representing very diverse audiences, including: the general public; college and university administrators, faculty, extension professionals, staff, and students; K-12 science teachers; youth; commodity groups; biotech, non-biotech, and organic producers; representatives of agribusiness; state departments and agencies; and the media. In addition, faculty and staff involved in the grant delivered 65 presentations to diverse audiences. Three on-line courses on biotechnology and bioethics were delivered to high school teachers, extension personnel, and others who work with youth and adult audiences. Several education and extension resources were developed and made available, including: modules for short presentations on biotech crops,
trade, and religious perspectives on biotechnology; a website, The People Side of Biotechnology; a 15-minute presentation on careers in biotechnology; a food biotechnology display for use by extension educators; a video GM Crops Discussion among agriculture and life science professors; and 5 issues of the Iowa Biotech Educator Newsletter. Most innovative was Genesis:Contemporary Art Explores Human Genomics, an art presentation at the University of Minnesota, bringing together work in biotechnology, the human genomic project, and a variety of disciplines including art, biology, women's studies, cultural studies, and philosophy. 18 public programs and classes were organized around this multidiscipline presentation, with an impact on about 4,545 people. Research continued on economic (7 activities), social (2 activities), cultural (5 activities), and ethical (2 activities) aspects of agricultural biotechnology. Two position papers reflecting American Indian perspectives were completed.
In addition, 20 publications resulting from project research were also completed. Since research activities, in particular, remain to be completed, owing largely to the delay in the release of grant funds, a no cost extension was requested and received to 09/15/05.
Impacts
While agricultural biotechnology continues to be a controversial topic for many people, it also is a topic on which there is growing, but still limited, public understanding. Research and educational efforts from this consortium have provided information to many diverse audiences, resulting in greater awareness and understanding of agricultural biotechnology. Discussions on co-existence have been initiated with producers representing varying points of view. Stakeholders in both industry and the public policy arena have become more informed regarding both producers's and consumers' expectations and concerns. American Indian perspectives are now a part of the ongoing discussion as a result of position papers on agricultural biotechnology developed at tribal colleges collaborating on this grant
Publications
- Cooley, D.R. 2003. Gaia's Body: Toward a Physiology of Earth. Agricultural History, 77(4). Book Review.
- Cooley, D.R. 2004. Recoding Nature: Critical Perspectives on Genetic Engineering. Agricultural History, 78(4).
- Cooley, D.R. 2004. Transgenic Organisms and the Failure of a Free Market Argument. Business Ethics: A European Review, 13(4): 354-371.
- Huffman, W. E., M. C. Rousu, J. F. Shogren, and A. Tegene. 2004. Consumers' Resistance to Genetically Modified Foods: The Role of Information in an Uncertain Environment. Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization, 2(2004): Article 8:1-13. http://www.bepress.com/jafio/vol2/iss2/art8
- Huffman, W. E., M. C. Rousu, J. F. Shogren, and A. Tegene. 2004. The Effects of Prior Beliefs and Learning on Consumers' Acceptance of Genetically Modified Foods. Iowa State University, Department of Economics, Economics Work Paper #04029.
- Huffman, W. E., M. C. Rousu, J. F. Shogren, and A. Tegene. 2004. Who Do Consumers Trust for Information: The Case of Genetically Modified Foods. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 86.
- Maxwell, B. J., W. Wilson, and B. Dahl. 2004. Producer Contract Strategies in GM Crops. AE Report No. 539. Reproduced in Feedinfo.com. http://www.feedinfo.com/Console/PageViewer.aspx?page=156418&source=al er
- Qasmi, B. A., E. Van der Sluis, C. J. Wilhelm. 2004. Cost of Segregating Non-transgenic Grains at Country Elevators in South Dakota. Selected Paper presented at the Western Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, Honolulu, H.I., June 30-July 2, 2004. agecon.lib.umn.edu/cgi-bin/detailview.pl?paperid=14734
- Stover, R. G., D. J. Hess, G. A. Goreham, G. A. Youngs, S. G. Sapp. 2004. Midwest Consumer's Beliefs and Attitudes Regarding Agricultural Biotechnology: An Executive Summary. South Dakota State University.
