The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Economic Research Service projects that by 2050, the total production of global agriculture will need to equal between 14,060-15,410 trillion crop calories based on medium- and high-population growth scenarios. That estimate is a 47%-61% increase from 2011 production.
To achieve this mark, food systems across the world are adapting accordingly. One approach available to them includes the advancements made in crop breeding and genetics.
Genetic engineering and gene editing integrate technologies that allow for a quicker and more efficient breeding process to occur compared to conventional breeding. These tools are particularly helpful when looking to incorporate specific traits into crops that contribute to their prosperity, such as improved yields, heightened nutrition and enhanced disease and pest resistance.
Genetic engineering refers to the broad action of altering an organism’s DNA through the addition of new strands from other organisms, deletion of regions or restructuring of base pairs. Gene editing is the precise method of targeting a specific location within a gene to make a minor insertion, cut or edit in its sequence.
Since being made available to consumers in the early 1990s, genetically engineered foods have continued to be thoroughly reviewed by the Environmental Protection Agency, Food and Drug Administration and USDA to ensure safety for people, animals and the environment.
However, Vincenzina Caputo, a Michigan State University professor in the Department of Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics and Homer Nowlin Chair in Consumer and Food Economics, has confirmed through her research that there remains a level of distrust among consumers about foods developed with these technologies. She said this is partly due to how information is communicated when consumers look to buy.
“If we want to achieve our sustainable goals and increase food production, we can’t do that by just using traditional agricultural techniques,” said Caputo, whose work is supported by MSU AgBioResearch. “The use of new agricultural and food technologies is the key to the future, but the way we communicate these technologies is important because how people perceive them is how they’ll be affected and, ultimately, accepted or rejected.”
In 2020, the Food Industry Association funded two of Caputo’s research projects. The first explored ways food industries could educate people on genetically engineered foods such as genetically modified organisms — now referred to as “bioengineered foods” under the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard — to increase consumer acceptance.
Her team learned that labels and other messaging on the packaging of bioengineered food are important to reduce confusion about the science and raise awareness about its benefits.
“We found that if food industries communicate to consumers about how these technologies work and produce foods that are, for example, more nutritious or better for the environment, the acceptance among consumers increases,” Caputo said.
The second project analyzed which communication tools — such as labels, text and QR codes — influenced consumer behavior. Findings showed that consumers tend to not interact with QR codes. While consumers preferred gene-edited foods over bioengineered foods for not containing inserted genes from other organisms, they still favored foods labeled as “organic” or “non-GMO.”
“What is technically feasible is not always accepted by the community, including both consumers and farmers, so the success of these technologies relies heavily on those two groups,” Caputo said. “My team wants to understand what the negative perceptions they have are. Usually, food that has been genetically modified or gene-edited is perceived as unsafe or unnatural.
“There are many scientists who believe that gene editing can overcome those negative perceptions because the way the technology works is different from how other genetic engineering technology works.”
Caputo and her team’s research led to two national reports published by the FMI detailing consumers’ acceptance and attitudes toward bioengineered and gene-edited foods. It also led to an article published in 2024 in Food Policy, a leading journal evaluating the economic and social aspects of food policy.
David Fikes, executive director of the FMI Foundation, said industry leaders appreciate and have used Caputo’s research to make decisions and create effective and meaningful ways of sharing information.
“As consumers seek to know more about how their food is produced, packaged and delivered, it’s imperative that the information food producers and retailers provide them is relevant, reliable, credible and accurate,” Fikes said. “We at FMI have engaged with Dr. Caputo on numerous research projects to help us gauge consumer thinking so we can better know what their questions are, what sources they find credible and how best to craft responses that ring with authenticity and value.
“As a partner who’s gotten into the trenches with Dr. Caputo on many of these research projects, I can say that I implicitly trust her judgment, character and commitment to accuracy. I know FMI members value the trustworthiness of her research findings and use them to help shape their business decisions. The caliber of her character shines through the high quality of her work.”
Caputo is now building upon what she’s discovered from these studies with a $650,000 grant awarded to her in 2023 from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA). The project aims to further understand and boost consumers’ trust in agri-food biotechnologies, as well as the food supply chain actors who play a role in their communication.
From MSU, John Besley, the Ellis N. Brandt Professor of Public Relations in the Department of Advertising and Public Relations, and Paul Thompson, professor emeritus in the departments of Philosophy, Community Sustainability and AFRE, join Caputo on the project. Valerie Kilders, a Purdue University assistant professor of agribusiness marketing, is also a collaborator.
Addressing the negative perceptions consumers have regarding genetic engineering and gene editing can promote a greater acceptance for their use and prevent a more pervasive distrust for food systems overall, Caputo said. That’s why she and her team are creating a means for the public to engage with and share thoughts on key players across food and agriculture sectors, specifically those involved with biotechnologies.
Using a monitoring survey, the team is tracking consumers’ trust in scientists, food retailers, food companies, policymakers, advocacy groups and farmers. Each edition of the survey will focus on one of these groups and include special topics for input.
The data collected will be shared publicly through dashboards and other forums, allowing people to learn more about agri-food biotechnologies and stakeholders to develop communication strategies that could help cultivate an expanded trust among consumers.
Additionally, food industry professionals will have opportunities to interact with other experts across the food supply chain using an online platform where they can answer questions and take part in conversations.
“Communication should not only be upstream and downstream, but it should also be midstream between all the different actors involved in the food supply chain — between farmers and retailers, retailers and policymakers, farmers and food companies, and so on,” Caputo said.
The first edition of the survey is scheduled to be released at the beginning of 2025. The project itself is funded through the summer of 2026. Caputo said the funding she’s received over the years from both the FMI and USDA NIFA has been critical to examine and advance public trust in food science.
“As an applied food economist, it’s important to see that the work my research team does is valued by both the industry and the government,” Caputo said. “When these key sectors invest in our research, it not only validates our efforts but also amplifies the potential to drive meaningful change and innovation in food systems.”
This story was originally published on the AgBioResearch website.
