Insights into GMO-labeled products
Although food labels are generally intended to inform consumers, some food labels such as non-GMO labels continue to cause confusion and debate in the marketplace. Building on earlier work, the objective of this study was to gain insights into the connection between consumer responses to GMOs and the timeline and trajectory of GMO labeled products. The analysis showed that although the topic of GMOs has diminished over time in current social media and policy engagement, there has been a continued upward market in GMO-free labeled products. This study along with previous work also raises the question of what the pathway may potentially be for other products or technologies, now and in the future.
Food labels are generally intended to inform consumers about products and quality, and to eliminate buyer confusion. However, some food labels such as non-GMO (genetically modified organisms) labels continue to cause confusion and be debated in the marketplace.
Building on earlier work, the objective of this study was to gain insights into the connection between consumer responses to GMOs and the timeline and trajectory of GMO labeled products. The study combined qualitative research with data analysis to show the history of GMOs, the trajectory of anti-GMO activism, the progression of the GMO narrative in policy documents and the timeline of GMO labeled products. Several datasets were accessed for the analysis, such as Buzzsumo media and market intelligence; Mintel analysis of public discourse of GMOs and the number of new food products with anti-GMO labels; and Overton policy overview of the GMO topic and timelines.
The results of the analysis shows that although current social media and policy engagement around the topic of GMOs has diminished over time, there has been a continued growth in additional products with a GMO-free designation. It also showed that the evolution of the GMO label timeline showed a peak in discourse at one point, but has since declined. The timeline began with the early history of the anti-GMO movement to the current National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard (NBFDS) in the United States. This standard was developed to provide a consistent way for consumers to differentiate foods containing GMOs from those that do not.
Anti-GMO sentiment remains
The study analysis also suggests that the legacy of an anti-GMO narrative remains firmly embedded in the social consciousness, evidenced by the continuing rise of products with GMO-free designation. It appears that this legacy of satisfying consumers’ right to know by using GMO labels and the perceived need for this information is self-sustaining.
The study notes that certain labels do have a legitimate and informative place in the market, providing important consumer information such as nutrition and ingredient information or food allergen labels. However, labels that declare unproven health claims or indicate ‘free-from’ certain ingredients like GMOs confuse consumers and do not help them distinguish between scientific fact and scientific fiction. This is particularly misleading for products that are labeled as free-from GMOs but never contained GMO ingredients in the first place.
Food companies also realize economic gains by using food labels to influence purchasing decisions and increase market share. Using food labels for marketing-based decisions can also potentially create negative influence on public perceptions around GMOs. This can further the gap between public perceptions and science. The consistent upward market for GMO-free labels on food and a growing demand for non-GMO labeled products is evidence of a continued belief by some that GMO food is unsafe or unhealthy.
Overall, this study along with previous work provides insights into GMO labeled products, but also raises the question of how things may potentially play out for other products or technologies. Will this pattern of events reveal itself as new product labels, such as climate-smart, carbon footprint, pollinator-friendly or other secondary standard claims are developed to meet consumer demand, now and in the future.
This work represents the collective work and interests of the authors involved who are all paid employees of either Bayer Crop Science or MilliporeSigma
Camille D. Ryan, Elizabeth Henggeler, Samantha Gilbert, Andrew J. Schaul & John T. Swarthout (2024) Exploring the GMO narrative through labeling: strategies, products, and politics, GM Crops & Food, 15:1, 51-66, DOI: 10.1080/21645698.2024.2318027, https://doi.org/10.1080/21645698.2024.2318027
