ABSTRACTS This paper analyzes the awareness and attitudes of the Chinese public toward genetically modified (GM) foods with different types of labeling and evaluates the impact of public

confidence in the government management of GM food labeling has on their attitude. From 2015 to 2016, we conducted a series of surveys to collect data from 1730 respondents, which included

consumers, farmers, media, and local agricultural officials in agricultural departments. The results show ~60% of the Chinese public do not know that they usually consume or purchase GM

products or products containing GM ingredients. Nearly 80% of the Chinese public are accepting foods labeled as not containing GM ingredients, 57% are accepting foods without labeling, and

attitude toward GM labeled foods is farmers. Our findings provide an empirical basis to inform GM food labeling policy discussions and possible revisions, which may promote the development

of GM foods in China. SIMILAR CONTENT BEING VIEWED BY OTHERS SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC AND CROSS-COUNTRY DIFFERENCES IN ATTENTION TO SUSTAINABLE CERTIFICATIONS AND CHANGES IN FOOD CONSUMPTION

Article Open access 01 June 2024 INVESTIGATING THE STATUS OF TRANSGENIC CROPS IN IRAN IN TERMS OF CULTIVATION, CONSUMPTION, LAWS AND RIGHTS IN COMPARISON WITH THE WORLD Article Open access

28 April 2021 REGULATORY RESPONSES TO ULTRA-PROCESSED FOODS ARE SKEWED TOWARDS BEHAVIOUR CHANGE AND NOT FOOD SYSTEM TRANSFORMATION Article 10 January 2025 INTRODUCTION Progress in the

research, planting, and application of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in China has been on-going for many years. China was one of the first countries to commercialize genetically

modified (GM) crops and has made large investments in the research and development of GM technologies.1,2 The government has approved safety certificates for seven types of GM crops, though

only insect-resistant cotton and disease-resistant papaya have achieved large-scale commercial production. In 2008, the State Council approved the establishment of major GM projects to

support the research and development of agricultural GM technologies.3 A review of the scientific literature reveals Chinese researchers have cloned more than 100 important genes, obtained

over 1000 patents, and have made numerous significant achievements in the research and development of GM technologies.4 In order to strengthen the management of GM food labeling and sales,

while protecting consumers’ “right to know,” the Agricultural Genetically Modified Organisms Identification Management Measures were issued in 2002.5 According to this regulation, five types

of GM crops within 17 categories of products must be mandatorily labeled. The five GM crops subject to labeling under this regulation include soybean, maize, cotton, rape, and tomato. Among

the five types of crops that must be labeled, soybean includes soybean seeds, soybeans, soybean flour, soybean oil, and soybean meal; Corn includes corn seeds, corn, corn oil, and corn

flour; Rape involves rapeseed for planting, rapeseeds, rapeseed oil, and rapeseed meal; Cotton includes cottonseed; Tomato includes tomato seed, fresh tomatoes, and tomato paste. Other

products, not included in the regulation, may be voluntarily labeled or have no labeling requirement.5 For example, soybean oils produced and sold in China must indicate whether the raw

soybeans include GM ingredients.6 Products such as GM papaya or products using imported GM sugar beet as raw material do not need to be labeled because these GM crop products are not

included in the labeling regulation. GM tomato has not been approved for adoption in China, but the government had previously approved the commercial release of virus-resistant tomatoes.7

China has already approved GM cotton and GM papaya for commercial adoption, in addition to approving GM soybean, cotton, maize, rape, and sugar beet for import as raw materials for

processing. So, tomato, maize, rape, and soybean are also subject to the 2002 labeling regulation. Compared to other countries that commercialize GM products, e.g. Europe, the U.S. or Japan,

the labeling system in China is relatively strict.8 There are three methods for identification of GM products in China, “Transgenic XX,” “Transgenic XX processed products,” and “the raw

materials for processing of this product contain transposed XX, but the product does not contain GMOs”.5 When agricultural GMOs are difficult to identify by packaging or labeling, the

following methods can be used to label the products: (a) marked on the product display; (b) marked on the price tag; (c) set up a signboard; (d) marked on the container; and (e) the sellers

declaring that the products are GMOs in an appropriate manner. If imported agricultural GM products without packaging and labeling are difficult to mark with a signboard, their GM status

should be indicated on the customs declaration. The public’s attitude toward GM technologies and products, which is mediated by GM food labeling, may have a significant impact on government

policy formulation and investment in new GM technologies. On the one hand, GM products have been labeled to satisfy consumers’ “right to know” and choose,9 potentially reducing asymmetric

knowledge and understanding of GM technologies between producers and consumers,10 thereby increasing consumer acceptance. On the other hand, the intense debate on GM food labeling seems to

have negatively influenced the public attitudes toward GM technologies and foods in China,11 which could further impact national decisions to develop and commercialize GM crops.12,13 From

