Prerpints.org logo
Preprint
Article

Genetically Modified Foods: Victoria Islanders’ Perspectives on the Common Good

Altmetrics

Downloads

181

Views

75

Comments

0

Submitted:

30 June 2024

Posted:

05 July 2024

You are already at the latest version

Alerts
Abstract
Rationale: Genetically modified (GM) foods have the potential to reduce food insecurity and address economic and environmental issues. Despite these benefits, GM foods continue to face significant criticism and there is limited information on public awareness and understanding of their nutritional and environmental health benefits in Nigeria. This study aims to fill this gap by investigating public knowledge and perceptions of GM foods in Victoria Island, Lagos. Methods: A convenience sampling method was used to recruit 369 respondents from Victoria Island, Lagos. Data were gathered using a structured questionnaire. The target population comprised employed adults either residing or working on Victoria Island. Statistical analyses were conducted to examine the relationship between sociodemographic factors and awareness of GM foods. Results: The study found that a majority of respondents (62.9%, n=232) were knowledgeable about GM foods and their associated issues. However, many believed that their community was not well-informed on the topic. Awareness of GM foods was significantly associated with sociodemographic factors such as marital status and education (P<0.01). Most respondents were well-informed about the environmental and health benefits of GM foods, with 61.8% believing that GM food production could sustainably reduce reliance on chemical pesticides, fertilizers, and other energy inputs, thus mitigating their ecological impacts. Additionally, most respondents did not feel that purchasing or consuming GM foods conflicted with their beliefs or would affect their food choices. Conclusion: The study concludes that while individual awareness of GM foods is relatively high, there is a perception that community awareness is low. Sociodemographic factors play a significant role in shaping public awareness and perceptions of GM foods. Recommendations: This includes government should actively educate the public on the ecological and health benefits of GM foods and address any safety concerns; Implement strict border controls and food labeling for GM products to protect consumer rights and preferences for organic foods, provide sufficient technical and financial assistance to farmers who participate in organic seed programs to enhance national food security. Significant Statement: This study highlights the importance of public education on GM foods and underscores the need for government intervention to ensure informed consumer choices and support for sustainable agricultural practices.
Keywords: 
Subject: Biology and Life Sciences  -   Food Science and Technology

1. Introduction

Biotechnology has revolutionized many facets of human life by enabling the seemingly impossible and ensuring rapid achievement of desired outcomes. It has shown remarkable potential in alleviating hunger and poverty, particularly in low-income regions [1,2,3,4,5,6]. At its essence, biotechnology involves using or modifying biological systems such as plants, animals, microorganisms, or their components to create innovative products like food, dairy items, antibiotics, and hormones, benefiting humanity extensively [7,8,9,10,11]. This field is vast, with successful applications in agriculture, food science, medicine, and environmental science. The origins of agricultural biotechnology trace back millennia when farmers selected crops with desirable traits such as enhanced pest and disease resistance, and larger seeds and fruits to improve crop yields and productivity [12]. Modern advancements in gene technology now enable the selection and incorporation of superior genes from other species for agricultural and industrial uses [7,8,9,10,11]. Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) are any plants, animals, microorganisms, or their derivatives that have undergone genetic modification [13]. The food market is increasingly saturated with GMOs, reflecting the widespread adoption of biotechnological innovations in agriculture [14,15,16]. This prevalence has significant implications for food production, distribution, and consumption, necessitating a nuanced understanding of its technical and socio-economic aspects. In Nigeria, the dynamic and unique cultural and political landscape is reflected in the diverse foods, indicating that food issues are not only essential for nourishment but are also central to cultural identity, economic stability, and political discourse [17,18,19,20,21]. Different regions and ethnic groups in Nigeria boast unique cuisines that are sources of pride and cultural heritage, recognized in social practices and celebrations. However, many families struggle daily to secure adequate meals, with numerous children suffering from malnutrition and food allergies. The country’s porous borders allow the illegal entry of various foreign crops, reducing the availability of traditional Nigerian foods and limiting food choices [22,23,24,25]. Occasionally, affluent politicians and both domestic and international non-profit organizations provide food aid. Consequently, people’s food purchasing and consumption decisions are influenced by their socio-economic circumstances and personal beliefs.
The African saying “Food is life” and Maslow’s hierarchy of needs emphasize the critical importance of food stability for human existence and growth. Research highlights the advantages of GMOs in reducing food insecurity and providing resistance to pests and drought [26]. Since the introduction of genetically modified foods in the 1990s, crop yields have grown exponentially, leading to the cultivation of over 102 million hectares of GM crops worldwide [27]. This increase has significantly impacted developing countries most vulnerable to food security [28]. Scholars advocate for funding agricultural biotechnological research to develop GM foods, which could address global hunger and malnutrition while contributing to environmental conservation. By enhancing crop yields and reducing reliance on artificial pesticides, GM foods offer promising solutions to these critical issues [29]. Moreover, agricultural biotechnology not only meets the growing demands of an expanding global population by increasing yields but also reduces operational costs and prices of agricultural goods, resulting in economic savings for consumers [30]. While Nigeria, with its rapidly growing population, faces significant challenges in ensuring food security [1,2,3,4,5,6]. Despite advances in agricultural technology, malnutrition and hunger remain prevalent. This is a reality for Nigeria and many other developing countries striving to achieve the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals [31]. The rise of genetically engineered foods has been widely proposed as a solution to improve crop yields and enhance food security [22,23,24,25]. However, there is a lack of comprehensive data on the awareness, understanding, and patronage of GM foods among Nigerian consumers, particularly in urban areas like Lagos [28]. Addressing this issue is crucial because public perception and awareness can influence policy decisions, regulatory frameworks, and educational campaigns about GM foods. Without such data, efforts to promote GM foods may be met with resistance or fail to address public concerns effectively [32].
Current literature on GM foods largely focuses on their agricultural and economic benefits, but there is a significant gap in research regarding consumer awareness and perception in the Nigerian context. Additionally, previous studies have shown that people perceive risks differently, especially in relation to public health, ecological concerns, food safety, and exposure to toxins and allergens [33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68]. Thus, this study aims to examine the understanding of genetically modified (GM) sustenance and its nutritional benefits within the community and workforce of Lagos Island, assess societal knowledge about the agro-economic advantages of GM produce, measure public opinions on the ecological and health impacts of GM nourishment, scrutinize the sources of information about genetically modified sustenance, and explore the factors influencing the production, consumption, and distribution of GM foods. This study aims to evaluate the depth of knowledge and perception of GM foods among residents of Lagos, Nigeria, explore factors influencing these perceptions, and identify strategies to improve public understanding and adoption of GM foods.

