Genetically modified foods’ questionable contribution to food security: exploring South African consumers’ knowledge and familiarity

1 Introduction

Food insecurity refers to a state of inadequate access to safe and nutritious food to sustain a healthy lifestyle, which continues to be compromised across the globe [1] Factors such as the COVID-19 pandemic; high inflation rates [2]; job losses [3]; unemployment [4]; the Ukraine war, which has increased food prices [5]; and food wastage [6] are factors that aggravate food insecurity. With very little control over some of these occurrences, the focus has shifted to the role of genetically modified foods (GMFs) in combating food insecurity [7]. Because of the modified traits of GMFs, food supply can increase, giving consumers access to nutritious food to sustain their health [4]. An example is the development of Bt maize, which contains 31 % fewer fumonisins and 29 % fewer mycotoxins (both toxins that are carcinogenic to human beings) than traditional maize [8], [9], [10]. As a result, consumers of high maize-based diets, characteristic of many developing countries, can nutritionally benefit from the development of GMFs.

Since GMFs were developed to aid food security [1], the intended purpose could be compromised if consumers do not know what GMFs are and are unfamiliar with which food products are GMFs and what these food products offer [11]. propose that a lack of knowledge of GMFs creates hesitancy in purchasing these food products, a finding confirmed in research conducted by [12],13], and [14]. Insufficient knowledge further leads to consumer ignorance of the available GMF products [15], [16], [17] and unknowingly consuming GMFs [18], 19], not knowing that they are indirectly benefitting from the inclusion of GMFs. This could hinder the consumers’ role in acknowledging the importance of GMFs in sustaining their health, or for this reason, purposefully selecting these products when making food product purchasing decisions. This behavior lessens the chance of GMFs’ purchases improving the state of food insecurity in developing countries. If the consumer is unacquainted with GMFs, not set on purchasing GMFs for their benefits, or unwilling to consume these food products due to misleading facts or untruths, these food products will not become a successful tool to alleviate food insecurity for all in developing countries. It is expected that, because GMFs have been around for some time, consumers’ attitudes towards GMFs have changed to acknowledge the positive change GMFs could bring about to alleviate food insecurity in many developing countries. To this effect, it can be questioned if consumers’ current state of GMFs knowledge remains the main cause of their continuous reluctance to embrace GMFs as an option to end food insecurity and if this state of knowledge is a further cause of their unfamiliarity with GMFs on the market.

Therefore, this study set out to determine consumers’ (1) knowledge about GMFs and their (2) familiarity with GMF products on the market. These two objectives were intended to determine if consumers’ knowledge about GMFs had developed into a more expansive understanding where consumers were certain about their facts, knowledgeable about the scientific advantages and disadvantages of GMFs, and not reliant on myths and hearsay about GMFs. The researchers assumed that with time, progress had been made in the GMF field to ensure that consumers had a compelling need to obtain GMFs, created through better awareness and improved knowledge about GMFs. The findings are disappointing as South African consumers’ knowledge has not advanced to make GMFs a priority in how they go about their food product decisions, nor has it changed to lead the advocacy for GMFs to alleviate the dire food insecurity state in many areas in South Africa. The findings point to the urgency with which information about GMFs has to reach the general public in South Africa to take the food-insecure to a state of food security. The study further contributes to the urgency with which the importance of GMFs needs to be re-established for consumers in South Africa. The lack of Government investment in raising consumer awareness about GMFs extends the suffering of vulnerable communities and the poor in South Africa, making Sustainable Development Goal 3 on health and wellbeing for all less achievable. As a result, food products created to address food insecurity are inactive and not used by consumers for the purpose it was intended, suggesting that consumers are at fault and the reason why GMFs are not benefiting consumers who are most in need of food security.

This article will include an overview of relevant literature to argue the issues related to food insecurity, the role of GMFs in addressing food insecurity, consumers’ position on knowledge and awareness of GMFs and the role of consumer education and information sources on improving consumers’ approach to GMFs. The methodology used to explore the purpose of the study and a discussion of the main findings will follow thereafter. The implications of the findings and the contribution of this research will conclude this article.