2002 to 2012, the proportion of Chinese consumers who considered GM foods unsafe for consumption increased from 13 to 45%.14 And, despite the increase in consumption of GM soybean in China,

Chinese consumers still lack knowledge and understanding of GM technologies,15,16 which further suggests that the current mandatory GM labeling policy in China might negatively influence the

Chinese public’s attitude toward GM foods. Thus, research on the public attitudes toward GM foods with labeling will not only contribute to the refinement of labeling policies, but also

help to elevate and improve public discussions concerning the sustainability of GM crops and safety of GM foods. Related studies have shown that public trust in government management of GM

labeling and safety assessments likely affects individuals’ attitudes toward GM labeled foods. For instance, Kikulwe et al.9 found that consumers who have more confidence in government

institutions may have a 14% higher trust in GM food labeling. However, other studies conclude that individuals who believe the government implements a mandatory labeling policy for GM food

are less likely to consume GM foods.17 Therefore, a mandatory GM food labeling policy implemented by the government may not generate trust from consumers and could result in a lack of

willingness to purchase GM foods.9 Although there have been many studies on public attitudes toward GM foods in China, this study is the first to document public attitudes toward GM foods

with different types of labeling and the determinants of these attitudes across four distinct public groups. Previous studies have focused on the general attitudes of specific groups toward

GM technologies and the influence of GM food labels on consumer behavior. For example, Deng et al.18 proved that most Chinese agribusiness executives are worried about GM foods and oppose GM

crop adoption. Huang et al.11 indicated that nearly 75% of scientists support the development of agricultural GM technologies, but only 29% of scientists are willing to buy GM soybean oil,

which is similar to urban consumers (25%). Vecchione et al.19 found that GM food labeling would impact consumer buying decisions and Huffman et al.20 found that GM food labels reduced the

price consumers were willing to pay for a product by ~14%. Meanwhile, new regulations on labels and safety tests are likely to lead to an increasing public awareness of the application of

biotechnology in agricultural products.21 The objectives of this paper are to examine Chinese public awareness of GM food labeling, attitudes toward GM foods with different types of labeling

and the impact of public confidence in the government’s management of GM food labeling on these attitudes. Our study’s population includes consumers, farmers, media, and local agricultural

officials from county agricultural departments. The reasons we focus on these interest groups are as follows. First, consumers are direct buyers of GM foods, so their attitudes are important

for both producers and policymakers. Second, given the large proportion of the agricultural population in China, farmers are not only the users of GM seed and producers of GM products, but

also a major group of consumers of GM foods. Third, the media represents the tone or attitude on the coverage of GM foods, which may influence public opinion, so their attitudes toward GM

food labeling might also have a significant impact on the final consumers’ attitudes. Finally, officials are the directors of agricultural department in the counties of different provinces.

Their attitudes, to some extent, represent the government officials’ attitude toward GM food labeling. Therefore, it is necessary and important to explore these interest groups’ attitudes

toward GM foods with different types of labeling. RESULTS AWARENESS AND ATTITUDES TOWARD GM FOOD WITH DIFFERENT LABELING IN CHINA To capture public awareness, whether consumers know that the

products they purchase or consume are GM products, and attitudes toward GM foods with different types of labeling, we choose foods with three types of labeling: (1) Foods without labeling,

which does not indicate whether or not the food contains GM products, (2) Foods labeled as not containing GM ingredients, (3) Foods labeled as GM products, which includes GM edible oil, GM

condiments and GM meat such as pork or chicken that has consumed GM feeds (since papaya has not been widely grown in China, we do not discuss it here). GM edible oil refers to edible oil

made by GM soybeans or GM soybean ingredients while GM condiments mean products such as soy sauce or vinegar produced by GM soybeans or GM soybean ingredients. GM meat refers to livestock

that have consumed GM feeds. We chose to examine these three product categories subject to GM food labeling because they exist or have been commonly found in the Chinese market. Edible oil

and condiments produced by GM soybeans are the most commonly purchased and consumed GM products subject to GM food labeling. Pork and chicken are popular meat products in China and most of

the compound feed used in Chinese livestock and poultry production contains GM ingredients.22 Although meat products that consumed GM feed do not need to be labeled based on the labeling

regulation, China imports over 70 million tons of soybeans (over 90% are GMOs), and millions of tons of maize (sizable percentage of which are GMOs) in recent years.23 These soybeans and

maize are mainly used for processing into animal feed and edible vegetable oil.24 Therefore, this study examines Chinese public awareness of these facts and attitudes toward GM edible oil,