2. Literature Review

The discourse surrounding the emergence of transgenic organisms in agriculture and crop production has long been fraught with concerns regarding food safety, impacting consumers’ rights and generating apprehension at multiple levels. The potential risks associated with GMOs, such as the transmission of antimicrobial resistance genes or unintended genetic transfers through cross-breeding, remain a focal point of global scrutiny [18,19,32,33,42,43]. Such concerns have prompted non-governmental organizations to caution the Nigerian government about the implications of integrating GM crops into the national food system, emphasizing the lack of conclusive scientific evidence on the safety of these products for both human health and the environment [9,11,13,41,47,55,59,60,61,63,68]. Key issues include the possibility of GM foods triggering allergies, causing immune dysfunctions, and leading to genetic disorders [39,40,44,45,46,49,50,53,54]. In response to these concerns, some countries have begun advocating for the labeling of GM products to enhance product surveillance and tracking while protecting consumer rights [69]. Regulatory agencies globally are stepping up by conducting thorough biosafety assessments to identify unauthorized and potentially hazardous GM food products in retail outlets such as markets and shops [70]. Despite these initiatives, public acceptance of GM food products remains tepid, with particular skepticism directed at herbicide-tolerant and pest-resistant GM varieties of soybean, corn, cotton, and rapeseed [71].
Nigeria faces additional challenges with the illegal importation of unlabeled GM foods through its porous borders. A notable study revealed that 26.7% of food products in Nigerian markets, including maize powder, bean powder, cookies, beverages, and various maize-based snacks, contained GMOs. This discovery has heightened consumer fears and prompted regulatory bodies to enhance detection methods, such as polymerase chain reaction (PCR), to ensure accurate documentation and safety [28]. Unlike many developed countries, Nigeria lacks robust consumer surveys to gauge public opinion on GM foods. Studies indicate that perceptions of genetically modified food products vary widely across different regions and time periods [30,72]. For instance, a survey in the United States revealed that 58% of respondents were unaware of GM foods [73], and a Pew Research Center study found persistent skepticism among Americans despite general beliefs in the healthiness of GM foods [74]. Similar sentiments were observed among college students, with many viewing GM foods as hazardous or lacking knowledge to recognize them [75]. Akinola [76] highlighted the socio-economic factors influencing agricultural information preferences. Negative opinions on gene technology prevail among consumers and professionals alike, with 35% of respondents expressing adverse views on GM foods. Economic hardship and inadequate knowledge about GM products further complicate acceptance [77]. Pachico and Wolf [78] linked consumer willingness to try GM products to the scarcity of quality food options. Resistance to GM foods is often rooted in moral, economic, ecological concerns, and worries about health and international trade [79]. Onyango [80] noted that well-informed consumers exhibited decreased willingness to try GM foods after understanding the risks involved. Baker and Burnham [81] found that 30% of American buyers based their decisions on a rational assessment of genetically modified cornflakes’ content. In contrast, European consumers generally emphasized the uncertain risks of GMO consumption, while Americans did not scrutinize these risks as meticulously [82]. Additionally, research has shown a consumer preference for paying extra for non-GMO products [83].
The labeling of genetically modified foods aims at transparency, though international regulations vary. For instance, while labeling is optional in some US states, it is mandatory in Japan and Europe. Labeling upon consumer demand could potentially lead to widespread rejection, as evidenced by significant resistance in Taiwan [84]. Given the expanding biotechnology industry and the evolving retail food distribution networks, understanding public opinion and awareness of the health risks associated with GM foods is crucial. This context underscores the purpose of the current study, which seeks to fill the informational gap regarding Nigerian consumers’ attitudes towards GM foods, examining their awareness, willingness to consume, and acceptability of prices for these products.

