=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-1498/HAICTA_2015_paper105
|storemode=property
|title=Consumers’ Attitudes Towards the Development of Transgenic Forest Trees and their Products in Greece
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1498/HAICTA_2015_paper105.pdf
|volume=Vol-1498
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/haicta/TsourgiannisKI15
}}
==Consumers’ Attitudes Towards the Development of Transgenic Forest Trees and their Products in Greece==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1498/HAICTA_2015_paper105.pdf
Consumers’ Attitudes Towards the Development of
Transgenic Forest Trees and their Products in Greece
Lambros Tsourgiannis1, Vassiliki Kazana2, Valasia Iakovoglou3
1
Region of Eastern Macedonia & Thrace, 67100 Xanthi, Greece,
e-mail: ltsourgiannis@gmail.com
2
Department of Forestry & Natural Environment Management, Eastern Macedonia & Thrace
Institute of Technology, 66100 Drama, Greece, e-mail: vkazana@gmail.com
3
Department of Forestry & Natural Environment Management, Eastern Macedonia & Thrace
Institute of Technology, 66100 Drama, Greece, e-mail: viakovoglou@yahoo.gr
Abstract. This paper aims to examine the attitudes of the consumers in Greece
towards the use of biotechnology in forest plantations and their potential
purchases of forest transgenic products. Three groups of factors related the
consumers’ attitude on the use of biotechnology in forest plantations with the
potential purchases of transgenic forest products: (a) the potential negative
environmental impacts (b) the potential positive impacts on production
processes, and (c) economic impacts. Furthermore, this study indicated that
consumers who intent to buy paper products derived from Genetically
Modified (GM) forest trees, were concerned for the environmental impacts of
the GM trees and then on the production process that was followed by
economic issues. No significant relationships were found between the
consumers who declared that they intent to buy wood and woody biomass
energy products derived from GM trees and the importance of the factors that
affect their attitudes towards the adoption of biotechnology in forest
plantations.
Keywords: Consumer behaviour, Genetically Modified Trees.
1 Introduction
It has been argued that the use of biotechnology in commercial forest plantations
would contribute to increased forest productivity, improved pulp for paper and
biofuel production, climate change mitigation, preservation of biodiversity and
reduction of energy, pesticides and fertilizers utilization (Sedjo 2006, Chapotin and
Wolt 2007, FAO 2008, 2010, Hinchee et al. 2009, Flachowsky et al. 2009, Harfouche
et al. 2011).
Specifically, the use of GM trees in forest plantations may provide several
economic advantages. Aside from increasing the trees’ viability and reducing losses
to folivores, fungi and bacteria, these types of modifications could also decrease the
need for pesticides and consequently affect the costs associated with tree production
(Mathews and Campbell 2000). The use of herbicide –resistance trees would also
967
allow producers to apply broad –spectrum herbicides to control weeds and therefore
reduce the need for traditional and costly methods of weed control (Mathews and
Campbell 2000). Furthermore, increased resistance of GM trees to abiotic stress
could mean a more efficient growth and therefore, improved productivity (Johnson
and Kirby 2001). Also, another economic advantage regarding the establishment of
GM forest trees is the reduced amount of time required to develop improved
phenotypes (Mathews and Campbell 2000; Pena and Seguin 2001).
On the other hand, the use of biotechnology in forest plantations could lead to a
decrease in the perceived social and economic value of natural forests, as the
economic gains from these types of forests would not be as large as those received
from GM forest plantations (Haynes 2001). A further economic concern relates to the
fact that low income wood producers might not be able to have access to GM trees
given their relatively high cost (Thomas 2001). Also, Thomas (2001) argued that GM
trees might generate profit for certain producers in the private sector while low
income producers would become further marginalized. Furthermore, the application
of GM technologies to forest trees has raised a number of potential public concerns.
Many of these concerns, are similar to those of the GM annual crop plants and are
mainly associated with the potential spread of antibiotic or herbicide resistance genes
to the native tree genetic pools; the potential for long – distance pollen spread, the
potential for adverse effects on biodiversity from GM tree plantations; and any
unexpected effects (Gartland et al 2003, El- Lakany 2004,Van Frankenhuyzen and
Beardmore 2004, Williams 2006, Sedjo 2006, Farnum et al. 2007, FAO 2008, 2010).