- Thompson, S. 2004. Consumer Acceptance of GM Foods Tested. Iowa Farmer Today, NW Edition, p. 16. http://www.iowafarmertoday.com/pdfpages.htm
- Van der Sluis, E., B. A. Qasmi, C. J. Wilhelm. 2004. Segregating Transgenic Grains: Results of a Survey among Country Elevators in South Dakota. Selected paper presented at the Western Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, Honolulu, H.I., June 30-July 2, 2004. agecon.lib.umn.edu/cgi-bin/detailview.pl?paperid=14738
- Van der Sluis, E. and A. Van Scharrel. 2004. Producer Perceptions of Research Needs and Transgenic Crop Adoption in South Dakota. Economics Commentator No. 447. South Dakota State University, Department of Economics.http://econ.sdstate.edu/Research/Commentator/No447-Evert.pd f
- Van Scharrel, A. and E. Van der Sluis. 2004. Farm Level Transgenic Crop Adoption Rates in South Dakota. Economics Commentator No. 446. South Dakota State University, Department of Economics. http://econ.sdstate.edu/Research/Commentator/No446-Evert.pdf
- Wilson, W. W. 2004. Global Trends in Wheat and Challenges of Biotechnology. Actas del Congreso: A TODO TRIGO, Un Congreso Para Todos, Mar del Plata, Argentina, published by Federaciaon de Centros y Entidades Gremiales de Acopiadores de Cereales, Buenos Aires, pp. 95-100.
- Wilson, W. W., E. Janzen, and B. L. Dahl. 2003. Issues in Development and Adoption of Genetically Modified (GM) Wheats. AgBioforum, Volume 6 (3):1-12.
- Wilson, W. W., B. J. Maxwell, and B. L. Dahl. 2004. Incentive Contracts to Meet Functional Characteristics in Wheat Purchasing. AE Report No. 545 and 545-S.
|
Progress 09/15/00 to 09/30/04
Outputs
Progress on research, education, and outreach were made in this final year. In research, a second position paper reflecting Ojibwa perspectives was completed at Lac Courte Oreilles Ojibwa Community College. Work continued on analyzing data on social and economic aspects of agricultural biotechnology. New data and previously collected data were analyzed on the following topics: Midwest consumers' beliefs and attitudes; producer attitudes; elevator operators' attitudes and facilities for segegating conventional and transgenic corn and soybeans; determinants of farmer adoption of transgenic corn and soybean; farmers' insect management compliance; gene flow of pollen in spring wheat and identity preservation; market mechanisms facilitating dual existence of GM and conventional wheat; impacts of EU traceability requirements on costs and risks for marketing U.S. wheat; price impacts of releasing GM wheat; welfare distributional impacts of relesing Roundup Ready wheat in the
U.S. and Canada. Work also continued in education and outreach. In South Dakota a hands-on Science Fair workshop for 20 high school teachers and students provided relevant lab experiences and suggestions for science fair projects. A grant proposal was also developed to support an agricultural biotechnology workshop for middle school teachers in 2006. In Minnesota, a Bioinformatics in the Classroom professional development program was delivered to 12 high school biology teachers and two post-secondary educators in July 2005. At Lac Courte Oreilles Ojibwa Community College, about 200 people attended a workshop focusing on Diabetes in Native Americans and the potential of biotechnology in addressing that health problem. Three radio programs in area tribal communities promoted the event. North Dakota State University hosted a two-day conference on Crop Biotechnology Update, attended by 112 indivuals from the Cooperative Extension Service, private industry, policy makers and government
officials, and the general public. Nineteen of the participants were grain traders from seven Asian countries. NDSU again offered its summer training sessions for science teachers. Sixteen science teachers attended. Finally, a two-day course on Biotechnology, From the Lab to the Classroom, was held in June in Fargo. Six teachers completed this course. At Iowa State University, six biotechnology education workshops were offered over the summer. They were attended by 77 K-12 and extension educators. Bioethics was a component of every workshop and was featured in a beginning bioethics workshop in June. A three-module curriculum, including an ethics module, was also prepared with support from the grant at Iowa State.
