Food In Canada


Study finds non-GM produce earns ‘halo effect’ under new labelling laws

Consumers were more willing to buy unlabeled produce after being shown food tagged as “genetically modified” in a new Cornell University study that comes two months before a new federal law, requiring genetically modified organism disclosure labels on food products, goes into effect.

“We wanted to learn from consumers what will happen to conventional products when the labelling goes into effect and we start seeing ‘GM’ and ‘non-GM’ labelled produce at the market,” said co-author Miguel Gómez, associate professor at Cornell’s Charles H. Dyson School of Applied Economics and Management. “Will shoppers be willing to purchase a product when the new labels are introduced?”

Consumer aversion toward genetically modified food has inspired mandatory labelling proposals and laws at the state and federal levels, according to the paper. On Jan. 1, the U.S. Department of Agriculture will begin implementing the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard, which requires food marketers to disclose the use of GMOs in food and food products.

In the study, the Cornell researchers recruited 1,300 consumers, who were shown GM, non-GM and unlabeled opportunities — in random sequences — to purchase apples, as well as other fruits and vegetables.

The paper found that when an unlabeled apple was presented first, the initial consumer demand — willingness to purchase — was 65.2 per cent. But if the unlabeled apple was presented after participants saw an apple with a GM label, the demand for the unlabeled apple jumped to 77.7 per cent.

If a consumer was presented first with an apple labelled “non-genetically modified,” the shopper’s preference for it was 67.2 per cent — statistically even with the shopper initial preference for an unlabeled apple. “In other words, the ‘non-GM’ label is not stigmatizing the unlabeled product,” Gómez said.

“We were pretty surprised when we first saw this paper’s results,” said co-author Adeline Yeh, a Cornell doctoral student in applied economics. “Our original hypothesis was that having a non-GM label would have a stigmatizing effect on the [unlabeled] fresh product. The results contradicted our original hypothesis. Instead, we found that the GMO label had a halo effect on the unlabeled product.”

Print this page

Related Posts

2 Comments » for Study finds non-GM produce earns ‘halo effect’ under new labelling laws
  1. GMO or non-GMO label doesn’t matter as much anymore because consumers are more aware. Those who want to avoid GMOs and disease-causing pesticides and herbicides know their best option is to choose Organic.

  2. Susan says:

    Here in the US, unless you buy USDA or Canada organic, you’re guaranteed to have glyphosate or some other pesticide on or in your food, GMO or not. AND – the FDA is putting 3 million dollars into improving “consumer acceptance” in supermarkets, in conjunction with GMO labeling.

    If anyone were to educate themselves about Simplot’s GMO “non-browning” potato, they will learn why GMO labels are important for consumer safety.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


A Must Read for all food & beverages industry personnel

Canada’s national food & beverage processing authority
Serving the Canadian food & beverage processing industry for over 80 years!

FREE to qualified industry professionals