Understanding the Science: More Produce Consumers Getting On Board With CRISPR
September 18, 2023 Since its inception in 2012, CRISPR (clustered regularly interspaced palindromic repeat) gene-editing technology has proven to be a highly effective and versatile genetic tool for improving plants, including fruit trees. Compared with the classic genetically modified (GM) plants, commonly called GMOs (genetically modified organisms) that contain a foreign DNA inserted randomly into the genome, CRISPR gene-edited plants are precisely edited in one or a few predetermined target genomic locations and are free of any DNA that originate outside the plant.
Such advantages make CRISPR gene-edited fruits not only superior to existing cultivars in important traits (e.g., yield, quality, and resistance), but also comparable to those developed by conventional breeding in their genetic compositions (free of foreign DNA).
As a result, the federal authorities (USDA, FDA, and EPA) in charge of regulating GMOs have drastically relaxed their regulatory procedures for gene-edited plants. For example, USDA has announced gene-edited plants will be treated much like those bred conventionally.
Although gene-edited fruits remain unavailable at the moment, they are expected to be available on the market in the near future. In response, scientific studies have taken place to gauge consumers’ views on gene-edited fruits, including apples and table grapes.
STUDY FINDINGS
Consumers are willing to pay more for tastier table grapes, regardless of breeding technologies.
A study by Uddin et al. (2023) finds U.S. consumers would use the same set of standards to determine their willingness to pay for both gene-edited table grapes (hypothetical) and conventionally bred ones.
For tastier (e.g., sweeter and crispier) table grapes, they would pay a premium, irrespective of whether the berries were developed by gene editing or by conventional breeding.
However, the study also finds consumers tend to pay a slightly lower price for gene-edited table grapes than for those bred conventionally if they taste similar, although the discount was not significant.
The Uddin study was conducted in April 2020 using an online survey platform. It surveyed 2,873 representative adult participants who were responsible for their household grocery shopping and had bought table grapes in the past 3 months. To help the participants’ understanding of the breeding technologies, a brief explanation for conventional breeding and CRISPR gene-editing was provided during the survey.
Gene-edited apples are more acceptable than genetically modified organisms (GMOs).
A study by Yang and Hobbs (2020) evaluating Canadian consumers’ willingness to pay for apples produced by different biotechnologies uncovered that gene-edited apples were preferred over their GMO counterparts.
The study also found evidence of a discount for gene-edited apples when compared with those bred conventionally.
This study was based on a 2016 online survey of 804 representative Canadian adults. Participants were asked for their choices as if they were purchasing sliced apples that differed in how the fruit post-slice browning was prevented (by non-browning vs by antioxidant-coating) and how the apples were developed (by CRISPR gene editing, GMO, or conventional breeding).
Culture values, institutional trust and knowledge about gene-editing determine who may eat or avoid gene-edited foods.
Individual consumers are known to differ widely in their views of biotechnologies in food production. To understand what causes such wide differences among consumers, Cummings and Peters (2022) conducted a survey of a nationally representative sample of 2,000 U.S. residents with a range of demographic and social-economic questions.
The researchers revealed that consumers who would eat gene-edited foods generally see advances in science and innovations in (bio) technology as necessary and critical to cope with grand challenges societies face. These consumers are younger on average and have higher levels of education and household income. They also tend to trust more in professional food regulators from relevant government agencies and are less concerned about how crop plants are improved genetically.
Conversely, consumers who would purposely avoid eating gene-edited foods are less knowledgeable about gene editing and have strong beliefs in environment, religion, and culture that food production should be accomplished via natural means. These consumers also tend to have low levels of trust in government policies and mostly comprise women, senior citizens, and those with lower household income.
The study’s findings suggest cultural values, institutional trust, and knowledge about gene editing are the major factors determining consumers’ acceptance of gene-edited foods.
In summary, North American consumers appear to appreciate the gene-editing technology more than GMOs, and the more consumers understand the science underlying gene editing, the more they accept gene-edited foods.
Subscribe Today For