Impacts
The extended year of the grant has resulted in increased education and the potential for greater understanding of agricultural biotechnology in the Midwest as well as beyond this region. Workshops and courses have reached audiences from middle school students and teachers to university educators, from the general public to business and government leaders, from agricultural producers and others involved in agri-business to consumers. Resources are now available in-print and on-line to provide further education for these diverse audiences. Issues related to cultural, social, economic, and ethical aspects of agricultural biotechnology have been addressed, providing science-based perspectives on these issues. As a result, discourse on agricultural biotechnology, its potential promises and risks, should now be more informed than in the past.
Publications
- Huso, S., and Wilson, W. 2005. Strategic Analysis of Trait Commercialization in Genetically Modified (GM Grains; The Case of GM Wheat. AAE Report No. 559
- Wilson, W., Henry, X., Dahl, B. 2005. Costs and Risks of Conforming to EU Traceability Requirements: The Case of Hard Red Spring Wheat. AAE Report No. 564. Wilson, W., DeVuyst, E., Koo, W., Taylor, R., Dahl, B. 2005. Welfare Implications of Introducing Biotech Traits in a Market with Segments and Segregation Costs: The Case for Roundup Ready Wheat. AAE Report No. 566.
- Wilson, W., Dahl, B. In press (2006) Costs and Risks of Segregating GM Wheat in Canada. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics. Wilson, W., Jabs, E., Dahl, B. 2005. Optimal Testing Strategies for Genetically Modified Wheat. Agricultural Economics.
- Youngs, G., Klenow, D., Park, D-B, Goreham, G. 2005. Ethical Themes Used by Transgenic Organisms Stakeholders: A Qualitative Study. Great Plains Sociologist 17(1).
- Cooley, D. 2005. Transgenic Organisms, The European Unioin, and World Trade Organization Agreements. Accepted for publication by Blackwell Publishers.
|
Progress 01/01/03 to 12/31/03
Outputs
Consortium members participated in an annual meeting in May at the Minnesota Arboretum. Each institution provided brief presentations on grant activities completed, underway, and planned. Subgroups (social, economic, extension, K-12, and tribal colleges) met to develop forward plans for FY4 and beyond. Several monographs are planned by subgroups, based upon research under the grant. Collaborative activities across research and extension/education subgroups were also planned. Twenty-one workshops and conferences were hosted by consortium partners, with more than 500 persons in attendance. Two of the workshops were sponsored or co-sponsored by one of the tribal colleges in the consortium. These included a wide range of audiences, from high school students to high school and college/university teachers to extension educators, to the general public, and American Indian elders considering agricultural biotechnology in the context of their cultural traditions. In addition,
the University of Minnesota hosted the annual Bioethics Institute for university scientists/educators; 37 individuals participated. Research was conducted on the social and economic aspects of agricultural biotechnology. These included the following foci: analysis of cost & segregation strategies of GMO and non-GMO crops; policy issues related to U.S. and Canadian GM wheat release decisions; economic & social determinants of transgenic corn & soybean adoption rates by farmers; grain farmers' compliance with refuge and other requirements for Bt-corn; evaluation of marketing options for grain handlers of specialty crops; socio-religious views on agricultural biotechnology; factors in producers' decisions to adopt/not adopt GMO crops; development of consumer survey, exploring the range of acceptance/non-acceptance of GMOs and factors related to these positions; and effect of food labeling and diverse ifnromation on consumer's willingness to pay for GM products. Based upon the research
conducted thus far, sixty-six invited presentations were made to a variety of academic and non-academic audiences. In disseminating information on agricultural biotechnology, the extension and education subgroups: developed and presented three on- and off-line courses; developed and released several education modules and lab protocols on agricultural biotechnology topics; maintained and updated four websites; and produced three newsletters (13 issues) on biotechnology and bioethics. In addition, work on the project resulted in thirty-six additional publications in peer-referred journals, technical reports, and on-line publications. These are identified in the Publications section of this report.
Impacts
While agricultural biotechnology continues to be a controversial topic for many people, it also is a topic on which there is growing, but still limited, public understanding. Research and educational efforts from this consortium are expected to provide information that will result in greater awareness and understanding of agricultural biotechnology and both promises and concerns related to it. Stakeholders in both industry and the public policy arena will be provided with insights to producers's expectations and concerns and with information on the extent to which and the conditions under which consumers are accepting or hesitant to accept products with transgenic organisms. Important new documents expected is a set of position papers reflecting American Indian perspectives on agricultural biotechnology.