GM condiments, and meat products that have consumed GM feed, given their widespread consumption and presence in the marketplace. The results in Table 1 show that the public has a low level

of awareness of these three types of commonly consumed GM foods. In total, over 60% of respondents do not know that the foods that they usually buy or consume include GM ingredients, while

<40% do know. Within the consumer interest group, 67% of people do not know that some livestock in China consumes GM feeds. Less than one third of consumers know condiments are made from

GM soybeans. More consumers know soybean oil is made from GM soybeans. For farmers and the media, the percentage of those who know edible oil is made from GM ingredients is 52 and 54%,

respectively. Surprisingly, a large proportion of agricultural officials do not know that meats and condiments are made from GM products, despite the fact that they have more access to

agricultural knowledge and technology. Public attitudes toward GM foods with different types of labeling are reported in Table 2. The overall results show that nearly 80% of the Chinese

public accept foods that are labeled as containing no GM ingredients, 57% of the Chinese public accept foods with no labeling, and around 40% accept foods labeled as GM products. Of note,

while 79% of consumers accept foods labeled as non-GM products, 57% accept foods without labeling, over 60% of consumers do not accept the three categories of GM labeled foods. However, the

survey analysis did not reveal any differences in attitudes toward different types (meat, oil, and condiments) of labeled GM foods. These results are consistent with Amin et al.25 study

which indicated that stakeholders’ attitudes do not vary among different types of GM products. But it does contradict with the conclusion of Burton et al.26 that UK consumers’ attitudes

toward GM foods with modified plant genes and those with modified animal genes are significantly different. It should be noted that Burton’s study was comparing products from genetically

modified animals, rather than animals that have consumed GM feed as was the case in this study. For farmers, 57% accept foods labeled as containing non-GM products, 33% accept foods without

labeling and 24% accept GM-labeled foods. In contrast, most journalists hold positive attitudes toward GM products, with nearly 80% of the journalists accepting GM-labeled foods without

preference toward how the products are labeled. We hypothesize that the mainstream media interest group surveyed had performed significant background research on GM technologies in order to

ensure the objectivity and impartiality of their prior GMO reporting. Their foundational knowledge regarding GM technologies and products likely went beyond the basic bioscience knowledge

assessed in this research survey and may explain the media’s more objective and positive opinion of GM technologies. This finding is consistent with our observation that fewer negative

reports about GM technology by the Chinese mainstream media have occurred in recent years. The attitudes of government agricultural officials appear to be mostly positive as well, with

acceptance rates of GM-labeled foods above 50%. CONFIDENCE IN THE GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT OF GM LABELING Another objective of this paper is to examine the Chinese public confidence in the

government management of GM food labeling. The survey results in Table 3 show that over 50% of the Chinese public have confidence in the government management of GM food labeling.

Particularly, 42% of consumers trust the government management of GM food labeling, while 51% do not and 7% have no knowledge on this matter. More than 50% of farmers are confident in

government management, while 17% are not. Around one quarter of farmers have no knowledge on the subject. The media have the lowest level of confidence in the government management of GM

food labeling. Specifically, only 34% have confidence in the government management of GM food labeling, 46% do not have confidence, and nearly 20% have no knowledge. Agricultural officials

show the highest level of confidence in the government management of GM food labeling. Among them, 74% are confident, 11% are not, and the remaining 15% have no knowledge of this issue.

DETERMINANTS OF ATTITUDES TOWARD GM FOOD LABELING Estimates of the determinants of public attitudes toward GM food labeling are shown in Table 4. There are five dependent variables

representing different labeling cases as well as a column indicating the trust in government management of GM food labeling. In the model of consumer confidence in government management of

GM food labeling, the instrumental variable denoted by dummyiv, represents the public attitudes toward government management of the territorial dispute (see Methodology section 4 for more

details). This has a significant effect on the confidence in the government management of GM food labeling. It should be noted that, in the bivariate probit (biprobit) model, the

confidence-in- government variable equals 1 if individuals do not have confidence in the government, otherwise it equals 0. Therefore, the explanation of the coefficient of the

confidence-in-government variable should be interpreted with care. If the coefficient is negative, it indicates that individuals who have no confidence in the government management of GM

food labeling are less likely to accept GM foods. If the coefficient is positive, individuals who have confidence in government or do not have opinions on their confidence in the government

are more likely to accept GM foods. The results indicate that the confidence in the government management of GM food labeling has a significant impact on the dependent variables, except

foods with no labeling. Those who do not trust the government management of GM food labeling are less likely to accept labeled GM products and foods labeled with containing no GM

ingredients. This is probably because the people who are not confident in the government management of GM food labeling show less trust in the GM foods managed by the government. The lower

levels of confidence in the government management of GM food labeling might also reflect public distrust of GMO safety assessment oversight by the government. This finding is consistent with

