DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Estimating Farmers' Willingness to Cultivate Genetically Modified Rice and Grass for Feed in Korea

농업인의 사료용 유전자변형 작물 재배 의사 추정

  • Kim, Seung Gyu (Agricultural Economics, Kyungpook National University) ;
  • Ryu, Jin (Agricultural Economics, Kyungpook National University) ;
  • Jung, Jae-Won (Agricultural Economics, Kyungpook National University) ;
  • Sung, Myung-Hwan (Food and Marketing Research, Korea Rural Economic Institute) ;
  • Kim, Tae-Kyun (Agricultural Economics, Kyungpook National University)
  • 김승규 (경북대학교 농업경제학과) ;
  • 류진 (경북대학교 농업경제학과) ;
  • 정재원 (경북대학교 농업경제학과) ;
  • 성명환 (한국농촌경제연구원 식품유통연구부) ;
  • 김태균 (경북대학교 농업경제학과)
  • Received : 2015.11.07
  • Accepted : 2015.11.27
  • Published : 2015.12.31

Abstract

Cultivating genetically modified (GM) crops is believed to be a practical solution to meet the increasing food demand, but GM crops are not legal in Korea mainly due to food safety issues. Even though the general public might not be ready to consume GM food, GM crops are imported and consumed as food and feed. To analyze farmers's willingness to grow GM crops for feed, a survey was conducted among crop farmers and 640 valid responses were collected by mail. In the questionnaire, the farmers were asked to select either 'yes' or 'no' if they were willing or not willing to cultivate GM rice and GM grass, respectively, under the given hypothetical income increase rate (i.e., 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, 60%, or 70%). Logit regression was used to estimate the two dichotomous choices by explanatory variables including hypothetical income increase rate. The results show that farmers are willing to cultivate GM rice and grass when their income is expected to increase by 47% and 43%, respectively.

본 연구는 전국의 686개 농가에 대한 설문조사를 통해 농가의 GM 기술과 GM 작물 및 이를 활용한 사료에 대한 인식, 농가의 생산 현황과 속성을 바탕으로 농가의 GM 벼(쌀)와 GM 사료작물에 대한 기술 수용성을 분석하였다. 개별적인 농가 속성에 따라 수용 의사가 다르지만, 2개의 GM 기술 수용성 추정에서 공통적으로 GM 기술 수용 의사를 높이는 변수는 GM 농작물의 필요성에 대한 인식과 잡곡이나 조사료 재배여부로 나타났다. 평균적인 경종 농가의 경우 7.8% 유의수준에서 농가소득이 47% 증가할 경우 벼(쌀)에 대한 GM 기술을 수용하고, 벼(쌀)를 제외한 사료작물의 경우에는 14.1% 유의수준에서 농가소득이 43% 증가할 때 GM 기술을 수용하는 것으로 분석되었다. 벼(쌀)와 비교해서 사료 작물은 상대적으로 적은 소득 증가에도 불구하고 수용 가능성이 나타났다. 그러나 두 가지 경우 모두 통계적 유의성이 5%를 넘어가 신뢰도에 문제가 있다. 앞으로 GM 기술에 대한 신뢰성이 높아짐에 따라 CVM에서 발생하는 가상적 편의가 줄어든다면 통계적 유의성이 높아질 것으로 기대되므로 이에 대한 추가 연구가 필요하다.

Keywords

References

  1. Chung, C.-H. and Kyung, K.H. 2009. World agricultural crop supplies and Korea's food security. Journal of Plant Biotechnology, 36(4):301-308. https://doi.org/10.5010/JPB.2009.36.4.301
  2. Ha, J.C., Choi, S.J., Kwon, Y.T. and Moon, T.W. 2003. Survey of consumer awareness and attitudes regarding genetically modified food in Korea. Journal of Korean Society of Food Science and Nutrition, 32(8):1401-1407. https://doi.org/10.3746/jkfn.2003.32.8.1401
  3. Hall, C. 2008. Identifying farmer attitudes towards genetically modified (GM) crops in Scotland: Are they pro- or anti-GM? Environmental Economic Geography, 39(1):204-212.
  4. Kim, B.-S. 2002. A survey analysis on the consumer's and farmer's perception of biotechnology and genetically modified organisms in Korea. Korean Journal of Agricultural Economics, 43(3):1-31.
  5. Kim, H.-Y., Lee, M.-R., Kim, H.-K., An, J.-H., Kim, M.G., Hong, S.K. and Kim, M. 2011. Consumer awareness about genetically modified food according to gender and age. Korean Journal of Food Culture, 26(4):331-343.
  6. KRIBB. 2015. Major statistics of living modified organism. Korea Research Institute Bioscience and Biotechnology.
  7. Lee, B., Kim, K., Ra, N., Lee, K., Kweon, S.J., Cho, H.S. and Ryu, T.-H. 2014a. Farmers' perception and cultivating intention on genetically modified organisms. Korean Journal of International Agriculture, 26(1):73-81. https://doi.org/10.12719/KSIA.2014.26.1.73
  8. Lee, C.-K., Lee, H.-M. and Kim, T.-K. 2014b. Estimating horseback riding experience using contingent valuation method. International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research, 28(1):37-47.
  9. Lim, J.-A., Shin, H.-J. and Gho, J.-T. 2004. A study on consumer awareness for labeling of genetically modified organisms. The Management Science, 30:291-315.
  10. National Institute of Animal Science, RDA. 2014. Current status of animal husbandry and its outlook. Rural Development Administration.