Public perception and environmental concerns on genetically modified maize production in Kenya
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
Abstract
Abstract. Mbugua AW, Mwaura F, Thenya T. 2018. Public perception and environmental concerns on genetically modified maize production in Kenya. Bioteknologi 15: 38-50. The purpose of this study was to establish: (i) the public’s perception towards the importance of biotechnology on maize production for food security in Kenya, (ii) the environmental implications of maize-related agro-biotechnology on national biodiversity conservation and biosafety and (iii) the public health concerns on the introduction of maize-related agro-biotechnology in Kenya. The study population included two clusters, namely maize farmers and consumers. The farmers were interviewed from two maize farming zones, namely Githunguri Ward (Kiambu County) as a small-scale production area and Moiben Ward (Uasin Gishu County) as a large-scale production area. The consumers, on the other hand, were interviewed from Umoja 1 Ward (Nairobi County). The number of enumeration areas (EAs) was based on planned 10-household interviews per EA, resulting in a total of 12 EAs; 6 from Umoja 1, 3 from Githunguri and 3 from Moiben with a total of 120 respondents including 60 maize producers and 60 consumers. The data analysis was undertaken using descriptive statistics and inferential statistics, like Man U Whitney test, with the initial phase using frequencies and cross-tabulations. The findings showed that majority of consumers believe that genetically modified (GM) maize will solve the problem of food insecurity in the country because there is a critical need to produce more maize to meet the increasing food demand. Out of the 120 surveyed respondents, 69% agreed that GM maize would play a significant role in solving food insecurity in Kenya. Only 34% of the respondents agreed that current maize production methods are sufficient to meet Kenya's food security needs. The respondents portrayed confidence that GM maize will be beneficial to farmers. 65% of the respondents agreed that GM maize would improve the profitability of the growers due to the increased yields per unit area. 60% of the respondents believed that GM maize would benefit society because it will allow farmers to produce food more efficiently. 51% thought GMO foods would play a significant role in solving malnutrition problem in Kenya. On the flip side, the majority of the respondents were concerned about the likely environmental and health risks. 76% of the respondents were concerned that GM maize will contaminate the conventional crops through cross-pollination. More than 6 in every 10 respondents believed that GM maize would be harmful to non-target insects, while 49 % thought that some of the GM maize would invade the environment and become uncontrollable. With regards to public health and religious concerns on the introduction of GM maize, it was established that 90% of the respondents were in favor of food labeling to show the presence of biotech ingredients. 55% of the respondents believed that GM maize might lead to human sickness and death. The study concluded that Kenyans would like a more integrated approach to address the food security issue without relying on any particular technology.
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Black JA, Champion DJ. 1976. Methods and Issues in Social Research. John Wiley & Sons., New York.
Cochran WG. 1977. Sampling Techniques. 3rd ed. John Wiley & Sons., New York.
Cronbach LJ. 1951. Coefficient Alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16:297-334.
De Groote H, Overholt W, Ouma JO, Mugo S. 2003. Assessing the impact of Bt maize in Kenya using a GIS model. Paper presented at the International Agricultural Economics Conference, Durban, August 2003.
Hallman W, Cuite C, Mori K. 2013. Public Perceptions of Labeling Genetically Modified Foods - Working Paper. Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ.
Kimenju S, De Groote H, Karugia J, Mbogoh S, Poland D. 2005. Consumer awareness and attitudes toward GM foods in Kenya. Afr J Biotechnol 4(10): 1066-1075.
Muyanga M, Jayne TS, Argwings-Kodhek G, Joshua A. 2004. Staple food consumption patterns in urban Kenya : Trends and policy implications. Tegemeo Institute, Working Paper, Kenya.
Nyoro J, Ayieko M, Muyanga M. 2007. The Compatibility of Trade Policy with Domestic Policy Interventions Affecting the Grains Sector in Kenya. Tegemeo Institute, Egerton University, Kenya.
Ombewa A, Otunge D. 2012. Opinion Survey on Awareness and Perceptions of Agricultural Biotechnology by the Seed Industry in Kenya
Omwenga I, Kanja I, Joseph Nguta J. James MJ, Patrick IP. 2016. Organochlorine pesticide residues in farmed fish in Machakos and Kiambu counties Kenya Cogent Environ Sci 2: 1153215.
Slovic P. 2000. The Perception of Risk. Earthscan. London.
Stenholm C, Waggoner D. 1992. Public policy in animal biotechnology in the1990s: Challenges and opportunities. In MacDonald J.F. (ed.) Animal Biotechnology: Opportunities and Challenges. National Agricultural Biotechnology Report no. 4. National Agricultural Biotechnology Council. Ithaca, NY.