3. Materials and Method

3.1. Study Area

Victoria Island, located within the Eti-Osa Local Government Area (LGA) of Lagos State, Nigeria, is a thriving and prosperous district that includes Lagos Island, Ikoyi, and the Lekki Peninsula. Enclosed by the Lagos Lagoon (see Figure 1), Victoria Island stands as the primary hub for business and finance in Lagos State [85,86,87]. Renowned for its affluence, the district offers a wide array of recreational activities and ample job opportunities. It is recognized as an expensive yet relatively secure residential area, notably hosting numerous diplomatic missions, embassies, and consulates in Lagos. Additionally, Victoria Island is home to the headquarters of several government agencies, religious institutions, major corporations, and multinational companies [85,86]. The community on Victoria Island is predominantly composed of professionals, entrepreneurs, and individuals who are adventurous and open to new prospects. This district is marked by a strong sense of community among its residents, who represent a balanced mix of various socio-economic statuses. This diversity includes affluent residents, middle-class professionals, and workers from different economic backgrounds, making Victoria Island a microcosm of broader societal dynamics. We consider Victoria Island an appropriate study area because it epitomizes a diverse and dynamic civil community. Its mix of socio-economic statuses and the presence of educated professionals and expatriates provide a broad spectrum of opinions and experiences. This diversity is ideal for assessing public awareness and perception of genetically modified (GM) foods, as it reflects a range of perspectives that are crucial for our study. The residents’ exposure to global discussions on biotechnology and GM foods further enhances the relevance of Victoria Island as a representative location for this research.

3.2. Study Design

This study utilized a cross-sectional survey design to collect data on the awareness and opinions of residents and workers in Victoria Island, Lagos, Nigeria, regarding the environmental and health benefits associated with the production and consumption of genetically modified (GM) foods. The primary objective was to understand public perception and knowledge of GM foods, providing a basis for advocating consumer rights concerning GMOs.

3.3. Study Population

The study targeted adult residents and workers in Victoria Island, Lagos, Nigeria. Victoria Island is a commercial and residential area with a diverse population, making it an ideal location for assessing a wide range of opinions and awareness levels regarding GM foods.

3.4. Study Duration

The survey was conducted over a period of three months, from January to March 2024. This timeframe allowed for sufficient data collection and ensured that a diverse cross-section of the population could be included in the study.

3.5. Inclusion Criteria

Participants included in the study were:
i.
Adults aged 18 years and above.
ii.
Residents or workers in Victoria Island, Lagos.
iii.
Willing and available to participate in the survey.
iv.
Able to provide informed consent.

3.6. Exclusion Criteria

Participants excluded from the study were:
i.
Individuals below 18 years of age.
ii.
Non-residents or those not working in Victoria Island.
iii.
Unwilling or unavailable to participate in the survey.
iv.
Unable to provide informed consent.

3.7. Sample Size Calculation

A sample size of 369 respondents was determined for this study. The choice of sample size was influenced by several factors. Firstly, the convenience sampling method was employed, where participants were selected based on their availability and willingness to participate rather than through random selection. This approach, while not providing a statistically representative sample, allows for quick and cost-effective data collection, which is suitable for preliminary research. The sample size of 369 was deemed sufficient for several reasons. It provides a large enough group to capture a wide range of opinions and levels of awareness about GM foods within the target population of Victoria Island. This number allows for meaningful statistical analysis, offering insights into general trends and patterns regarding the community’s perceptions and knowledge. Additionally, the sample size was chosen to balance the need for comprehensive data collection with the practical constraints of time, resources, and accessibility of participants. Given the exploratory nature of the study, the goal was to gather a robust snapshot of the current state of awareness and opinions on GM foods, which can then inform further, more detailed research.
By involving 369 respondents, the study aims to achieve a level of diversity and variability in responses that can highlight different perspectives within the population. This size helps ensure that the findings are not overly influenced by outliers or atypical responses, providing a more reliable basis for understanding the broader trends in public opinion regarding GM foods in the region. In summary, the sample size of 369 respondents, chosen through convenience sampling, is intended to provide a valuable preliminary overview of awareness and opinions on GM foods. This initial data collection serves as a foundation for future research, which may utilize more rigorous sampling methods and larger sample sizes to build on these preliminary findings.

3.8. Sampling Techniques

The study employed a convenience sampling approach, a non-probability method where participants were selected based on their availability and willingness to participate. This method was chosen for its simplicity and cost-effectiveness, making it suitable for preliminary research.

3.9. Study Instrument

A structured questionnaire was developed in English for data collection. The questionnaire consisted of multiple sections, including demographic information, awareness and knowledge of GM foods, opinions on environmental and health impacts, willingness to purchase and consume GM foods, and past experiences with GM foods. The questionnaire was validated by two scholars specializing in cell biology, genetics, biotechnology and environmental health to ensure content validity.

3.10. Study Procedure

Participants were approached face-to-face in various locations within Victoria Island, including commercial areas, residential neighbourhoods, and public spaces. The survey was introduced with a brief explanation of GM foods and their characteristics to ensure all respondents had a basic understanding before answering the questions. This approach helped address any unfamiliarity among participants and reduce potential biases.

3.11. Data Collection Tools

The primary data collection tool was the structured questionnaire. It was designed to be completed in approximately 10 minutes, with statements framed both positively and negatively to mitigate response bias. Data collection was facilitated by trained research assistants who ensured the accurate and consistent administration of the questionnaire.

3.12. Study Variables

The study variables included:
i.
Independent Variables: Demographic information (age, gender, education level, occupation), awareness and knowledge of GM foods, opinions on environmental and health impacts, willingness to purchase and consume GM foods, past experiences with GM foods.
ii.
Dependent Variables: Awareness and opinions on the environmental and health benefits of GM foods.

3.13. Data Analysis

Data analysis was conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics 28.0. Descriptive statistics, including means and percentages, were used to summarize the data. Correlation analysis and contingency tables were employed to explore relationships between variables. P-values were adjusted using the Bonferroni Method to ensure accuracy and minimize the risk of Type I errors. The results were presented in tables and figures to facilitate clear interpretation and understanding.

