CONSUMER ACCEPTANCE OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS



International Food Information Council Foundation (IFIC). (2001). “More U.S. Consumers See
Potential Benefits to Food Biotechnology.” Wirthlin Group Quorum Surveys, January
2001.
http://www.ific.org/proactive/newsroom/release.vtml?id=19241 (March).

Loader, R. and Henson, S. (1998). “A View of GMOs From the UK”. AgBioForum, 1 (1), 31-34.

Loehman, Edna and VoHu De. (1982). “Application of Stochastic Choice Modeling to Policy
Analysis of Public Goods: A Case Study of Air Quality Improvements.”
Review of
Economics and Statistics,
54 (1982):474-480

Macer, D. and Ng A.C. (2000). “Changing Attitudes to Biotechnology in Japan”. Nature
Biotechnology,
18, 945-947.

Nordic Industrial Fund. (2000). Negative Attitude to Gene-Modified Food.
http://www.nordicinnovation.net (November 1).

Wang, Q., Halbrendt, C., Kolodinsky, J. and Schmidt, F. (1997). “Willingness to Pay for rBST-
Free Milk: A Two-Limit Tobit Model Analysis”.
Applied Economics Letters, 4, 619-621.

20



More intriguing information

1. Getting the practical teaching element right: A guide for literacy, numeracy and ESOL teacher educators
2. Wettbewerbs- und Industriepolitik - EU-Integration als Dritter Weg?
3. The name is absent
4. The name is absent
5. Magnetic Resonance Imaging in patients with ICDs and Pacemakers
6. THE INTERNATIONAL OUTLOOK FOR U.S. TOBACCO
7. The name is absent
8. The name is absent
9. The name is absent
10. Transfer from primary school to secondary school
11. The name is absent
12. The name is absent
13. Innovation and business performance - a provisional multi-regional analysis
14. Sectoral specialisation in the EU a macroeconomic perspective
15. Output Effects of Agri-environmental Programs of the EU
16. Cancer-related electronic support groups as navigation-aids: Overcoming geographic barriers
17. Using Surveys Effectively: What are Impact Surveys?
18. The Demand for Specialty-Crop Insurance: Adverse Selection and Moral Hazard
19. National curriculum assessment: how to make it better
20. Place of Work and Place of Residence: Informal Hiring Networks and Labor Market Outcomes