2 Literature review

Food insecurity is becoming a threat in the 21st century, as more than 800 million individuals worldwide do not have an adequate intake of food [20]. The need for food is increasing as the global population continues to grow, with a prediction of approximately 9 billion people in need of food by 2050 [21]. Ehirim et al. [22] suggest that as a result, food production will need to increase by 50 %. In South Africa, between September and December 2020, approximately 9.34 million people (16 % of the South African population) suffered from a high level of acute food insecurity [23]. Although this was amid the coronavirus pandemic of 2019 (COVID-19), it suggests sudden changes in food availability and the effect on consumers’ food security in a developing country. Furthermore, in 2022, more than 30 million people encountered food insecurity every month in South Africa [24]. The statistics show the reality of food insecurity, suggesting that these figures may continue to increase if secure and continuous food production is not ensured.

GMFs were developed with the intent of addressing food security. Through modified traits, genetically modified crops became pest and weather-resistant, which led to increased yields that brought about products that cost less [25] and offer better nutritional value to the consumer [1], 9], 26] as well as extended the shelf life of these products [27]. As a result, there are various GMFs available on the international market, such as maize, soybean, cotton, potato, papaya, summer squash, canola, apple, sugar beet, alfalfa used in livestock feed, aubergines and pink-fleshed pineapple [28] In South Africa, the only food products that contain genetically modified (GM) components are maize and soya [29], which are found in food products such as maize meal [30], bread [31] and cereals [32]. These are staple foods that can provide the necessary nourishment to the South African consumer to sustain a healthy lifestyle. However, no GM-containing fruits or vegetables are available in the South African market [32]. It is questioned whether consumers purchase food products with their food security status in mind. If consumers are not familiar with the GMFs on the shelf, these food products may go unnoticed and not become a desired purchase for consumers, thus further stifling GMFs’ intended purpose to promote food security. If these food products are not recognized by consumers for the purpose it was developed, GMFs have not succeeded in their purpose. Since GMFs were supposed to feed the world [1], it has disappeared among food products on the shelf without being recognized for the good they could do. Therefore, are GMFs effective in terms of their intended purpose, and have they succeeded in becoming the food of choice that could solve many food-related problems?

In the South African context, there is still uncertainty about consumers’ knowledge, awareness of and familiarity with GMFs, and what these food products can offer the consumer. South African GM-related consumer studies, conducted some time ago, identified consumers’ awareness [33], acceptance [34] and perception of GMFs [35] to provide insight into consumers’ positions on these food products. The results showed that consumers did not know what the term ‘genetic modification’ meant, nor which foods in supermarkets contained GM ingredients and were generally unaware of GMFs [33], [34], [35]. These studies pointed to South African consumers’ ignorance about GMFs, which may not have changed since these studies were conducted. With the rising concern about food insecurity in South Africa, consumer ignorance of beneficial food products such as GMFs defeats the purpose of these foods.

In general, studies have shown that consumers lack knowledge about GMFs [36], [37], [38], [39]. Knowledge refers to what a person knows or what they think, in their own opinion – they know about something, and thus it equates to what a person is aware of and their familiarity with a product [21]. Since knowledge is integral to what a person thinks and the opinions that follow about a product, it affects an individual’s purchase decision [40]. Knowledge further aids an individual in their purchase decision as the decision depends on the knowledge that has been obtained about the specific product [41]. Since knowledge aids individuals in arranging information, such as information about a product (for example, GMFs), consumers must have sound knowledge of GMFs to ensure that they can make sense of information about GMFs to assist them in making an informed and confident decision about these foods [42]. This is because a lack of knowledge about products, such as GMFs, decreases confidence in the products and in purchasing the products [41]. The lack of knowledge and absence of a solid knowledge foundation have led to an inability to challenge misconceptions about GMFs and to identify these foods in stores [33], 43], 44]. As a result, consumers do not need to seek the confidence to purchase these food products, as the knowledge with which to make these decisions has not been established.

Consumers’ unawareness of GMFs may be attributed to the low level of information dissemination to the public. International studies conducted by [36], 45] to determine consumers’ knowledge of GMFs found that consumers had not heard of GMFs. This suggests that educational curricula and consumer education programs were devoid of GMF information to inform and create awareness about the benefits and purposes of GMFs. Although these studies, which were conducted in different countries over many years, provided an understanding of international consumers’ positions on GMFs, the question remains whether the original intent of GMFs has made a difference in the lives of South African consumers. In other words, do South African consumers know more about GMFs since their first introduction into the country, and have they become familiar products that consumers deliberately seek to consume? Therefore, this study examined the positions of South African consumers on GMFs. It argues that if the consumer has not moved from knowing about GMFs to actively engaging with GMFs at a consumption level, the intended purpose of GMFs to address food security will remain elusive.