4. Results and Discussions

The examination of sociodemographic data provides valuable insights into the relationship between social identity and other variables [88,89]. Participants in this study were employed across various sectors of the Nigerian economy, reflecting the diversity of the workforce. Specifically, 33.1% were involved in the service sector, 27.6% were engaged in academia and research institutions, 25.5% worked in government roles, 8.4% were employed in manufacturing, 3.0% were part of non-profit organizations, and 2.4% were involved in agriculture. The age distribution of the respondents showed that a majority (54%) were between 26 and 35 years old, while 23.8% were between 16 and 25 years old, indicating a predominantly young and socially active cohort. Gender distribution revealed that females constituted 64.5% of the sample, while males made up 35.5%. Marital status was nearly evenly split, with 50.1% of participants being married and 49.9% being single (see Figure 2 below).
Religious affiliation among respondents was predominantly Christian (91.3%), with a minority (8.7%) identifying as Muslim. In terms of educational attainment, 62.3% of participants held a bachelor’s degree or equivalent, 25.5% had completed a master’s degree, 9.2% possessed a high school diploma, and 3.0% had obtained a national diploma (see Figure 3 below). This demographic profile indicates that the respondents were generally well-educated, young, and socially active, which suggests a heightened attentiveness to public and food-related issues. This demographic is likely to hold diverse views on food-health matters, including genetically modified (GM) foods. These demographic trends align with findings from previous public awareness surveys [89,90,91,92]. Akinola [76] suggested that socio-economic factors can significantly impact public awareness, particularly in terms of information acquisition and decision-making processes. This underscores the importance of considering sociodemographic variables when assessing public perceptions and awareness, as they offer critical insights into how different segments of the population engage with and respond to various issues, including biotechnology and GM foods.
Increasing public knowledge on any aspect of public health is crucial for facilitating well-informed governmental decisions, gaining community support, and mobilizing local resources towards positive health outcomes [90]. Specifically, understanding genetically modified (GM) foods can significantly influence consumer behaviors and acceptance. As depicted in Figure 4, the level of familiarity with GM foods among the participants in this study was relatively high at 62.9%, indicating that a majority of respondents were informed about GM foods and recognized their nutritional and health benefits. Conversely, 32% of participants lacked awareness, and 5.1% were unsure. Previous research has shown varied levels of awareness regarding GM foods. For instance, Huang et al. [93] revealed that two-thirds of urban consumers had heard about GM foods, although their understanding of biotechnology was limited. The Hartman Group [94] reported near-universal consumer awareness of GM foods at 97%, with an increasing number of consumers seeking to avoid them. In contrast, Pattron [95] found that many consumers in Trinidad (90%) had little knowledge about GM foods, and most suppliers (67%) were unaware that they sold genetically modified foods. Similarly, a 2016 report by the Pew Research Center indicated that 29% of Americans were well-informed about GM foods, while 19% had not heard anything about them. Ali and Rahut [96] observed disparities in awareness among Pakistani farmers: over 90% were knowledgeable about GM cash crops, but few were aware of GM food crops and vegetables. These findings underscore the necessity for comprehensive public education on the advantages of GM foods, encompassing their nutritional and environmental benefits. Utilizing diverse communication channels to educate the public can empower individuals to make informed decisions about their food choices, promoting both legal and public acceptance of GM foods. Such education initiatives are essential for ensuring that the public is well-informed, which in turn supports the adoption and integration of GM foods into everyday life.
Table 1 illustrates public perceptions on the acceptance of genetically modified (GM) foods. A significant portion of respondents (46.1%) indicated varying degrees of agreement (16.3% somewhat agree; 10.6% agree; 19.2% strongly agree) that there is a lack of awareness in their communities regarding the nutritional and health benefits of GM foods/products. This perceived lack of awareness aligns with previous studies by Pattron, [95] and Huang et al., [93]. Insufficient awareness about public health, safety, and socio-economic significance can impede national development, underscoring the need for continuous public education on both the benefits and potential risks of GM foods. Additionally, over 40% of participants (5.1% somewhat agree, 16.0% agree, 20.6% strongly agree) believed that GM seeds are not accessible to farmers, while 35.2% were unsure and the remainder disagreed. Proper distribution of GM seeds by agricultural agencies could encourage farmers to grow more drought- and pest-resistant crops, enhancing national food security (35, 36, 38-40, 44, 5157, 58). Previous reports indicate farmers opt for GM seeds due to increased yields and cost savings [97]. GM crops have helped reduce hunger by boosting incomes for 18 million smallholder farming families, benefiting over 65 million people in developing countries [97].
Regarding the usability of GM seeds, more than 40% disagreed with the statement that GM seeds are not user-friendly (13% strongly disagreed, 12.7% disagreed, 16.7% somewhat disagreed), while 38.8% were undecided and the remainder agreed. This finding might not fully represent farmers’ perspectives, as only 2.4% of respondents were from the agricultural sector. Farmers often save and replant GM seeds unless restricted by intellectual property rights [97]. However, in public sector projects like the Hawaiian papaya and insect-resistant eggplant in Bangladesh, farmers can save and share GM seeds without royalty obligations [97]. Over 40% of respondents believed that educational and technical expertise required for GM food production influences public acceptance, while 29.3% were undecided and approximately 26% disagreed. About 37% disagreed that GM crops could lead to the loss of local food sources or cultivars, with 29.3% undecided and about 33% agreeing. Thus, concerns about losing local cultivars may not significantly impact public acceptance of GM foods.
Approximately 38% disagreed with the assertion that the government does not support GM foods, while 28.2% were undecided and 33% agreed. This suggests that most respondents perceive government support for GM food production and distribution, consistent with previous findings among the American population [98]. Around 37% believed there are weak or nonexistent policies to sustain GM food adoption, while 40% were undecided. Previous studies have noted limited trust in scientists associated with GM foods [98]. This study advocates for inclusive policymaking involving scientists, small-scale farmers, and the public. Regarding the cost of GM foods, 41.5% were undecided, approximately 30% disagreed, and only 26.9% agreed that GM foods are expensive and accessible only to the wealthy. Moreover, 39% disagreed that a preference for organic foods influences acceptance of GM foods, with 34% undecided and 26% agreeing. Thus, a preference for organic foods does not significantly influence acceptance of GM foods. Recent studies have shown that some individuals engage in anthropogenic activities driven by deep spirituality or religious beliefs [91]. In this study, the majority of respondents (58.5%) disagreed with the statement that GM food production and consumption conflict with their spiritual or religious beliefs, while 23.3% were undecided and the rest agreed. This suggests that religious beliefs do not majorly influence acceptance of GM foods. This finding aligns with previous research indicating that media, environmental activists, scientists, and the food industry have a greater impact on consumer perceptions than religious beliefs [87,99].