evidence from previous research on consumer perceptions and trust in governance in China14,27 and other countries.28,29 The awareness of GM food labeling has a significant positive

influence on consumers’ acceptance of GM labeled foods while having negative, but not significant, impact on foods without labeling and foods labeled as containing no GM ingredients. Results

indicate that those who know that livestock is fed GM feeds or soybean oil/condiments are produced by GM soybeans are more likely to accept these GM products. Moreover, the impact of

consumers’ biotechnology knowledge about GM foods on the acceptance of GM labeled foods is not statistically significant, whereas the impact of consumer knowledge on the acceptance of foods

labeled as GMO-free is significantly positive. The results are consistent with the results of Huang et al.11, which reveal that although agricultural scientists have more knowledge than

consumers, the higher scientific knowledge does not result in a higher level of acceptance of GM foods. In addition, compared with male respondents, females are more opposed to GM labeled

foods. The possible reason is that women, who usually buy foods in the market, are more concerned about food safety.21 Age has a significant negative impact on the acceptance of labeled GM

foods while education level only has a significant positive effect on the acceptance of foods without labeling or foods with no GM ingredients. A possible explanation is that people who have

a higher education may worry more about the perceived risks of GM foods.27 Public acceptance of foods with different types of labeling varies between interest groups examined in this

survey. Compared with consumers, agricultural officials and the media have more positive attitudes toward GM labeled foods, while farmers have more negative attitudes. The relatively

negative attitude of farmers may have several explanations. Farmers may believe that the mandatory GM labeling policy implemented by the government indicates that GM products are potentially

risky, otherwise the government would not enforce such a strict labeling policy. Or, farmers lack of knowledge and awareness of GM technologies may make them more vulnerable to negative and

false information about GM crops and products found on social media and the internet. These survey results are consistent with research on three African interest groups’ (farmers,

consumers, and gatekeepers) attitudes toward GM foods, which also found that farmers have a lower awareness of GM technologies.30 DISCUSSION This paper examines the determinants of Chinese

public attitudes toward GM foods with different types of labeling among different interest groups and the effect of public confidence in the government management of GM food labeling on

these attitudes. We conducted a series of surveys on four groups of respondents, namely consumers, farmers, media, and local government officials in agricultural departments. There are three

different types of food labeling related to GM products, including foods with no labeling, foods labeled as GM products (meat labeled as having consumed GM feed, edible oil labeled as

containing GM ingredients, and condiments labeled as containing GM soybean), and foods labeled as not having GM ingredients. Overall, the Chinese public has a low level of awareness of

common GM foods. Nearly 60% of respondents do not know that the foods that they usually buy or consume include GM ingredients. Most respondents prefer foods labeled as GMO-free and foods

without labeling. Analysis of the survey data shows no significant difference in the attitudes toward labeled GM foods. The group holding the most positive attitudes toward GM foods is the

media, followed by agricultural officials, while the group holding the most negative views toward GM foods are farmers. Regression results show that those more familiar with GM products are

more likely to accept labeled GM foods. The respondents lacking confidence in government oversight of GM labeling are less likely to accept GM products. Surprisingly, the effect of

biotechnological knowledge on attitudes toward GM labeled food is not statistically significant, which is inconsistent with Cui’s study which concludes that consumers’ opinions of GM foods

are related to their knowledge.31 One explanation for this result is that biotechnology knowledge may exert a smaller impact on public attitudes and behaviors than the misinformation

disseminated by activists and other on social media in China.32 The public are often insensitive to scientific evidence but pay more attention to the risks, which could reduce the impact of

knowledge. On the other hand, the questions measuring public biotechnology knowledge in our survey are more related to basic bioscience knowledge rather than GM technology, which might also

influence the effect of knowledge on the attitudes. Our research may be helpful in rethinking the implementation of mandatory labeling policy on approved GM products in China. It is widely

accepted that mandatory food-labeling requirements are used to alleviate problems of asymmetric information and allow the consumers to have the “right to choose”.33 However, many studies

suggest that the mandatory labeling policies do not provide consumers with valuable or useful information for decision making.34,35 Moreover, labeling requirement may increase the cost of

products because of mandatory segregation systems along the food supply chain.35 In addition, a mandatory qualitative labeling policy requires effective and reliable detection techniques to

detect traces of GM materials. So, policies may require huge efforts to validate tools for GMO analysis,36 which may further increase the cost of the products. Therefore, the findings of

this paper suggest that: (a) Regional agricultural officials need professional development or education on the science behind GM crops, such as safety studies, to bring them up to a level of

competence on par with scientists in the bioscience field. Because the knowledge that they currently possess does not lead to purchasing behavior that differs from groups that likely know

less about GM foods (consumers, farmers); (b) If the Chinese government intends to continue exploring GM technologies, widespread public education needs to occur to facilitate consumer

acceptance and understanding; (c) The strict labeling regime may need some changes in order to increase acceptance of GM foods; and (d) Greater efforts should be made by the government to

gain public trust. Certainly, these survey results are not without limitations. Strong efforts were made to ensure collection of a representative survey sample, but results may only

represent a portion of the general population due to sample size limitations. Therefore, if possible, we will increase the sample size of consumers in other provinces, farmers, media, and

officials in further studies, which will support a more robust and persuasive analysis. In addition, the instrument variable included in the model may need to be refined for future work.