Publications
- Barham, B.L., J. Foltz, and S. Moon. 2002. rBST in the United States: That was the Juggernaut - that wasn't. Choices, 15-19.
- Barham, B.L., F.H. Buttel, and J.D. Foltz. 2003. Use of Genetically Modified Crops in Wisconsin. Status of Wisconsin Agriculture. Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, College of Agricultural and Life Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison and Cooperative Extension, University of Wisconsin-Extension.
- Cooley, D. 2002. So Who's Afraid of Frankenstein Foods? Journal of Social Behavior 33(3, Fall): 442-463.
- Cooley, D. 2003. Transgenic Organisms and Some Legal Ethics. Public Affairs Quarterly. (in press)
- Cooley, D. and G.A. Goreham. 2003. Are Transgenic Organisms Unnatural? Ethics and the Environment. (in press)
- Lawson, M.E., R.G. Stover, D.J. Hess, G. Goreham, and G.A. Youngs. 2003. Agricultural Biotechnology and the Midwestern Agricultural Producer. Rural Life Census Data Center, South Dakota State University.
- Lawson, M.E., R.G. Stover, D.J. Hess, G.A.Goreham, G.A. Youngs, and S.G. Sapp. 2003. Midwest Agricultural Producers Beliefs and Practices Regarding Agricultural Biotechnology: An Executive Summary. South Dakota State University.
- Miranowski, J.A., H.H. Jensen, S.P. Batres-Marquez, and A. Ishdorj. 2003. Product Differentiation and Segregation in Agricultural Systems: Non-GM and Specialty Corn and Soybean Crops in Iowa. Proceedings of the 7th ICABR International Conference on Public Goods and Public Policy for Agricultural Biotechnology. (in press)
- Rousu, M., W.E. Huffman, J.F. Shogren, and A. Tegene. 2004, in press. Are U.S. Consumers Tolerant of GM Foods? Review of Agricultural Economics 26.
- Rousu, M.C., W.E. Huffman, J.F. Shogren, and A. Tegene. 2004, in press. Estimating the Public Value of Conflicting Information: The Case of Genetically Modified Foods. Land Economics 80.
- Rousu, M., W.E. Huffman, J.F. Shogren, and A. Tegene. 2003. The Welfare Effects of Implementing Mandatory GM Labeling in the USA. In R.E. Evenson and V. Santaniello, Consumer Acceptance of Genetically Modified Foods, Wallingford, England: CABI Publishing. (in press)
- Sikinyi, T.M. and R. Martin. 2003. The Role of Biosciences/Biotechnology in the Secondary School Agriculture Curriculum in the North Central Region: Implications to Teacher Education Programs. Proceedings of the North Central Region Agricultural Education Research Conference, Columbus, Ohio. http://www.biotech.iastate.edu/publications/IFAFS/RobertMartin.pdf
- Streiffer, R. 2003. In Defense of the Moral Relevance of Species Boundaries. American Journal of Bioethics 3:3.
- Tegene, A., W.E. Huffman, M. Rousu, and J.F. Shogren. 2003. The Effects of Information on Consumer Demand for Biotech Foods: Evidence for Experimental Auctions. USDA, Technical Bulletin No. 1903. http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/tb1903/tb1903.pdf
- Cooley, D., G.A. Goreham, and G.A. Youngs, Jr. 2003. Practical Moral Codes in the Transgenic Organism Debate. Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Ethics. (in press) Foltz, J.D., K. Kim, and B. Barham. 2003. A Dynamic Analysis of University Agricultural Biotechnology Patents. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 85, 1: 187-197.
- Foltz, J.D. and T. Dhar. 2003. The Market for rBST-free and Organic Milk. Wisconsin Family Farm Facts, No. 18..
- Foltz, J.D., and T. Dhar. 2003. How Consumers Value rBST-free and Organic Milk in the Marketplace. Wisconsin Family Farm Facts, No. 19.