Approximately 50% of respondents believed that GM foods are authentic, 35.8% were undecided, and a minority doubted their authenticity. Regarding potential health risks, 48.3% expressed no concerns, 22.2% were undecided, and 29% expressed fears. Previous studies have reported similar mixed perceptions, with some seeing no difference between GM and conventional foods, while others view GM foods as risky for health [98]. Younger adults and those concerned about health risks are more likely to view GM foods skeptically [98]. Additionally, 45% did not believe that GM foods could shorten life expectancy, 32.8% were undecided, and 22.2% agreed. Approximately 40.9% were uncertain about existing policies supporting GM food adoption, while 36.9% were unsure if policies were supportive. Effective policies are crucial to promote GM food adoption. Finally, 31.2% strongly agreed that GM food production requires education and technical expertise. Concerns about food and environmental safety due to genetic modification techniques underscore the need for companies to engage qualified experts [32].
Figure 5 reveals that respondents primarily obtained information about GM foods from the internet and social media, which accounted for 52.5% of the responses. This was followed by family and friends or word of mouth, at 30.7%, and government agencies, at 15.7%. These findings align with previous public awareness surveys on information sources, such as those by Mittal and Mehar [100] and Omoyajowo et al. [89,92]. This study highlights the pivotal role of internet and social media platforms in disseminating information and raising awareness about public health issues [101,102,103,104,105,106,107,108,109,110,111,112,113,114,115,116], including GM foods. The substantial reliance on digital platforms indicates a shift in how people access and trust information, emphasizing the need for credible and accurate content online to inform public opinion and decision-making [87].
According to Figure 6, a significant portion of participants (50.41%) reported that they seldom purchase or consume genetically modified (GM) foods. This is followed by 28.83% who indicated occasional consumption. Additionally, 14.91% of respondents stated that they purchase or consume GM foods “very frequently,” while 8.13% reported that they “always” do so. In a related study, despite limited knowledge of biotechnology, consumers in Beijing generally showed a positive attitude towards GM foods, particularly those with enhanced product qualities. Their willingness to pay for such products was significantly influenced by positive opinions and self-reported knowledge [117]. On the other hand, research highlighted that Americans’ food preferences are strongly shaped by their focus on healthy and nutritious eating habits [98]. These findings illustrate diverse consumer behaviors and attitudes towards GM foods across different regions. They emphasize the complex interplay between knowledge, perception, and cultural factors in shaping food choices. The varied frequency of GM food consumption observed in our study, combined with insights from previous research, underscores the importance of public education and transparent information to guide informed decision-making regarding GM foods.
Based on the results presented in Table 2, a significant majority of respondents acknowledged the potential benefits associated with genetically modified (GM) food production. Specifically, 75.6% of participants believed that farmers and other stakeholders in the national food production system would experience economic advantages from GM foods. Moreover, 61.8% agreed that GM food production could effectively reduce the reliance on chemical pesticides, fertilizers, and energy resources [36,38,39,40,44,53,118]. Additionally, a noteworthy 59.6% expressed willingness to participate in GM food production initiatives. Although this study did not delve deeply into the factors influencing public participation in such programs, previous research by Ali and Rahut [96] suggested that households with higher incomes and larger landholdings were more inclined to engage in GM food production. Furthermore, 56.9% of respondents recognized that GM plant production could contribute to resource conservation, including space, water, and energy, underscoring a favorable perception of GM technology’s environmental benefits. These findings resonate with Sönmezoğlu and Keskin’s [71] observations that GM crops, such as herbicide-tolerant and insect-resistant soybeans, maize, cotton, and rapeseeds (Brassica napus), are increasingly cultivated worldwide, sparking discussions about their implications for health and safety. Nevertheless, public opinion on GM foods remains diverse. A report referenced by PRC [98] highlighted varying concerns among different populations regarding the environmental and health impacts of GMOs, indicating that perceptions of GM food production’s benefits can vary significantly across regions and cultures.
The correlation matrix presented above (Table 3) provides insights into the relationships between sociodemographic factors such as age, gender, marital status, and education and awareness and perceptions of genetically modified (GM) foods. Notably, age demonstrates a statistically significant positive correlation with perception (P < 0.01), albeit weak, suggesting that older respondents tend to hold more favorable views towards GM foods. This finding contrasts with research on the US population, which suggests that younger individuals are more likely to perceive health benefits in organic produce and express concerns about health risks associated with GM foods [98]. Similarly, gender and religious affiliation (Christianity or Islam) also exhibit weak but positive correlations with perception (P < 0.01). This implies that being male or belonging to either Christian or Muslim religious groups may influence how GM foods are perceived in Nigeria. Previous studies indicate that men generally hold more positive attitudes towards GM foods compared to women [98]. However, the influence of religious affiliations on perceptions of GM foods remains less substantiated by current evidence. Interestingly, awareness of GM foods and their perceived benefits shows weak but positive correlations with both marital status and educational attainment. This suggests that marital status and level of education may shape individuals’ perspectives on GM foods. Higher educational attainment and scientific literacy are likely associated with more favorable views towards GM foods. In summary, these findings underscore the significant impact of sociodemographic factors on public perceptions of GM foods in Nigeria. They emphasize the necessity of integrating these variables into future research and policy initiatives aimed at understanding and shaping public opinion towards GM foods. Such considerations are crucial for developing targeted strategies that effectively communicate the benefits and address the concerns associated with GM food technologies.
The comparative analysis provided valuable insights (in table 4) into the relationships between sociodemographic factors and awareness of genetically modified (GM) foods. Across different age groups, except for individuals aged 18-25 years, there were no statistically significant differences (P > 0.05) in awareness levels. Notably, respondents in the 18-25 age bracket exhibited significantly higher awareness compared to other age groups. Gender did not exert a significant influence on awareness levels (P > 0.05), despite studies indicating that women generally tend to be more informed and cautious about GM foods compared to men [98]. In terms of religious affiliation, while the majority of respondents identified as Christians, there was a significantly higher level of awareness (P < 0.05) observed among Christians compared to Muslims. Conversely, awareness levels were significantly lower among Muslim respondents. Educational attainment emerged as a critical factor influencing awareness levels. Individuals holding a master’s degree demonstrated significantly higher awareness (P < 0.05) of GM foods, whereas those with an associate degree equivalent (OND/NCE) or a high school diploma exhibited significantly lower awareness levels. Marital status, however, did not have a significant impact on awareness levels (P > 0.05). In summary, these findings deepen our understanding of how sociodemographic factors intersect with awareness of GM foods. They highlight the heightened awareness among younger adults, particularly those aged 18-25 years, and the varying levels of awareness across different educational backgrounds and religious affiliations. Addressing these disparities is crucial for developing targeted educational campaigns and policy initiatives aimed at enhancing public understanding and engagement with GM food technologies.