METHODS MODEL SPECIFICATION Kikulwe et al.9 consider a conceptual model framework on consumers’ choices between foods labeled with GM information and those not labeled. Deng et al.14 provide

a framework to test the impact of government trust on consumers’ attitudes toward GM foods. Following these models, we put forward a framework that models people’s attitudes toward GM foods

with labeling. Its utility function is expressed as: $${\mathrm{U}} =

{\mathrm{U}}(L_{{\mathrm{NGM}}},L_{{\mathrm{GMP}}},L_{{\mathrm{GMS}}},L_{{\mathrm{GMV}}},L_{{\mathrm{GMN}}};C_{\mathrm{i}}),$$ where _L_NGM represents foods labeled as non-GM foods, _L_GMP

meat such as pork and chicken fed GM feed and labeled as GM products, _L_GMS soybean oil labeled as GM products, _L_GMV vinegar or other condiments made from GM ingredients and labeled as GM

products, _L_GMN food labeled as not containing GM ingredients, and _C_i the confidence in the government management of GM food labeling. If _P_NGM, _P_GMP, _P_GMS, _P_GMV, and _P_GMN stand

for the prices of the respective foods above, _Y_ is the budget of individuals, who maximize utility in the limit of this budget: $$\begin{array}{l}{\mathrm{Max}}{\mathrm{U}} =

{\mathrm{U}}(L_{{\mathrm{NGM}}},L_{{\mathrm{GMP}}},L_{{\mathrm{GMS}}},L_{{\mathrm{GMV}}},L_{{\mathrm{GMN}}};C_{\mathrm{i}}),\\ P_{{\mathrm{NGM}}}L_{{\mathrm{NGM}}} +

P_{{\mathrm{GMP}}}L_{{\mathrm{GMP}}} + P_{{\mathrm{GMS}}}L_{{\mathrm{GMS}}} + P_{{\mathrm{GMV}}}L_{{\mathrm{GMV}}} + P_{{\mathrm{GMN}}}L_{{\mathrm{GMN}}} \le Y.\end{array}$$ To identify the

determinants of Chinese public attitudes toward GM foods with different types of labeling, we propose an empirical model. Our focus is the determinants of public attitudes toward GM foods

and the attitude differences among different groups. Based on previous studies and experience, we chose factors that can be identified and may have a significant impact on public attitudes.

For instance, besides personal characteristics, we include public knowledge of biotechnology and awareness of GM foods. Moreover, we use four different groups of people for comparison. The

general form of the model is formulated as: $${\mathrm{Attitude}}_{\mathrm{i}} = f\left( {D_{\mathrm{i}},A_{\mathrm{i}},C_{\mathrm{i}}} \right) + \varepsilon _{\mathrm{i}}.$$ The dependent

variable Attitude_i_ represents the attitudes toward GM foods with different types of labeling (acceptable or opposed). _D__i_ represents personal characteristics, including age, gender (1 =

 female, 0 = male), education level, and bioscience knowledge. The education level is divided into three dummy variables: below bachelor, bachelor, or above bachelor. Knowledge is the number

of correct answers for the five questions in the survey. _A_i represents the public awareness of GM foods with labeling. _C_i is the variable of confidence in the government management of

GM food labeling. It may have endogenous issues because there might be unobserved variables in the attitude equation that not only influence public attitudes toward foods with different

types of labeling, but are correlated with the variable public confidence in the government management of GM labeling. The bivariate probit model can apply to the model in which a dependent

variable is a binary choice and an endogenous variable is also a binary choice. Given this, bivariate probit models are employed to estimate our models. The mixed-process regression model is

as follows, and the estimated results are reported in Table 4. $$\left\{ {\begin{array}{*{20}{c}} {{\mathrm{Attitude}}_{\mathrm{i}} = f_{\mathrm{i}}\left(

{C_{\mathrm{i}},Group_{\mathrm{i}},D_{\mathrm{i}},A_{\mathrm{i}},\mu _{\mathrm{i}}} \right)} \\ {C_{\mathrm{i}} = f_{\mathrm{i}}\left(