- Huffman W.E. 2003. Production, Identity Preservation and Labeling in a Market Place with Genetically Modified (GM) and Non-GM Foods. Plant Physiology. (in press)
- Huffman, W.E. 2003. Consumer's Acceptance of (and Resistance to) Genetically Modified Foods in High Income Countries: Effects of Labels and Information in an Uncertain Environment. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 85. (in press)
- Huffman, W.E., M. Rousu, J.F. Shogren, and A. Tegene. 2003. The Public Good Value of Information from Agribusinesses on Genetically Modified Foods. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 85. (in press)
- Huffman, W.E., M. Rousu, J.F. Shogren, and A. Tegene. 2003. Better Dead than GM Fed? Information and the Effects of Consumer Resistance to GM-Foods in High Income Countries. Iowa State University, Department of Economics Working Paper No. 03017. http://www.biotech.iastate.edu/publications/IFAFS/GMFedEDCC.pdf
- Huffman, W.E., J.F. Shogren, M. Rousu, and A Tegene. 2003. Consumer Willingness to Pay for Genetically Modified Food Labels in a Market with Diverse Information: Evidence from Experimental Auctions. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 28. (in press)
- Van Scharrel, A. 2003. Determinants of South Dakota Farmers' Adoption of Genetically Modified Corn and Soybeans. Unpublished M.Sc. Thesis, South Dakota State University.
- Webber, G.D., M. Zeller, K. Hessler, W. Fehr, R. Martin, J. Staker, and A. D'Souza, eds. 2003. Bacillus thuringiensis: Sharing Its Natural Talent with Crops. Curriculum modules for grades 9-12 and adults about insect-resistant crops using Bt bacteria, January 2003, 322pp. Prepared by the Office of Biotechnology, Iowa State University, and distributed by Iowa State University Extension. 4H 949.
- Wilson, W., E. Jabs and B. Dahl. 2003. Optimal Testing Strategies for Genetically Modified Wheat. Agribusiness and Applied Economics Report No.520.
- Wilson, W., E. Janzen, B. Dahl and C. Wachenheim. 2003. Issues in Development and Adoption of Genetically Modified (GM) Wheats, Agribusiness and Applied Economics Report No. 509.
- Wilson W. 2001. Economic Strategies for Coexistence: Testing, Tolerances and Segregations in GM Crops. Strategies for Coexistence of GMO, Non-GMO, and Organic Crop Production, Minneapolis, Minnesota. http://www.biotech.iastate.edu/publications/IFAFS/SpecialReports-Econ omics.html
- Wilson W. W. 2001. Identity Preserved Grain Export Supply Chains, in Getting Supply Chains Right. The 6th Annual Fields on Wheels Conference, ed Dr. Barry E Prentice, ISBN No 1-894218-310, Occasional Paper No. 20, Transport Institute, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg.
- Zeller, M. 2002. Bioinformatics: The Art of Silicogenetics. Laboratory protocol. Iowa State University.
- Wilhelm, C. J. 2003. Non-Transgenic Grain Segregation at Country Elevators in South Dakota. Unpublished M.Sc. Thesis, South Dakota State University.