As no food safety issues are involved (although cellulose is sometimes used a
filler in foods) the extent to which retail consumers might resist transgenic wood
products appeared to depend largely on their environmental and philosophical
concerns (Serdjo 2004). Therefore, it is important to know therefore how the attitude
of the consumers of potential forest transgenic products in Greece would affect their
buying decision. In this context, the aim of this study was to explore the attitudes of
the consumers towards the use of biotechnology in forest plantations in an E.U.
country, Greece and to profile them according to their willingness to buy products
that could derived from GM trees. Further, this work was coordinated within the
frame of the European COST ACTION FP0905 that focused on various biosafety
aspects, such as analyses of the efficiency of existing gene containment strategies to
avoid or to minimize gene flow or evaluation of methods to monitor GMTs in the
whole production chain (Fladung et al. 2012, Vettori et al. 2014).
2 Methods
A survey was implemented to identify the factors that affect the consumers’
attitudes towards the use of biotechnology in forest plantations. Furthermore, it
explored the association between the consumers’ attitudes towards the use of
biotechnology in forest plantations and their intention to buy products.
Therefore this study examines the rejection of the following research null
hypotheses:
968
• Ho1: There are some main factors that do not affect consumers’ attitudes
towards the use of biotechnology in forest plantations.
• Ho2: The factors affecting consumers’ attitudes towards the use of
biotechnology in forest plantations are not significantly associated with their
intention to buy products derived from GM forest trees.
• Ho3: The factors affecting consumers’ attitudes towards the use of
biotechnology in forest plantations are not significantly associated with
consumers’ classification regarding their buying behaviour towards
transgenic tree derived products.
2.1 Survey Procedure
The information for the survey was gathered through field interviews following a
systematic stratified sampling method (Moser 1958; Errington 1985; Barnett 1991;
Oppenheim 2000). According to Errington (1985) the units for survey were randomly
selected from the larger population in order to generalize the conclusions. So, every
sixth customer that was entering into the survey area was undergoing the interview
(McCluskey et. al., 2003).
The size of the selected sample was based on Siardos’ methodology (Siardos
1997). Particularly, the representativeness of the sample was immunized by checking
the sample proportion of the consumers who declared that they would buy forest
products of transgenic origin with the consumers in the pilot survey who declared
that they would buy these products. More specifically, the proportion of consumers
(p) in the pilot survey who would buy at least once a product of transgenic origin,
such as woody biomass energy product or woody product was 86%. Therefore, in
order to achieve a representative sample, the sample size should have been at least
420 consumers (in order to have z=3 and d=5%). Furthermore, the power analysis
that was conducted by using the Gpower software (Faul et.al. 2009) indicated a total
sample size of at least 132 consumers for a medium effect size (Cohen 1988) of a
power of 0.95. Hence, the sample size of 450 consumers was considered
“representative” since it was more than three times the indicated size by the power
analysis and the 86% of consumers, who declared that they would buy a transgenic-
tree derived product. The productive sample consists of 418 consumers.
2.2 Questionnaire Design
Based on the literature, the factors that affected the development questions
involved in the questionnaire were the consumers’ behaviour towards GM forest
trees derived products and the consumers’ attitudes towards the development of
transgenic plantations. Furthermore, the questionnaire was designed in order to meet
the research’s objectives and it was pre-tested in academics, marketing experts and
consumers. In order to verify any modifications at the structure of the questionnaire,
a pilot survey of 30 consumers was conducted in October of 2011. The results from
969
this pilot survey indicated that there was need for further modification and therefore,
the main survey was conducted between November and December of 2011.
2.3 Statistical Methodology
Multivariate analysis techniques were performed for a total of 418 consumers to
reveal the key information contained in the responses. Particularly, Principal
Component Analysis (PCA) was used to identify the variables that accounted for the
maximum amount of variance within the data in terms of the smallest number of
uncorrelated variables (components). The anti-image correlation matrix was used as
well as Bartlett’s test of sphericity and the measure of sampling adequacy (MSA) in
order to check the appropriateness of the data for subsequent factor analysis. The
variables that had a high proportion of large absolute values of anti –image
correlations as well as MSA less than 0.5 were removed before analysis.