{{\mathrm{dummyiv}},{\mathrm{Group}}_{\mathrm{i}},D_{\mathrm{i}},A_{\mathrm{i}},\varepsilon _{\mathrm{i}}} \right)} \end{array}} \right.,$$ where dummyiv, the instrumental variable,

represents the public attitude toward the government’s handling of the territorial dispute (Diaoyu islands) between China and Japan. This is a good instrumental variable because it

theoretically reflects the public confidence in the government and is independent of agriculture, therefore not affecting public attitudes toward GM foods. Additionally, the regression

results show that the instrumental variable is statistically significant. DATA AND DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS To capture the different groups’ attitudes and awareness of GM foods with different

types of labeling, we conducted a series of surveys during 2015–2016. All interviewers are graduate students on our team, who have received training on how to conduct research surveys. The

data on consumers were collected by face-to-face interviews during June–July 2015 in Beijing. Based on the different economic conditions and locations, we divided Beijing into three

sections, that is, the inside ring, the middle ring and the outside ring, which represent the populations who live in the wealthier areas, the populations who live in relatively wealthy

areas and those who live in relatively poor areas, respectively. Then we divided each section into four geographical directions (east, west, north, and south). Combining the rings and

geographical directions, we obtained 12 sections of Beijing. In each section, we chose one big wet market and one big supermarket to ensure sample randomness. The reason that we choose

consumers in the wet market and supermarket as representative consumers is that these people are usually the real decisionmakers. They purchase foods for their families, which likely

includes GM foods. At each location, we randomly selected consumers who were either entering or leaving the market to respond to the questionnaire. A total of 1460 consumers were

interviewed. For more details on consumers’ data, see Deng et al.14. A series of surveys with farmers, who are presidents of agricultural cooperation communities (ACC), were conducted in

2016 coinciding with training of farming technology and practices in Beijing by the Chinese Ministry of Agriculture (MOA). The content of their training was cooperative management and

policy. During all training rounds, we chose two groups of ACC farmers to complete the survey in order to capture their awareness and attitudes toward GM foods with different types of

labeling. Fifty-four farmers were interviewed. Similarly, to understand government officials’ attitudes toward GM foods with labeling, surveys were conducted among directors of agricultural

departments in the counties of different provinces in 2015, who visited Beijing for agricultural policy training. During the training, the government officials were organized by the MOA to

help us complete the survey. As a result, a total of 146 agricultural officials from different counties in China were interviewed. In addition, from April to September 2015, we conducted a

survey among journalists who had written reports about GM technologies and products in China. Of those surveyed, 70 journalists completed the questionnaire. All respondents were asked to

answer a series of questions relevant to GM food labeling. First, regarding the awareness of GM foods with different types of labeling (see the questionnaire in the appendix), the question

“Do you know that, at present, most edible oils, condiments, and meat used in most restaurants are derived from GM plants or animals fed GM feeds?” (1=“know”; 2 = “do not know”) was asked.

Second, a question about their attitude toward GM foods with labeling was included in the survey, “If, in accordance with the National Food Safety Law, restaurants have labeled their foods

as containing GM ingredients, will you go to restaurants that use GM ingredients?” (1 = “yes”; 2 = “no”). To test the impact of government management confidence on Chinese public attitudes,

we formulated the following question: “Currently, the National Food Safety Law requires that GM foods must be identified, do you think the government can do a good job in this area of

regulation?” (1 = “yes”; 2 = “no”; 3 = “have no idea”). Additionally, respondents’ bioscience knowledge and their characteristics were also investigated. The summary statistics of

respondents’ characteristics are presented in Table 5. In total, 1730 respondents completed the survey, including 1460 consumers, 54 farmers, 70 journalists, and 146 agricultural officials.

The response rate is around 75%, which means that 75% of the people who the graduate students tried to approach take the time to stop and answer questions. The average age of all respondents

is 36. Most respondents are male (54%), but the male to female proportion is balanced. A total of 857 respondents hold a bachelor’s degree and 372 individuals hold a master’s degree or

above, while 501 individuals only have a high school education or below. The highest education level in the farmer category is a bachelor’s degree, while medias’ lowest education level is a

bachelor’s degree, which is reasonable because of the job’s nature and requirements. Furthermore, we also test Chinese public knowledge of GM technology with five common-sense questions

about GMOs, mainly from Huang et al.15 and Huang et al.11,15 Respondents score one point for each correct answer, and zero otherwise. The individual total scores show that the media and

agricultural officials have the highest average scores, while farmers score the lowest. Statistical analysis: analysis of the survey results was finished by using the software program

package – StataMP 14. REPORTING SUMMARY Further information on research design is available in the Nature Research Reporting Summary linked to this article. DATA AVAILABILITY A sample of the

questionnaire, which has been translated into English, is available in supplementary information at npj: Science of Food’s website. The completed 1730 questionnaires and the resulting

database for the statistical analyses are in Mandarin and are not publicly available, but can be made available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. REFERENCES * Hu, R., Cai,

C., Huang, J. & Wang, X. Silos hamstring Chinese plant biotech sector. _Nat. Biotechnol._ 30, 749–750 (2012). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Huang, J., Hu, R., Cai, J. & Wang, X.