- Zeller, M. QuickStixT Strip Test - Corn Seed. Revised 2003. Laboratory protocol for lateral flow seed testing. Iowa State University. http://www.biotech.iastate.edu/publications/lab_protocols/QuickStix-c orn_seed/QuickStix-corn_seed.pdf
- Zeller, M. Revised 2003. QuickStixT Strip Test - Roundup Readyr Soybeans. Laboratory protocol for lateral flow seed testing. Iowa State University. http://www.biotech.iastate.edu/publications/lab_protocols/QuickStix-r r_soybean/QuickStix-rr_soybean.pdf
|
Progress 01/01/02 to 12/31/02
Outputs
Consortium members participated in an annual meeting in May at the Minnesota Arboretum. Presentations on grant activities completed or underway were made. Subgroups (social, economic, extension, K-12, and tribal colleges) developed forward plans for FY3. Tribal college representatives found this to be beneficial for networking. The extension subgroup also participated in a conference call to plan their activities. The annual meeting is a major vehicle for integrating research with education and outreach. Twenty-one workshops, conferences, and forums, involving approximately 430 adults and 40 youths, were conducted, providing information and demonstrations on agricultural biotechnology and related issues for college and university science faculty, K-12 teachers, extension educators, middle and high school youth, and various stakeholders (including legislators, producers, consumers, and community leaders). The second annual Bioethics Institute, involving life-science
faculty from the consortium institutions, was held at the University of Minnesota. Outreach was provided via at least 40 presentations and guest lectures delivered to a wide range of lay and academic audiences throughout the consortium area and at least three abroad. Three courses on agricultural biotechnology were available online. Resources were developed and/or updated to further disseminate biotechnology information, including nine newsletters, several lab protocols for K-12 use, several internet resources (including web sites at each of the consortium institutions), and a 300+ page, four-module curriculum on Bt crops released in print and online. Research was conducted by economists, sociologists, and extension personnel on a variety of topics related to grant objectives. These include producer surveys, a survey of elevator managers on segregation of GMO and non-GMO corn and soybeans, a survey of grain handlers on the process and cost of identity preservation in grains, a survey
on consumer resistance to biotechnology and its relation to sources and varieties of information, and a survey of extension educators in the consortium area and their needs and capabilities in addressing biotechnology issues with constituents. Economics research has also addressed adoption patterns of GMOs worldwide, adoption and disadoption of GMOs in Wisconsin, adotpion and disadoption of rBST on Wisconsin dairy farms, refuge patterns of farmers using GMOs, and agricultural biotechnology patents. At least three presented papers and three journal articles have resulted.
Impacts
The following impacts have resulted from the second year of grant activities. Many K-12 teachers are more informed on agricultural biotechnology -- what it is; what its potential benefits are; what some possible risks are; and multiple perspectives on issues surrounding it. As a result, both through the teachers and direct presentations to youth groups, youths are also better informed on agricultural technology. Analysis of producer and consumer attitudes, values, and behavior has also begun to identify perceived economic, environmental, and health benefits and risks of GMOs. Sources of resistance by consumers are also better understood. Ethical bases (religious and cultural in particular)of various positions on agricultural technology have been identified. These insights are useful in considering the ease or difficulty (even impossibility) in addressing resistance to biotechnology.
Publications
- Van der Sluis, E., M. Diersen, and T. Dobbs. 2002. Agricultural Biotechnology: Farm-Level, Market, and Policy Considerations. Journal of Agribusiness 20, 1: 51-66.
- Van der Sluis, E. and A. Van Scharrel. 2002. Farm Level Transgenic Crop Adoption Rates in South Dakota. Information Systems for Biotechnology, ISB News Report (October 2002): 9-11.
- VanWechel, T. 2002. Effect of Environmental Impact Information on Willingness to Pay for Genetically Modified Food Products. Unpublished masters thesis. North Dakota State University.
- Wilson, W. and B. Dahl. 2002. Costs and Risks of Testing and Sesgregating GM Wheat. Agribusiness & Applied Economics Report No. 501 and 501-S.
- Zeller, M. 2002. Agricultural Biotechnology Education. Agricultural Education Magazine, Vol. 74, #5, pp. 22-23.
- Dahl, B. and W. Wilson. 2002. The Logistical Costs of Marketing Identity Preserved Wheat. Agribusiness & Applied Economics Report No. 495.
- Fehr, W. 2002. Production of Pharmaceuticals in Plants: The Role of Public and Private Institutions in Regulaton and Education. http://www.biotech.iastate.edu/publications/IFAFS/PewMeeting Paper.html
- Fehr, W. 2002. The Cost of the Journey. http://www.biotech.iastate.edu/publications/IFAFS/CostofJourney.html
- Hessler, K., R. Whetten, C. Loopstra, S. Shriver, K. Penner, R. Zeigler, J. Fletcher, M. Torrie, and G. Comstock. 2002. Golden Rice in G. Comstock (ed), Life Science ethics, Iowa State Press: 307-310, 358-368.
- Huffman. W., and A. Tegene. 2002. Public Acceptance of and Benefits from Agricultural Biotechnology: A Key Role for Verifiable Information, in V. Santaniello, R. Evenson, and D. Zilberman (Eds), Market Development for Genetically Modified Foods. NY: CABI Publishing, pp. 179-189.