PCA reduced the 8 key attitude variables, which relate to consumers’ opinion
about the use of biotechnology in forest plantations to a smaller set of underlying
factors. An orthogonal rotation (varimax method) was conducted and the standard
criteria of eigenvalue = 1, scree test and percentage of variance were used in order to
determine the factors in the first rotation (Hair et al. 1998). Different trial rotations
followed where factor interpretability was compared.
Statistical tests based on the outcomes of the factor analysis presented above were
used to test three hypotheses presented in previous section.
3 Results
Principal Components and Factor Analyses (through a varimax rotation) were
conducted to identify the key consumers’ attitudes towards the use of biotechnology
in forest plantations, and the latent root criterion (eigenvalue =1), the scree plot test
and the percentage of variance were used to determine the number of factors.
PCA identified three factors that affect consumers’ attitudes towards the use of
biotechnology in forest plantations (Table 1).
970
Table 1. Main Factors Affecting Consumers’ Attitudes towards the use of Biotechnology in
Forest Plantations.
KEY ATTITUDE DIMENSIONS Factor Loading
Negative Environmental Impacts
Negative impact on biodiversity conservation 0.829
Negative impact on the environment 0.789
Possibility to harm human health 0.746
Positive Impacts on production process
Reduction of production losses 0.747
Important for biomass production 0.725
Economic Impacts
Reduction of production costs 0.861
Increase of return 0.782
KMO MSA = 0.743
Bartlett test of Sphericity = 977.656, P <0.001
In particular consumers’ attitudes towards the use of biotechnology in forest
plantations were mainly influenced by:
(a) the potential negative environmental impacts of the adoption of such
technology that retain negative impacts on biodiversity conservation, the
environment and possibility to harm human health,
(b) Potential positive impacts on production processes, such as the reduction of
production losses whilst they consider the use of GM technology in forest
trees as an important factor for biomass production, and
(c) economic impacts, such as reduction of production costs and increase of the
returns from the forest plantations.
Therefore, the hypothesis Ho1: “There are some main factors that do not affect
consumers’ attitudes towards the use of biotechnology in forest trees” may be
rejected.
Moreover, the non-paramateric Friedman Test was performed to explore the
association between the factors that affect the consumers’ attitudes towards the use of
biotechnology in forest plantations in Greece and their intention to buy each category
of GM forest products; specifically, (a) paper-, (b) wood-and (c) woody biomass
energy products. Hence, this study indicated that consumers who intent to buy paper
products derived from GM forest trees, were mainly concerned for the environmental
impacts of the GMTs and then on the production process that was followed by
economic impacts (Table 2). No significant relationships were found between the
consumers who declared that they intent to buy wood and woody biomass energy
products derived from GM trees and the importance of the factors that affect their
attitudes towards the adoption of biotechnology in forest plantations.
971
Table 2. Importance of the factors affecting consumers’ attitudes towards the use of
biotechnology in forest plantations
Consumers who Consumers who Consumers who
intent to buy paper intent to buy wood intent to buy woody
Factors affecting consumers’ products that could be products that could biomass energy products
attitudes towards the use of derived from GM be derived from GM that could be derived
biotechnology in forest forest trees (x2=6,829, forest trees (x2=2,31, from GM forest trees
plantations df=2, P<0,05) df=2, N.S) (x2=0,109, df=2, N.S)
Environmental Impacts 2,1 2 2,02
Impacts on production process 2,05 2,04 1,99
Economic Impacts 1,85 1,96 1,99
Therefore, the research hypothesis H2: “The factors affect consumers’ attitudes
towards the use of biotechnology in forest plantations are not significantly
associated with their intention to buy GM forest products” may be rejected.
Tsourgiannis et. al. (2015) identified four groups of consumers according to their
potential buying behaviour towards forest products derived from transgenic-trees :
(a) consumers who were interested in the product’s quality, (b) consumers who
were orientated towards lower prices, (c) consumers who were influenced by
labelling and curiosity issues and (d) consumers who were interested in health safety
issues and the environmental impacts. In this study the Friedman one way non
parametric test was employed in order to explore which factors affected consumers’
attitudes towards the use of biotechnology in forest plantations in Greece that have an
impact on each group of consumers (Table 3).