It is a fact that education contributes to building knowledge, and therefore, information sources on GMFs can enhance consumers’ knowledge about these food products [46]. In some instances, the lack of information has been found to result in searches on the internet; in newspapers, magazines and documentaries; and on educational platforms of colleges and/or universities to find information on GMFs [17], 19], 37], 47], 48]. These sources are not always reliable and factually sound, which further contributes to misconceptions and misinformation about GMFs or opinions that are not based on scientific or factually correct information [37]. The fact that consumers consult other sources indicates that the GM food industry and the government have omitted or not succeeded in educating consumers about GMFs. Cormick and Mercer [48] suggest that the GM food industry is not focusing on disseminating information on GMFs to the consumer because of the concern that aggravating the misconceptions about GMFs may result in further skepticism about GMFs. The involvement of the GM food industry in stamping out the misconceptions about GMFs has been risky, as the reputational damage to a company might outweigh its involvement in communicating the facts about GMFs. Therefore, important findings from risk assessments of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) need to be communicated to the public to ensure acceptance of GMFs and increase consumer understanding of these food products [37]. Non-involvement in challenging misconceptions may only prolong the inability to achieve food security for all in South Africa. A further concern has been the absence of GMF information contributing to consumers’ mistrust in the information given to them by the government [7]. Although opinions favour education support from the government to not only improve consumer knowledge about GMFs but also genetic modification in general [37], 49], consumer trust remains an inhibiting factor in the acceptance of GMFs.

It has been suggested that trusted platforms or sources such as consumer organizations, environmental groups or scientists can be used to disseminate information on GMFs [15], 48]. However, leaving the search for information to the consumer is not conducive to the dissemination of GMF information, as not all consumers have the means to conduct searches or may not see the necessity to do so. The result is that consumers could build their knowledge on other peoples’ opinions or on non-factual information, which could ultimately drive consumers away from these foods [37]. These organizations may also let the consumer down by not emphasizing the importance of GMFs for it to become a wanted and recognized food source. Studies conducted by [19], 48] were aimed specifically at determining which sources of information consumers used to learn more about GMFs. Platforms or sources such as television were considered trusted platforms by consumers in Australia and Botswana [19], 48], while social media and the radio were considered less trustworthy in GMF information dissemination by consumers in South Korea [50]. Nevertheless, it has been suggested that sources or platforms such as television, social media, the radio, infographics, videos, presentations and samples of GMFs in supermarkets must be utilized as communication tools to reach the public about GMFs [37], 48], 51]. Several of these available platforms have been underutilized in disseminating GMF information to improve consumer awareness of the benefits of GMFs.

The role of GMFs in food security relies on consumers’ awareness of the benefits of GMFs, as this could create a sense of comfort, dispel skepticism and reduce moral opposition to GMFs to increase consumers’ acceptance of GMFs [52], 53]. This was evident in [25] research, where it was found that Indian consumers supported GMFs more freely when they were exposed to information about the benefits of GMFs. By focusing on the benefits of GMFs, consumers may become more involved in utilizing GMFs for the purpose for which they were intended. One way to advance consumer awareness of GMFs is through the application of automaticity described by [54], emphasizing that “consumer behavior is influenced by mental processes occurring outside of conscious awareness”. Subsequently, placing greater emphasis on the environmental features, including awareness campaigns through influencers, digital applications and social media presence to activate consumer attitude in the automatic process, may lead to a motivational outcome and decision to purchase GMFs. In this way, a consumer behavior approach may create awareness instead of waiting for governments and other stakeholders to inform and create knowledgeable consumers.