5. Conclusions

Based on the findings of this study, it is evident that residents of Victoria Island, like many globally, recognize the significance of genetically modified (GM) foods in addressing food security challenges. Despite initial apprehensions regarding potential health risks, respondents demonstrated a nuanced understanding of the benefits associated with GM crops. These benefits include enhanced crop yields, increased resistance to diseases and pests, and the provision of nutritious food options that respect various cultural identities. The study highlighted the pivotal role of GM foods in fostering sustainability within the food production system and generating socio-economic opportunities for farmers and food producers. Victoria Islanders acknowledge that GM technology can effectively tackle critical agricultural issues such as limited arable land, water scarcity, and the imperative for environmentally friendly farming practices. A noteworthy discovery was the widespread awareness among respondents regarding GM foods, with many accessing information through internet and social media platforms. This indicates a growing interest and active engagement in discussions about GM technology, underscoring a desire for well-informed decision-making regarding food choices. Furthermore, the study revealed a solid understanding among Victoria Islanders of the environmental and health benefits associated with GM food production systems, suggesting a high level of literacy and awareness regarding the potential impacts of GM technology on both human health and the environment. However, it is crucial to prioritize consumer rights and recognize that perceptions of GM foods can vary across different demographic groups influenced by factors such as gender, education, and religion. Therefore, efforts to promote awareness and understanding of GM technology should be tailored to address these diverse perspectives effectively. Based on these findings, the study proposes the following recommendations to guide informed policy decisions:
i.
Public Education: Governments and relevant stakeholders should prioritize efforts to educate the public comprehensively about the environmental and health benefits of GM foods, while also addressing safety concerns. This educational campaign should leverage diverse media channels to effectively reach various audiences.
ii.
Regulatory Measures: Governments should implement proactive measures to strengthen border controls and enforce robust food labeling regulations for GM products within the Nigerian market. This initiative will empower consumers to make informed choices and safeguard their rights, particularly those who prefer organic foods.
iii.
Support for Farmers: Adequate training and financial support should be provided to farmers and interested citizens to facilitate the cultivation of GM crops. This support will contribute significantly to addressing food insecurity challenges in Nigeria and promote sustainable agricultural practices.
iv.
Risk Management: Government agencies must collaborate to establish and implement a cohesive risk-management system for monitoring the safety of both existing and new biotechnology products. This system should prioritize considerations for environmental, human, and animal health to ensure the overall safety of GM foods and their production processes.
Future research should focus on evaluating the effectiveness of current regulatory frameworks governing GM foods in Nigeria and beyond. This includes assessing areas for improvement in safety assessment, labeling standards, and enforcement protocols. Additionally, research efforts should investigate the health and environmental impacts associated with consuming and producing GM foods. Understanding how demographic variables such as gender, education, religion, and socio-economic status influence consumer perceptions and attitudes towards GM foods is crucial for informed policymaking and the promotion of sustainable agricultural practices. Furthermore, studying the factors influencing farmers’ decisions regarding the adoption or rejection of GM crops will provide valuable insights for shaping future agricultural policies.