- Rousu, M. W. Huffman, J. Shogren, and A. Tegene. 2002. The Value of Verifiable Information in a Controversial Market: Evidenc from Lab Auctions of Genetically Modified food. ISU, Department of Economics. Staff Working Paper Series, Paper #3. http://www/biotech.iastate.edu/publications/IFAFS/HuffmanJPE22502.pdf
- Titchener, G., and S. Sapp. 2002. A Comparison of Two Approaches to Understanding Consumer Opinions of Biotechnology. Social Behavior and Personality 30: 373-382.
|
Progress 01/01/01 to 12/31/01
Outputs
Consortium members have met and participated in conference calls to initiate activities on the grant. Seventeen workshops, involving 568 adults and 50 youths, were conducted, creating awareness of agricultural biotechnology and discussing related issues. A Bioethics Institute, involving 52 participants, was held at Iowa State University. Thirty-one presentations were made to a variety of audiences. North Dakota State University hosted a monthly roundtables series. South Dakota State University published two tabloids addressing facts and concerns of agricultural biotechnology. Three distance education courses on biotechnology were developed and delivered . Three web sites have been created with current information and resources. Several exploratory research activities took place. In South Dakota interviews with producers were conducted on planting GMO crops, perspectives on biotechnology, and ethical and other concerns. Brief surveys exploring producer knowledge and
concerns about biotechnology were conducted at a large farm show in SD. Pre- and post-workshop surveys were administered to 31 participants in an adult educator workshop on biotechnology at SDSU. In North Dakota, interviews on ethical values related to transgenic organisms were conducted with individuals in the agro-food system. Major religious denominations in North Dakota were contacted for their written statements or policies on transgenic organisms. Two experimental auctions have been conducted with NDSU students to assess consumer tastes for products with GMO ingredients. Experimental auctions of three food items were conducted in the Minneapolis/St. Paul and Des Moines areas by economists from Iowa State University who found that consumers were willing to pay a significant premium for products they perceived as not genetically modified. Related research addressing GM food labeling policies of the U.S. and its trading partners is currently underway. Results of the economic
research have been presented at conferences in Italy, Chicago, and at ISU. Economics research is examining ISU's agricultural biotechnology patent activity and income from licensing. Research activities at the University of Wisconsin included two major surveys of dairy farmers on rBST use and factors influencing the adoption decisions of farmers. A panel study of grain producers was undertaken examining their GMO adoption decisions. The tribal colleges generally focused their first year activities on becoming better acquainted with agricultural biotechnology and related issues. Personnel attended workshops and institutes elsewhere in the region. Leech Lake Tribal College worked with the University of Minnesota in hosting a Biotechnology and Anishinaabe Culture High School Teachers Workshop. Fundamental concepts of agricultural biotechnology were presented; philosophy and culture of the Anishinaabek and other Native Americans of the Great Lakes Region were examined; and ethical and
moral implications for biotechnology were discussed. A draft of an Anishinnabe position paper on biotechnology has also been produced.
Impacts
The following impacts from first year grant activities are expected: Research has revealed diverse perspectives and concerns in agricultural biotechnology among both producers and consumers. Insights can be expected to inform future research and policymaking. Research has also revealed varying levels of knowledge about agricultural biotechnology. As research is incorporated into education and extension activities, it can be expected that levels of knowledge regarding technical aspects and potential benefits of agricultural technology will increase. Data from participants in workshops indicate that some concerns remain. Future activities will need to address these. Overall, the expected impact of activities will likely be a better informed public, including all involved with the agricultural-food system. While some individuals may become more accepting of GMOs, others continue to raise serious questions which must be addressed. For some individuals, ethical
considerations, based upon belief and value systems, can be expected to continue to make for resistance to GMOs. As a result, it might be expected that continued work in this area will need to address the potential for coexistence of GMO and non-GMO agricultural activities and products.
Publications
- "Sorting Out Ethical Perspectives in the Transgenic Organism Debate." by George A. Youngs, Jr., Daniel Klenow, Duk-Byeong Park, and Gary A. Goreham. Paper presented at the Great Plains Sociological Society annual meeting, October 6-7, 2001.
- "A Basic Primer on Biotechnology", NDSU Extension Publication A-1219, by Dr. Michael Peel, NDSU Extension Agronomist, October, 2001.