Consumers’ knowledge of GMFs plays a vital role in the success of GMFs in the marketplace [1], 21]. Their lack of knowledge can hinder product purchases due to unfamiliarity with GMFs [47] and thus compromise the effectiveness of GMFs in aiding in food security efforts. In general, South African consumer knowledge of biotechnology was found to be positively correlated with younger consumers, with a higher level of education and socio-economic status, although the understanding of GM food was still less understood by South African consumers, irrespective of socio-demographic characteristics [35]. GMFs may be affected further because consumers do not know enough about GMFs and what they have to offer [36], 55], which could be problematic in terms of the success of GMFs in the marketplace and thus their intended purpose. These authors allude to the fact that if consumers do not have sufficient knowledge about GMFs, GMFs may not receive any support from consumers. To enhance South African consumers’ food security status and to promote the inclusion of GMFs in intended purchases, this study set out to explore consumers’ knowledge of GMFs and familiarity with these food products to determine if this would drive their intention to purchase GMFs, thus giving a view on South African consumers’ positions on GMFs.

3 Methodology

The process followed in the design, study execution, through to the implementation of the data gathering procedures and analysis of the data in this study is illustrated in Figure 1 and explained in the next sections.

Figure 1:

Flow of the research methodology applied to the study.

4 Findings and discussion

South African consumers’ positions on GMFs reflected the five themes indicated in Figure 2. The first two themes confirm that consumers were still unfamiliar with GMFs. Theme 1 suggests that consumers lacked GMF knowledge and Theme 2 suggests that they could not recognize or identify GM foods on the shelves. To further show consumers’ positions on GMFs, Theme 3 suggests that consumers thought all foods available on the market were GM, while Theme 4 suggests that there was no desire to seek information about GMFs. As a result, Theme 5 suggests that there was no desire to purchase GMFs, which could further hinder the successful use of GMFs to address food security. The facts that consumers presented that generated these themes are presented in the discussion of each theme below.

Figure 2:

South African consumers’ current position on GMFs.

5 Conclusions

The study aimed to give a view on South African consumers’ positions on GMFs and confirmed that South African consumers still lack knowledge about GMFs and subsequently do not know which foods are GMFs, which is not unfamiliar to developing countries. The study contributes to a more current view on GMFs, suggesting that the inability of consumers to use GMF knowledge to make informed decisions about the food products they purchase dampens efforts to address food insecurity of global concern. GMFs have been created to advance food production, thereby ensuring that enough food is produced and that consumers’ nutritional status is elevated through the genetic modification of food products. The intention with GMFs will not come to fruition if consumers are unable to make the right food product choices and select GMFs above other food products because of the nutritional benefits of GMFs. False beliefs about GMFs can be attributed to the lack of information dissemination by key stakeholders, such as the government, as the provider of products that cannot be developed by people themselves. In so doing, many consumers are not benefiting from GMFs, and food insecurity will continue to be a challenge in a developing country such as South Africa. It is imperative that the government, environmental groups and private sector companies build better communication strategies about GMFs and improve digital network technology to reach rural and undereducated communities in South Africa, to enable social media to become a carrier of GMFs information to these communities. South Africa may need to invest in long-term scientific literacy to advance public and consumer understanding of GMFs, as this seems to have been the reason for consumers’ favourable adoption of GMFs in the EU. This may create a better receptive environment for the automaticity process that the study proposes.

The study further contributes to the understanding that if South Africa does not improve consumers’ knowledge about GMFs, these food products have failed to deliver the purpose for which they were developed. The ideal would be to have consumers search for and prefer GMFs because of their benefits and not to avoid these food products because they do not know anything about them. It is especially consumers who are on the brink of food insecurity or are already food insecure that will benefit the most from GMFs. Therefore, it is important that future research also establishes the status of these consumers, including demographic characteristics, to fully understand the level at which GMF educational initiatives can be developed to advance the purchase and consumption of these food products. Future research could benefit from a quantitative approach to enable the generalizability of the data to the broader South African context, to enable a bigger reach of GMF education across the South African consumer population.

The findings contribute to the plea for consumer education. If consumer education on GMFs is not pursued, South Africa will be unable to curb food insecurity as more people become cash-strapped and resource-depleted due to socioeconomic factors. Although important, the study was limited to the opinions of South African consumers, less transferable to other populations in African or developing countries. Further qualitative studies in African and developing countries may be needed to broaden current opinions and perspectives on GMFs. GMFs were developed to address these issues by providing food products that can benefit consumers. Why not use what has already been developed and create better awareness of the use of GMFs by starting with younger consumers in the educational system, who may be the future users of GMFs?