6. Significant Statement

The study conducted on Victoria Islanders provides compelling insights into their perceptions and awareness of genetically modified (GM) foods, highlighting a nuanced understanding of its potential benefits amidst initial concerns. Residents demonstrate a clear recognition of GM crops’ ability to address pressing challenges in food security through increased yields, resilience against pests and diseases, and the provision of culturally sensitive nutritional options. This awareness underscores the role of GM technology in fostering sustainability within agricultural practices while creating socio-economic opportunities for local farmers and producers. Moreover, the study reveals a notable trend in information access through digital platforms, indicating a growing interest and engagement in discussions surrounding GM foods among Victoria Islanders. Furthermore, the findings underscore the importance of tailored educational initiatives to enhance public understanding of GM technology, emphasizing its environmental and health benefits while addressing safety considerations. Effective communication strategies are crucial in bridging knowledge gaps and promoting informed decision-making among diverse demographic groups, influenced by factors such as gender, education level, and religious affiliation. The study advocates for proactive regulatory measures that strengthen food safety standards and labeling requirements for GM products in the Nigerian market, empowering consumers to make choices aligned with their preferences and values. Looking forward, the study proposes strategic recommendations for policy development and research focus areas. These include bolstering support for GM crop cultivation through targeted training and financial assistance for farmers, as well as advancing comprehensive risk management frameworks to ensure the continued safety and sustainability of GM foods. Future investigations should delve deeper into the societal implications of GM technology adoption, exploring its impacts on health, environment, and socio-economic dynamics to inform evidence-based policymaking and sustainable agricultural practices nationally and globally.

Author Contributions

All authors contributed equally.

Funding

This research was funded and technically supported by the Koozakar grant no. KO5172024 through the first author. The views and opinions expressed in this study reflect those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of Koozakar.

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is not any conflict of interests regarding the publication of this manuscript. In addition, the ethical issues, including plagiarism, informed consent, misconduct, data fabrication and/or falsification, double publication and/or submission, and redundancy has been completely observed by the authors.