Human research capacity in Chinese agri-biotech. _Nat. Biotechnol._ 30, 1007 (2012). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * State Council. _National Medium and Long-term Scientific and

Technological Development Plan 2006-2020_ (2008). * Liao, X. _State Council Information Office_, _Ministry of Agriculture held a press conference on the situation of agricultural genetic

modification_. http://www.scio.gov.cn/xwfbh/gbwxwfbh/x-wfbh/nyb/Document/1474274/1474274.htm (2016). * Ministry of Agriculture. _Agricultural Genetically Modified Organisms Identification

Management Measures_ (2002). * State Council. _Regulations on Safety Management of Agricultural Genetically Modified Organisms_ (2001). * Huang, J., Rozelle, S., Pray, C. & Wang, Q.

Plant biotechnology in China. _Science_ 295, 674–676 (2002). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Zhu, X., Roberts, M. T. & Wu, K. Genetically modified food labeling in China: in pursuit of a

rational path. _Food Drug Law J._ 71, 30 (2016). PubMed  Google Scholar  * Kikulwe, E. M., Falck-Zepeda, J. & Wesseler, J. ‘If labels for GM food were present, would consumers trust

them?’ Insights from a consumer survey in Uganda. _Environ. Dev. Econ._ 19, 786–805 (2013). Article  Google Scholar  * Hobbs, J. E. & Plunkett, M. Genetically modified foods: consumer

issues and the role of information asymmetry. _Can. J. Agric. Econ._ 47, 445–445 (1999). Article  Google Scholar  * Huang, J., Peng, B. & Wang, X. Scientists’ attitudes toward

agricultural GM technology development and GM food in China. _China Agric. Econ. Rev._ 9, 369–384 (2017). Article  Google Scholar  * Paarlberg, R. & Pray, C. Political actors on the

landscape. _AgBioForum_ 10, 144–153 (2007). Google Scholar  * Gruère, G. & Sengupta, D. GM-free private standards and their effects on biosafety decisionmaking in developing countries.

_Food Policy_ 34, 399–406 (2009). Article  Google Scholar  * Deng, H. & Hu, R. A Crisis of Consumers’ Trust in Scientists and Institutions: Development of Agricultural Biotechnology in

China. In _Agricultural & Applied Economics Association Annual Meeting in 2017_ (Chicago, IL, 2017). * Huang, J., Qiu, H., Bai, J. & Pray, C. Awareness, acceptance of and willingness

to buy genetically modified foods in Urban China. _Appetite_ 46, 144–151 (2006). Article  Google Scholar  * Zhang, X., Huang, Jikun, Qiu, H. & Huang, Z. A consumer segmentation study

with regards to genetically modified food in urban China. _Food Policy_ 35, 456–462 (2010). Article  Google Scholar  * Lusk, J. L. & Rozan, A. Public policy and endogenous beliefs: the

case of genetically modified food. _J. Agric. Resour. Econ._ 33, 270–289 (2008). * Deng, H. et al. Attitudes toward GM foods, biotechnology R&D investment and lobbying activities among

agribusiness firms in the food, feed, chemical and seed industries in China. _China Agric. Econ. Rev._ 9, 385–396 (2017). Article  Google Scholar  * Vecchione, M., Feldman, C. &

Wunderlich, S. Consumer knowledge and attitudes about genetically modified food products and labelling policy. _Int J. Food Sci. Nutr._ 66, 329–335 (2015). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  *

Huffman, W. E., Shogren, J. F., Rousu, M. & Tegene, A. Consumer willingness to pay for genetically modified food labels in a market with diverse information: evidence from experimental

auctions. _J. Agric. Resour. Econ_. 28, 481–502 (2003). * McCluskey, JillJ. & Loureiro, M. L. Consumer preferences and willingness to pay for food labeling: a discussion of empirical

studies. _J. Food Distrib. Res._ 34, 95–102 (2003). Google Scholar  * Dong, P. _Liu Yonghao reported that feed in new hope contains genetically modified organisms: the bigger companies_,

_the more willing to use_, http://finance.ifeng.com/a/20131219/1130-3515_0.shtml (2013). * James, C. _20th Anniversary (1996 to 2015) of the Global Commercialization of Biotech Crops and

Biotech Crop Highlights in 2015_, http://www.isaaa.org/resources/publications/briefs/5-1/download/isaaa-brief-51-2015.pdf (2015). * USDA. _China- People Republic of: Regulatory Process

