[雙語翻譯]轉(zhuǎn)基因食品外文翻譯--消費(fèi)者對(duì)轉(zhuǎn)基因食品和標(biāo)簽政策的知識(shí)和態(tài)度

1、4600 英文單詞， 英文單詞，25500 英文字符，中文 英文字符，中文 8000 字文獻(xiàn)出處： 文獻(xiàn)出處：Vecchione M , Feldman C , Wunderlich S . Consumer knowledge and attitudes about genetically modified food products and labelling policy[J]. International Journal of

2、Food Sciences and Nutrition, 2014, 66(3):1-7.Consumer knowledge and attitudes about genetically modified food products and labelling policyMelissa Vecchione, Charles Feldman, and Shahla WunderlichAbstractThe purpose of t

3、his study was to examine the relationship between consumer knowledge, attitudes and behaviours towards foods containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and the prevalence of GMO labelling in northern New Jersey sup

4、ermarkets. This cross-sectional study surveyed 331 adults, New Jersey supermarket customers (mean age 26 years old, 79.8% women). The results show a strong, positive correlation between consumer attitudes towards foods

5、not containing GMOs and purchasing behaviour (Pearson’s r=0.701, p＜0.001) with lesser correlations between knowledge and behaviour (Pearson’s r= 0.593, p＜0.001) and knowledge and attitudes (Pearson’s r =0.413, p＜0.001)

6、. GMO labelling would assist consumers in making informed purchase decisions.Keywords：Consumer behaviour, GM food, GMO, supermarketsIntroductionThe U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2001) defines the term genetically mo

7、dified organisms (aka GM or GMOs) as ‘‘origin- ally used by the molecular biology scientific community to denote a living organism that had been genetically modified by inserting a gene from an unrelated species’’. Since

8、 genes from unrelated organisms are not naturally transferred, technology is needed to carry out this task. These new species of plants are referred to as ‘‘transgenics’’ (U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 2001). Organi

9、sations studying the presence of GMOs in America estimate that 75–80% of packaged or processed food items on supermarket shelves nationwide contain GMOs (Center for Food Safety: About GE Foods, 2014; Martin, 2013; Pew In

10、itiative on Food and Biotechnology, 2005). One of the main reasons for the predominance of GM food products in the US marketplace is that the US cultivates the largest amount of GM crops in the world (GM crops: A story i

11、n numbers, 2013). In the US, a large number of processed foods accessible to consumers contain GMOs, ostensibly attributed to the higher level of national agricultural cultivation of GM commodities (GM crops: A story in

12、numbers, 2013; Martin, 2013).Although the FDA states that it supports manufacturers who choose to include truthful information on their labels regarding whether food products were created using genetic engineering, label

13、ling remains voluntary in the US (U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 2013). Currently, the only organisation offering verified GM testing in North America is the Non-GMO Project, which places its ‘‘Non-GMO Project VER

14、IFIED’’ seal on products that undergo voluntary testing and contain not more than 0.9% GM ingredients, which is the current threshold required within the European Union (EU) for GMO labelling (The Non- GMO Project, 2014)

15、. However, due to limited testing capabilities and the high likelihood of contamination, no products are scientifically guaranteed to be ‘‘GMO-free’’ (The Non-GMO Project, 2014; U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 2001).

16、In addition to the specific labelling done by the Non-GMO Project, found that consumers’ decisions about purchasing GM foods are generally impacted by how information on these products is framed and presented. Though, th

17、e findings suggest that mandatory labelling may not be effective in the promotion of product reliability and consumer awareness (Zhao et al., 2013). However, a recent investigation in Canada demonstrated the effectivenes

18、s of information and prior knowledge of new food technologies on consumers’ evaluation of food product innovations and purchase intentions, indicating that promotional and educational campaigns might be effective in offs

19、etting food technology neophobia (Chen et al., 2013). The success of new food technologies appears to hinge on whether consumers perceive scientific progress as improvements in social welfare. However, the potential occu

20、rrence of a negative or positive incident in the GM food sector may strongly ferment public opinion towards or against these products (Frewer et al., 2014).Gender differences and income levels have been found to be affec

21、tive on consumers’ perceptions of these products. One investigation found that while male consumers did not prioritise GMO products as one of their top concerns, females had stronger attitudes towards purchasing non-GM f

22、oods (Bellows et al., 2010). Investigators have also explored the financial aspects of GMO preferences and attitudes, specifically how income level influences attitudes towards GMOs, since it is widely believed that GMO

23、foods are distributed more often to low-income populations. King (2003) conducted focus groups of low-income consumers in California and found that 80% of the participants initially were not knowledgeable about GMO produ

24、cts. After they were provided with information about these foods, the participants felt that scientifically altered crops could be unethical and unsafe. Furthermore, Nielsen et al. (2003) determined that high-income cons

25、umers do not have to consider price when deciding between GMO and non-GMO products; they have the ability to solely purchase non-GMO products. The willingness to pay a premium price for non-GMO foods reflects a negative

26、attitude towards genetic modification, though that attitude may vary based on consumer priorities. In a study of American grocery shoppers, consumers who shopped in speciality grocery stores were willing to pay an averag

27、e of 37 cents more for a ‘‘Genetically modified free’’ product, while consumers in a traditional store were only willing to pay an additional 18 cents (Batte et al., 2007). Within this speciality-store population, older

28、customers, and women in particular, were willing to pay more money for non-GM food products, and although there was no strong correlation between individual income and willingness to pay for GM-free products, there was a

29、 strong correlation between income and willingness to pay for 70–100% Organic products (which are free of GM-ingredients) (Batte et al., 2007). The results from a study in Ireland indicate that a market for GM potatoes c

30、ould exist within an appropriate price point (Thorne et al., 2014).Although other countries have laws in place that require companies to label GM foods, labelling remains voluntary in the US, though there have been recen

31、t efforts to change this policy in individual municipalities (Carter, 2002; Vilojen & Marx, 2013). The FDA maintains that mandatory labelling potentially implies that GM food products are unhealthy and environmentall

32、y harmful, though this perception is currently unfounded (U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 2001). Scholarly opinion suggests that global warming actually necessitates the inclusion of GM products into the food system (

33、Rotman, 2014). On the other hand, research has demonstrated that GM crops could potentially have negative effect on the environment by threatening biodiversity, creating a monoculture that would cause soil depletion and