Table 3. Importance of the factors affecting consumers’ attitudes towards the use of
biotechnology in forest plantations for each group of consumer
Key attitude Group of Consumers
dimensions Consumers Consumers Consumers Consumers
who are who are who are who are interested
interested in the orientated influenced by in health safety
product’s towards lower labelling and issues and the
quality prices curiosity issues environmental
(x2=1.440, df=2, (x2=2.391, (x2=9.260, impacts (x2=2.319,
N.S) df=2, N.S) df=2, P <0.05) df=2, N.S)
Negative 2.12 2.00 2.21 2.21
Environmental
Impacts
Positive 2.00 2.04 1.89 1.89
Impacts on
production process
Economic 1.88 1.96 1.90 1.90
Impacts
The test indicated that most of the consumers who were influenced by the
labelling and curiosity issues paid attention mainly on the environmental impact that
the adoption of biotechnology might have in the forest tree sector and then on
972
economic issues and lastly on the positive impact on production processes. No
significant association was found between the other three groups of consumers and
the importance of the factors that affect their attitudes towards the adoption of
biotechnology in forest plantations.
Hence, the hypothesis Ho3: “The factors affect consumers’ attitudes towards the
use of biotechnology in forest plantations are not significantly associated with
consumers’ classification regarding their buying behaviour towards transgenic tree
derived products”, may be rejected.
4 Discussion - Conclusions
This study investigated the main factors that affect the attitude of potential
consumers towards the utilization of transgenic trees and their products and influence
their willingness to buy those products. It showed that consumers’ attitudes towards
the use of biotechnology in forest plantations were mainly affected by the impact of
that technology might have on the environment, biodiversity, and human health, as
well as by its positive impact on production processes and economic impact.
This study supports the findings of other studies according to which consumers
were mainly affected in their preferences towards transgenic trees and their potential
products, from their environmental and philosophical concerns. Consumers appeared
positively orientated towards the use of biotechnology in forest plantations, probably
because the products derived from forest trees are not food and therefore they were
considered less dangerous to human health.
A limitation however of this survey needs to be mentioned. The adopted statistical
methodology although it explored the factors that affect consumers’ buying
behaviour, which is useful for marketing analysis and strategy development can not
measure the demand of a product or determine the importance of the characteristics
of a product that affect consumers’ behaviour. These measurements can be made
with the use of other statistical techniques such as conjoint analysis and contingent
valuation.
Nevertheless, the current study is of value, since according to our knowledge, this
is the first attempt to explore the consumers’ attitudes towards the development of
transgenic trees and their products, as well the factors that affected their attitudes
towards the adoption of such technology in forest plantations. According to the
results of the study the potential developers of such forest tree plantations and paper,
wood and woody biomass energy products should structure their marketing and
promotion mix and focus on environment protection, and economic efficient
production methods. Furthermore, campaigns that will aim to inform public about the
use of biotechnology in forest plantations and its advantages and disadvantages
should take place.
973
References
1. Barnett, V, (1991). Sample survey, principles and methods. Edward Arnold,
Kent. 1-173 pp.
2. Chapotin SM and Wolt JD (2007). Genetically modified crops for the
bioeconomy: meeting public and regulatory expectations. Transgenic Research
16(6): 675-688.
3. Cohen J (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences(2nd ed.).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
4. Errington, A. (1985). Delegation on farms: An examination of organisation
structure and managerial control on farms in the vale of the white horse. PhD
Thesis University of Reading.
5. El-Lakany MH (2004). Are genetically modified trees a threat to forests?
Unasylva 217, Vol.55, No.1: 45-47.
6. Farnum P, Lucier A and Meilan R (2007). Ecological and population genetics
research initiatives for transgenic trees. Tree Genetics and Genomes 3: 119-133
7. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Buchner A., Lang A (2009). Statistical power analyses using
G*Power 3.1:Tests for correlation and regression analyses, Behavior Research
Methods, 41 (4), 1149-1160.
8. FAO (2008). The potential environmental, cultural and socio-economic impacts
of genetically modified trees. UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/13/INF/6, pp17.
