Issue link: https://read.uberflip.com/i/1438839
WWW.POTATOGROWER.COM 29 You'd think a technology that improves the safety and sustainability of food would be embraced by the consuming public. Who doesn't want safe food that's produced in a way that protects our planet, especially at a time when interest in sustainability is skyrocketing? You'd be surprised. Consider the critics who surfaced after the introduction of the Innate potato, genetically modified to produce healthier and more abundant crops, reduce blackspot bruising and lower levels of asparagine, which reduces formation of the potentially toxic acrylamide when potatoes are baked and fried. Why wouldn't everyone want these potatoes in their kitchen pantries? Consumers are complicated. However, new research from The Center for Food Integrity (CFI) sheds light on the driving factors of consumer acceptance or rejection of technology. Why are they okay with some technologies but not others? The new findings provide farmers with insights to advance the technology that's crucial to U.S. agriculture in maintain- ing a safe, sustainable food supply. "Agriculture has a rich history of innovation," says Charlie Arnot, CFI CEO. "As farming and food production practic- es integrate more technology, it's increasingly important for those in agriculture to understand the keys to successfully building support for technology so they can continue to make progress." In the research, conducted with support from the United Soybean Board, CFI measured consumer attitudes regarding four agriculture and food technologies with the overarching goal to identify the drivers of consumer acceptance and rejection of technology as a whole. The technologies used as prompts in this study included gene editing in plants, gene editing in animals, plant-based meat, and cultured (cell-based) meat. Acceptance Drivers Several consistent themes regarding support for and rejection of technology emerged in the study. Key drivers for acceptance include: • Belief that food resulting from technology use is safe to consume • Readily available information on food produced through technology, which enables an informed choice of voluntary exposure • Benefits that outweigh perceived risks • Understanding that technology can help ensure a consistent supply of food • Understanding that technology promotes greater sustain- ability by making more with a lesser environmental impact "Consumers are concerned about the direct impact on them, such as, 'Is the food I'm consuming safe and healthy?'" says Arnot. "That's why there's greater concern about tech- nology like pesticides and gene editing, compared to drone technology or GPS systems." The research shows that consumers also trust in the orga- nizations that approve and monitor the impact of technolo- gies, and they prefer third-party, independent oversight, along with information from that third-party source. In addition, for the technology to be accepted, the benefits must outweigh the perceived risk of consuming the end product. Trust