- William W. Wilson, US, Canada Face Biotech Wheat Showdown, in ISB News: Report Covering Agricultural and Environmental Biotechnology Developments, June 2001, pp. 8-11.
- Lambert, D. and William W. Wilson. Variety Values Under Imperfect Product Quality Measurement." Under review (2nd round), 2001, American Journal of Agricultural Economics.
- Bradford L. Barham, Douglas Jackson-Smith, and Sunung Moon "Use and Implications of Bovine Somatotropin for the Wisconsin Dairy Sector in the 1990s," PATS Research Report, No. 9, June, 2001.
- Lucy Chen, Bradford L. Barham, Frederick H. Buttel, "Update on the Adoption and Deadoption of GMO Crop Varieties in Wisconsin," PATS Research Summary, No. 6, August, 2001.
- Granholm, Nels. "Ethical Perspectives in Biotechnology," Questioning the Promise. Critical Reflections on Agricultural Biotechnology from the Perspective of Catholic Teaching. Published by the National Catholic Rural Life Conference, March 20, 2001.
- Van der Sluis, Evert, Matthew A. Dierson, Thomas L. Dobbs. "Selected Economic Implications and Policy Aspects of Agricultural Biotechnology." South Dakota State University, Economics Staff Paper No. 2001-6, October 2001.
- Van der Sluis, Evert. "Biotechnology - Some Implications of its Use in Agriculture." South Dakota State University, Department of Economics, Economics Commentator No. 423, October 1, 2001.
- Bradford L. Barham, Jeremy D. Foltz, Kwansoo Kim, "Trends in University Agbiotech Patent Production," Food Marketing Policy Center, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Connecticut. Research Report No. 58. March, 2001.
- Jeremy D. Foltz, Kwansoo Kim, and Bradford L. Barham, "A Dynamic Count Data Analysis of University Ag-Biotech Patents," Food Marketing Policy Center, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Connecticut. Research Report No. 56. January, 2001.
- Fehr, Walter R. "Animal Vaccines in Transgenic Plants: The Education and Regulatory Challenge." June 2001.
- Fehr, Walter R. "Strategies for the Coexistence of GMO, Non-GMO, and Organic Crop Production." August 2001.
- Huffman, Wallace E., Jason F. Shogren, Matthew Rousu, and Abe Tegene. "The Value to Consumers of GM Food Labels in a Market with Asymmetric Information: Evidence from Experimental Auctions." Iowa State University, Department of Economics, Staff Paper No. 335, May 2001 (Revised September 30, 2001). Paper presented for the 5th International Conference of the International Consortium on Agricultural Biotechnology Research (ICABR) on "Biotechnology, Science and Modern Agriculture: a New Industry at the Dawn of the Century," Ravello, (Italy) June 15-18, 2001.
- Iowa Biotech Educator Newsletter. Glenda D. Webber, ed. Iowa State University Office of Biotechnology. January, March, May, September, November 2001 issues.
- Rousu, Matthew and Wallace E. Huffman. "GM Food Labeling Policies of the U.S. and Its Trading Partners." Iowa State University, Department of Economics, Staff Paper No. 344, September 6, 2001 (Revised September 30, 2001).
- Zeller, Michael, science ed., and Glenda D. Webber, curriculum ed., and others. A Better-Tasting and More Digestible Soybean: Agricultural Genetics Resource Unit for Grades 9-12. Iowa State University Extension and ISU Office of Biotechnology, 4H 970, August 2001.
- Comstock, Gary, "An Alternative Ethic for Animals," in John Hodges and In K. Han, eds., Livestock, Ethics and Quality of Life (New York: CABI Publishing, 2000), pp. 99-118.
- Comstock, Gary, "Make plans on the hoof," Times Higher Education Supplement (London) 22 - 29 December 2000, p. 19.
- Comstock, Gary, "A Brief for the Royal Commission on Genetic Modification of New Zealand," (Wellington, NZ, 22 November 2000)
- Comstock, Gary, "Ethics and Genetically Modified Foods," SCOPE Research Group (U. California-Berkeley, U. Washington, and American Association for Advancement of Science, July 2001)
|
|