Continues Churning, Commercialization Not in Sight ([GAIN] Report Number: CH17054)_,

https://gain.fas.usda.gov/Recent%20GAIN%20Publications/Agricultural%20Biotechnology%20Annual_Beijing_China%20-%20Peoples%20Republic%20of_12-29-2017.pdf (2017). * Amin, L., Md Jahi, J. &

Md Nor, A. R. Stakeholders’ attitude to genetically modified foods and medicine. _Sci. World J._ 2013, 1–14 (2013). Article  Google Scholar  * Michael Burton, D. R., Young, T. & James,

S. Consumer attitudes to genetically modified organisms in food in the UK. _Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ._ 28, 479–498 (2001). Article  Google Scholar  * Zhang, M., Chen, C., Hu, W., Chen, L. &

Zhan, J. Influence of source credibility on consumer acceptance of genetically modified foods in China. _Sustainability_ 8, 899 (2016). Article  Google Scholar  * Kikulwe, E. M., Wesseler,

J. & Falck-Zepeda, J. Attitudes, perceptions, and trust. Insights from a consumer survey regarding genetically modified banana in Uganda. _Appetite_ 57, 401–413 (2011). Article  Google

Scholar  * Gutteling, J., Hanssen, L., van der Veer, N. & Seydel, E. Trust in governance and the acceptance of genetically modified food in the Netherlands. _Public Underst. Sci._ 15,

103–112 (2016). Article  Google Scholar  * Kimenju, S. C., Charles Bett, H. D. G. & Wanyama, J. Farmers, consumers and gatekeepers and their attitudes towards biotechnology. _Afr. J.

Biotechnol._ 10, 4767–4776 (2011). Google Scholar  * Cui, K. & Shoemaker, S. P. Public perception of genetically-modified (GM) food: A Nationwide Chinese Consumer Study. _npj Sci. Food_

2, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41538-018-0018-4 (2018). * Huang, J.-k. & Peng, B.-w. Consumers’ perceptions on GM food safety in urban China. _J. Integr. Agric._ 14, 2391–2400 (2015).

Article  Google Scholar  * Golan, E., Kuchler, F., Mitchell, L., Greene, C. & Jessup, A. Economics of food labeling. _J. Consum. Policy_ 24, 117–184 (2001). Article  Google Scholar  *

Heslop, L. A. If we label it, will they care? The effect of GM-ingredient labelling on consumer responses. _J. Consum. Policy_ 29, 203–228 (2006). Article  Google Scholar  * Premanandh, J.

Global consensus–Need of the hour for genetically modified organisms (GMO) labeling. _J. Commer. Biotechnol._ 17, 37–44 (2011). Article  Google Scholar  * Weighardt, F. GMO quantification in

processed food and feed. _Nat. Biotechnol._ 25, 1213 (2007). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  Download references ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This research was supported by the National Science and

Technology Major Project of China (2018ZX08015001). We would like to gratefully acknowledge the research team members who participated in the baseline survey. Many thanks to Lay Zhang and

Theo Zhu. AUTHOR INFORMATION AUTHORS AND AFFILIATIONS * School of Management and Economics, Beijing Institute of Technology, 5 South Zhongguancun Street, Beijing, 100081, China Yawei Zhao, 

Haiyan Deng, Changxin Yu & Ruifa Hu Authors * Yawei Zhao View author publications You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar * Haiyan Deng View author publications You

can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar * Changxin Yu View author publications You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar * Ruifa Hu View author publications

You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar CONTRIBUTIONS Y.Z. analyzed the data and wrote the paper. H.D. provided guidance for the structure of the paper and contributed

analysis tools. She also contributed to the revising and editing of the manuscript. R.H. designed the questionnaire and provided advice in its methods. C.Y. provided support in data

processing and analysis. CORRESPONDING AUTHOR Correspondence to Haiyan Deng. ETHICS DECLARATIONS COMPETING INTERESTS The authors declare no competing interests. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

PUBLISHER’S NOTE: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION QUESTIONNAIRE REPORTING

SUMMARY RIGHTS AND PERMISSIONS OPEN ACCESS This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and

reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes

were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If

material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain

permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. Reprints and permissions ABOUT THIS ARTICLE CITE THIS

ARTICLE Zhao, Y., Deng, H., Yu, C. _et al._ The Chinese public’s awareness and attitudes toward genetically modified foods with different labeling. _npj Sci Food_ 3, 17 (2019).

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41538-019-0049-5 Download citation * Received: 23 July 2018 * Accepted: 19 July 2019 * Published: 26 September 2019 * DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41538-019-0049-5

SHARE THIS ARTICLE Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content: Get shareable link Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article. Copy to

clipboard Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative