GMO's and Labeling

8/20/2019 GMO's and Labeling

1/30

The Fight Over GMO Food Labeling

A Social Science Perspective

Carmen BainDepartment of Sociology, Iowa State University


2/30

Introduction

GMOs as ‘wicked’ problem Fight over political and economic interests and values

Science cannot arbitrate

Movement for GMO labeling Key actors, frames, responses

Social movements, consumers, food industry Framing GMOs as a social problem Mandatory vs. voluntary labeling

Conclusion Science cannot ‘solve’ GMO debate but inform ‘Management’ is social and political process

otential for voluntary labeling to settle the debate


3/30

Where’s the Science?!road criticism that anti"GMO proponents ignore

scientific consensus, facts on GMOs, and scienceshould ad#udicate

$Stand up for Science. %oin us in demanding &.science"

based standards for GMO food labeling' ()oalition for Safeand *ffordable Food, +-/.

$0ndependent ob#ective information on the scientific issues&need to be provided to legislators and consumers&to

help move the national discussion from contentiousclaims to a more fact"based and informed dialog' (1an2enennaam et.al, )*S3, +-4/.

$&army of 5uac6s and pseudo"environmentalists 7aging a

leftist 7ar on science' (Saletan, +-, Slate).


4/30

Is this fight about GMOs?

For opponents, GMOs pro8y forbroader political, economic, ethicalconcerns

$GMOs are concrete, it’s a target, it’ssimple, and it’s a place for people to

focus other broader moral concernsabout sustainable agriculture or the foodthat they’re eating.'

(2nvironmental Org, +-4/


5/30

Is this fight about GMOs?

Fight over GMOs and labeling is aboutpolitical and economic interests andvalues on both sides

industrial agriculture, corporate control,property, patents, mar6ets, profits, theenvironment&


6/30

$9e are very, very, very concerned about theinade5uacy of the structure for evaluating7hether :GMOs; are safe to eat &right to6no7 issues and transparency&but :also; theeconomic impacts on agriculture, the biggerpicture food system impacts. So it’s the

patent issues, the consolidation of the seedindustry, increasing the role of chemicals'()onsumer *dvocacy Organi


7/30(Kreuter et al. +4> !atie +?> !atie and Sch7ei6hardt +-/

GMOs as a “Wicked roble!"

3ame problems@ problem is clear, outcome istrueAfalse, causes determined by scientifice8perts, science can guide solutions

9ic6ed roblems@ issue is comple8> sub#ect topolitical, scientific and social uncertainty Science cannot ‘solve’ but inform

Bo agreement over $real' problem and causes Bo shared values over desired goals for society Outcome neither trueAfalse but betterA7orse ‘Management’ is social and political process


8/30

#o!!unicating $ith the ublic

about GMOs

General Assumption

)ontroversies about science (e.g. GMOsafety/ are caused by a deficit of science6no7ledge

3he role of e8perts and scientists is toeducate the public, thereby reducing thecontroversy

Facts 7ill spea6 for themselves(Scheufele, +-4/


9/30


about GMOs

Deficit Model of cience Communication

Kno7ledge and attitudes about contentious

issues are generally not correlated2ven in the face of facts, 7e rarely

change our minds


10/30


about GMOs

!hy"

0ndividuals ma6e #udgments 5uic6ly basedon our values and interests versus reasoning

9e tend to see6 out reasonsAfacts thatsupport our initial value #udgments andinterests

0f you as6 someone to believe somethingthat violates their moral intuitions, they 7ill7or6 very hard to find a reason to disagree

(Scheufele, +-4> Caidt, +-+/


11/30

GMO #ro%s in the &S

)ommercially available since -DD4

DE corn, soybeans, cotton in S is GM "?E of processed foods include GM

ingredient

#ey GM traits

Cerbicide tolerance (Houndup Heady/

0nsecticide (!t corn/


12/30

GMO #ro%s in the &S

-DD+ FI* determined@

GM foods substantially e5uivalent

GM foods pose no additional ris6s

Mandatory labeling for any functionaldifferences J label the difference

Bo labeling re5uiredFI* allo7s voluntary process"based

labeling so long as not false or misleading


13/30

Fra!ing GMOs as a Social

roble!2arly efforts to ban or label GM foods failed

-DDs@ E public support for biotech

Since +--, mandatory and voluntary labeling initiatives gained momentum

Key role of social movement organi Food 9ater 9atch>

2nvironmental 9or6ing Group> Organic )onsumers *ssociation> Bon"GMO ro#ect

(Loes6e, +> Schurman and Munroe, +-> !ain etal, +-4/


14/30

Fra!ing GMOs as a Social roble!

$roblem

)onsumers have $right to 6no7'

)onsumers should have $choice'

3here should be $transparency' Hesonates 7ith 6ey *merican values, cultural

norms, and trends

0ndividual rights and freedoms Hise of political consumption, food

movements, private governance

olution@ labeling


15/30

$3o be honest, it’s a little surprising

that this push for labeling has come upin the last = to 4 years&0 thin6 itsreally lin6ed to a larger movement

among consumers 7anting moretransparency in the food system.3hey 7ant to 6no7 where their food

came from%how it was produced.'(*g olicy Org, +-4/


16/30

olitical'(thical #onsu!%tion

Hise of consumption as political practice 0ndividuals empo7ered through role and identity

as consumers

Lac6 of trust in e8isting policies, regulations )oncerns about ris6

Iesire for non"economic values in mar6et arena

Social, environmental, ethical roduction processes

(!ostrom Klintman, +--> !ain et al. +-4/

&ood movement local foods organic

animal 7elfare fair trade


17/30

$0n the 7orld of GMO issues,

labeling seems achievable and ittaps into a uni5uely *mericanthing&everyone is do7n on thegovernment, the government can’tdo anything :but people thin6; 'if

you put labels on it( )’ll decide formyself*+(Food and 2nvironmental *dvocacy Organi


18/30

#onsu!er Surve)s

,-./0 123 poll D=E 7ant GM foods labeled

,-./0 4utgers $ublic urvey 4 E 6ne7 very littleAnothing of GM foods + E never heard of them 4=E not a7are GM products currently for sale

$9hat information 7ould you li6e to see on foodlabels that is not already on thereN' E said GM food labeling *s6ed directly, should GM foods be labeledN

= E agreed


19/30

rivate Food Governance

)reation food retailing giants7ith direct lin6s to consumers

1ulnerable to activist campaigns rotect valuable brand names, reputation

Labels, brands, certification Ievelop niche mar6ets 7ith price premium Bon"price competition based on ‘5uality’ attributes Iemonstrate $corporate social responsibility' )onvey transparency, trust, credibility, reduce ris6

(Catana6a et.al, +> Haynolds et.al, +-4> !usch, +--> !ain et.al, +-=/


20/30


21/30

#a!%aigns for Mandator) Labeling


22/30

(Center for Food Safety, 201!


23/30

GMO Labeling O%%onents

!iotech )ompaniesA ‘!ig *griculture’AGovt *gencies

Mandatory labeling

Bo scientific #ustification

Safe

)ostly creates illusion of difference

7ill confuse and mislead consumers creates negative associations creates less choice

Support voluntary labeling(1an 2enennaam etal, +-4/


24/30

*egulator) (fforts to +lock

Mandator) Labeling

afe and Accurate &ood 5abeling Act

674 .899:

;an states from introducing GMOlabel laws GMO"free labels 7ould have to submit to

certification process overseen by SI*

0ntroduced March + by Heps Mi6e ompeo (H"KS/ and GK !utterfield (I"B)/

Couse of 2nergy and )ommerce )ommittee and

Couse of *griculture )ommittee (%uly -4, +-/


25/30

Governancetrategy

4etailer


26/30

#hi%otle Me/ican Grill


27/30

S!art +alance

$0’ve been in the food industry for = years. 0have never seen a consumer issue come onthis fast.' )2O Cughes

'!hat you put in your food matters* o does what

you leave out+


28/30

Whole Foods

-E labeling by +-?

$9hole Foods Mar6et commits to full GMOtransparency &'

$9e are putting a sta6e in the ground on

GMO labeling to support the consumer’sright to 6no7'

(9alter Hobb, co")2O, +-=/


29/30

,on-GMO #ertification

1on=GMO $ro>ect

Borth *merica’s only third party verification andlabeling for non"GMO food and products

Over +, products verified since +?


30/30

#onclusion

Focus on scientific arguments and science education 7illnot resolve GMO labeling battle

Focus on facilitating dialogue that identifies trade"offs,better or 7orse (not right or 7rong/ outcomes and

identifies potential areas for managing problem

0nterest in GMO labeling reflects alignment of anti"GMOframing 7ith broader values, concerns, interests ofpolitical consumers and food retailers

Momentum for state"based mandatory labels 7aningN

Gro7th in voluntary labeling may act to $settle' the issue Bo consensus but addresses concerns of political

consumers> value"based food businesses> opponents of

mandatory labels

GMO's and Labeling

Documents