A Comparative Analysis of Canadian Consumers’ WTP for Novel Food Technologies (Case of Juice Produced by Nanotechnology & Pork Chops Using Genomic Information)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since novel food technologies (such as nanotechnology, cloning, genomics, etc.) are still in their infancy, communication will be very important in the development of these new technologies to address consumer perceptions and hence market acceptance of these innovations in the agri-food industry. Understanding consumer preferences is key to ensuring that the use of new technologies optimizes use of resources and societal welfare. Two national online surveys (in 2010 for nanotechnology and in 2012 for genomic information) were conducted across Canada to elicit Canadian consumers’ WTP for juice produced by nanotechnology or pork chops that are produced from pigs bred using genomic information. Canadian consumers’ WTP (i.e. whether or not they are willing to buy the products at a price over the price of goods produced without the use of the technologies), and the effects of demographic characteristics, Canadian consumers’ attitudes on their purchase intentions about products created using these novel technologies, were examined. The preliminary analysis shows that the majority of Canadians have little knowledge about use of genomic information or nanotechnology, and hence are not willing to pay a premium for these novel technologies applied to their food.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".