Harrison, Jake; Bartkus, Kenneth; Marlowe, Byron (Utah State University)
Faculty Advisor: Bartkus, Kenneth; Marlowe, Byron
The use of genetically modified organisms in the production of food products in the U.S. appears to be pervasive. For example, it is reported that 90 percent of corn, soy and other crops grown in the U.S. are currently genetically modified and 75 to 80 percent of food products contain GMOs or GMO components. Unfortunately, a gap exists between what scientists and consumers believe with regard to the health safety of GMO foods. Specifically, it has been reported that while "Nearly 9 out of 10 scientists from the American Association for the Advancement of Science say GMOs are 'generally safe' to eat, more than half of general public believe it is not a good idea." This presents a challenge for restaurants. That is, should they continue to use GMO food products given assurances from the scientific community or should they respond to consumer concerns and begin the process of adopting a non-GMO policy? The purpose of this research is to address this question by proposing a framework that helps explain why a restaurant might decide to adopt (or not adopt) a non-GMO policy. Based on an adaptation of Roger's Characteristics of an Innovation, the framework has five constructs: (1) Relative Advantage, (2) Compatibility, (3) Complexity, (4) Trialability, (5) Observability. An exploratory application of the model to U.S. restaurants suggests that the framework can provide meaningful and systematic insights into the perceptions of U.S. restaurants with regard to the adoption or non-adoption of a non-GMO policy. Recommendations for further application of the framework, along propositions for additional analysis are provided. Implications for decision making are also presented.