9. FAO (2010). Forests and Genetically modified trees, Rome, Italy, pp235.
10. Flachowsky H, Hanke M-V, Peil A, Strauss SH and Fladung M (2009). A review
on transgenic approaches to accelerate breeding of woody plants. Plant Breeding
128: 217-226
11. Fladung M, Altosaar I, Bartsch D, Baucher M, Boscaleri F, Gallardo F, Häggman
H, Hoenicka H, Nielsen K, Paffetti D, Séguin A, Stotzky G and Vettori C (2012).
European discussion forum on transgenic tree biosafety. Nature Biotechnology
30: 37-38
12. Gartland, K., Crow R., Fenning T. and Gartland J., (2003) Genetically Modified
Trees: Production, Properties, and Potential, Journal of Arboriculture, 29 (5)
2003, 259-266.
13. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L. and Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate
data analysis. Prentice Hall Inc, New Jersey..
14. Harfouche A, Meilan R and Altman A (2011). Tree genetic engineering and
applications to sustainable forestry and biomass production. Trends in
Biotechnology Vol. 29, No.1: 11-17.
15. Hayes, J.P., (2001) Biodiveristy implications of transgenic plantations,
Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Ecological and Societal
Aspects of Transgenic Plantations, 168-175.
16. Hinchee M, Rottman W, Mullinax L, Zhang C, Chang S, Cunningham M,
Pearson L and Nehra N (2009). Short-rotation woody crops for bioenergy and
974
biofuels applications. In Vitro Cellular and Developmental Biology- Plant 45(6):
619-629.
17. Johnson, B. and Kirby K. (2001). Potential impacts of genetically modified trees
on biodiversity of forestry plantations: A global perspective. Proceedings of the
First International Symposium on Ecological and Societal Aspects of Transgenic
Plantations, pp. 176-186.
18. Mathews, J.H. and Cambell, M.M. (2000) The advantages and disadvantages of
the application of genetic engineering to forest trees: a discussion, Forestry, 73
(4), 371-380
19. McCluskey, J., Grimsrud, K., Ouchi, H,. and Wahl, T. (2003). Consumer
Response to Genetically Modified Food Products in Japan., Agricultural and
Resource Economic Review, 32 (2), 222-231.
20. Moser, C. A. (1958). Survey methods in social investigation. Heinemann,
London. 1-268 .
21. Oppenheim, A. N. (2000). Questionnaire design, interviewing and attitude
measurement. Continuum, New York.
22. Pena, L., and Senguin, A., (2001) Recent advances in the genetic transformation
of trees, Trends in Biotechnology, 19 (12), 500-506
23. Serjo, R.A. (2004) Transgenic Trees: Implementation and Outcomes of the Plant
Protection Act, April 2004, Resources for the Future.
24. Sedjo RA (2006). Toward commercialization of genetically engineered forests:
economic and social considerations. Resources for the Future, pp 46.
25. Siardos, G. (1997). Methodology of Agricultural Sociological Research. Ziti
Publications, Thessaloniki,
26. Thomas S., (2001) Ethical and social considerations in commercial uses of food
and fibber crops, Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Ecological
and Sociatal Aspects of Transgenic Plantations, 92-98.
27. Tsourgiannis L, Kazana V and Iakovoglou V (2014). Exploring consumers’
potential behavior towards transgenic forest products: The Greek experience,
iForest (early view): 1-e7 [online 2015-01-13] URL:
http://www.sisef.it/iforest/contents/?id=ifor1339-007
28. Van Frankenhuyzen K., and Beardmore, T., (2004). Current status and
environmental impact of transgenic forest trees, Canadian Journal of Forest
Research, 34, 1163-1180.
29. Vettori C, Pilate G, Häggman H, Gallardo F, Ionita L, Ruohonen-Lehto M,
Glandorf B, Harfouche A, Biricolti S, Paffetti D, Kazana V, Sijacic-Nikolic M,
Tsourgiannis L, Migliacci F, Donnarumma F, Minol K and Fladung M (2014)
COST Action FP0905: Biosafety of Forest Transgenic Trees. In: Ramawat KG,
Mérillon J-M and Ahuja MR (eds) Tree Biotech-nology, CRC Press, pp. 112-124.
30. Williams GC (2006). Opening Pandora’s box: Governance for Genetically
Modified Forests, ISB News Report, January 2006.
975