References

  1. Raimi MO, Bilewu OO, Adio ZO, Abdulrahman H (2019) Women Contributions to Sustainable Environments in Nigeria. Journal of Scientific Research in Allied Sciences. 5(4), 35-51. ISSN NO. 2455-5800. [CrossRef]
  2. Raimi MO, Suleiman RM, Odipe OE, Salami JT, Oshatunberu M, et al (2019). Women Role in Environmental Conservation and Development in Nigeria. Ecology & Conservation Science; 1(2): Volume 1 Issue 2 - July 2019. https://juniperpublishers.com/ecoa/pdf/ECOA.MS.ID.555558.pdf. [CrossRef]
  3. Raimi MO, Odubo TR, Ogah A (2022) Women, Water and Development in the Global South. Oral Presentation Presented at the Multidisciplinary International Conference on Water in Africa (ICWA 2022) on the theme: Towards Successful Delivery of SDGs 3 & 6, which held February 09 – 11, 2022.
  4. Raimi MO, Odubo TR, Odubo TV, Omidiji AO (2022) Gender and Sustainability in the Niger Delta. Oral Presentation Presented at the Multidisciplinary International Conference on Water in Africa (ICWA 2022) on the theme: Towards Successful Delivery of SDGs 3 & 6, which held February 09 – 11, 2022.
  5. Gift RA, Olalekan RM, Owobi OE, Oluwakemi RM, Anu B, Funmilayo AA (2020). Nigerians crying for availability of electricity and water: a key driver to life coping measures for deepening stay at home inclusion to slow covid-19 spread. Open Access Journal of Science. 2020;4(3):69‒80. [CrossRef]
  6. Gift RA, Olalekan RM (2020). Access to electricity and water in Nigeria: a panacea to slow the spread of Covid-19. Open Access J Sci. 2020;4(2):34. https://medcrave.com/index.php?/articles/det/21409/. [CrossRef]
  7. Sylvester CI, Odangowei IO, Matthew CO, Saoban SS, Zaharadeen MY, Muhammad A, Morufu OR, and Austin-Asomeji I (2023) Historical Perspectives and Overview of the Value of Herbal Medicine. In: Izah, S.C., Ogwu, M.C., Akram, M. (eds), Herbal Medicine Phytochemistry, Reference Series in Phytochemistry, Springer, Cham. [CrossRef]
  8. Saliu, A.O., Komolafe, O.O., Bamidele, C.O., Raimi, M.O. (2023). The Value of Biodiversity to Sustainable Development in Africa. In: Izah, S.C., Ogwu, M.C. (eds) Sustainable Utilization and Conservation of Africa’s Biological Resources and Environment. Sustainable Development and Biodiversity, vol 888. Springer, Singapore. [CrossRef]
  9. Raimi MO, Abiola OS, Atoyebi B, Okon GO, Popoola AT, Amuda-KA, Olakunle L, Austin-AI & Mercy T. (2022). The Challenges and Conservation Strategies of Biodiversity: The Role of Government and Non-Governmental Organization for Action and Results on the Ground. In: Chibueze Izah, S. (eds) Biodiversity in Africa: Potentials, Threats, and Conservation. Sustainable Development and Biodiversity, vol 29. Springer, Singapore. [CrossRef]
  10. Raimi MO, Austin-AI, Olawale HS, Abiola OS, Abinotami WE, Ruth EE, Nimisingha DS & Walter BO (2022). Leaving No One Behind: Impact of Soil Pollution on Biodiversity in the Global South: A Global Call for Action. In: Chibueze Izah, S. (eds) Biodiversity in Africa: Potentials, Threats and Conservation. Sustainable Development and Biodiversity, vol 29. Springer, Singapore. [CrossRef]
  11. Olalekan RM, Omidiji AO, Williams EA, Christianah MB, Modupe O (2019). The roles of all tiers of government and development partners in environmental conservation of natural resource: a case study in Nigeria. MOJ Ecology & Environmental Sciences 2019;4(3):114‒121. [CrossRef]
  12. Wieczorek, AM., & Wright, MG. (2012). History of Agricultural Biotechnology: How Crop Development Has Evolved. Nature Education Knowledge, 3(10), 9.
  13. Onyeji, E. (2018). Don’t Introduce GMO crops- Group warn Nigerian government. Retrieved from www.premiumtimesng.com/healthnews.
  14. Jacob OA, Anuoluwa OE and Raimi MO (2023) The notorious daredevils: potential toxic levels of cyanide and heavy metals in cassava flour sold in selected markets - taken Oke Ogun Community, Oyo State as an example. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 7:1165501. http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fsufs.2023.1165501/full?&utm_source=Email_to_authors_&utm_medium=Email&utm_content=T1_11.5e1_author&utm_campaign=Email_publica. [CrossRef]
  15. Omotoso AJ, Omotoso EA, Morufu OR (2021) Potential Toxic levels of Cyanide and Heavy Metals in Cassava Flour Sold in Selected Markets in Oke Ogun Community, Oyo State, Nigeria, 01 July 2021, PREPRINT (Version 1) available at Research Square. [CrossRef]
  16. Ademola, S.A., Bakare, A.A., & Morenikeji, O.A. (2007). Genetically Modified Foods in Nigeria: a long-lasting solution to hunger? Estud. Biol. 29(67), 191-202.
  17. Oluwaseun EO., Raimi MO, Nimisingha DS, Abdulraheem AF, Okolosi-PE, Habeeb Modupe Lateefat and Mary Fadeyibi (2019) Assessment of Environmental Sanitation, Food Safety Knowledge, Handling Practice among Food Handlers of Bukateria Complexes in Iju Town, Akure North of Ondo-State, Nigeria. Acta Scientific Nutritional Health 3.6 (2019): 186-200. [CrossRef]
  18. Adiama, YB., Sawyerr, OH., Olaniyi, OA., Fregene, AF., Alabede, M., & Raimi, MO. (2022). Assessment of Microbiological Quality of Ready to Eat Food Served in Ships Along Warri, Koko and Port Harcourt Water Ways, Nigeria. Online Journal of Microbiological Research, 1(1), 1–7. Retrieved from https://www.scipublications.com/journal/index.php/ojmr/article/view/230.
  19. Lateefat HM, Faith A, Yusuf AB and Raimi OM (2022) Food for the Stomach Nourishing our Future: Assessment of Potassium Bromate in Local and Packaged Bread Sold in Ilorin Metropolis. Public H Open Acc, 6(1):. Medwin Publishers ISSN: 2578-5001. [CrossRef]
  20. Raheem WB, Fadina OO, Idowu OO, Raimi MO, Austin-Asomeji I (2023) The Application of Biomaterials in Ecological Remediation of Land Pollution: Bioremediation of Heavy Metals in Cement Contaminated Soil Using White-Rot Fungus Pleurotus sajor-caju, 11 January 2023, PREPRINT (Version 1) available at Research Square. [CrossRef]
  21. Modupe Abeke Oshatunberu, Adebayo Oladimeji, Sawyerr Olawale Henry, Opasola Afolabi Olaniyan, Morufu Olalekan Raimi (2022) Moving from Total Concentrations to Measures of Harm in Grain Sold at Selected Markets of Southwest Nigeria. medRxiv 2022.12.18.22283634; https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.12.18.22283634.
  22. Odubo Tonye V; Obafemi Andrew A. & Emenike Gladys C (2019) Analysis of Women’s Participation in Agriculture in Selected States in Niger Delta, Nigeria. International Journal of Innovative Social Sciences & Humanities Research 7(2):51-61, April-June, 2019.
  23. Odubo et al. (2019), " Participation of Rural Women in Agriculture in Selected States in Niger Delta, Nigeria", International Journal of Research in Environmental Science (IJRES), vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 16-22, 2019. [CrossRef]
  24. Odubo, T.V (2019)’’ Analysis of the Role and Participation of Rural Ijaw Women in Agriculture in Niger Delta, Nigeria.’’ PhD Thesis, Department of Geography and Environmental Management University of Port Harcourt, Rivers State, Nigeria. Pg. 159.
  25. Odubo T.R & Anele K.A (2019) ‘‘Artisanal Crude Oil Refining and Livelihood Adaptive Strategies in theNiger Delta Region.’’ International Journal of Innovative Human Ecology & Nature Studies 7(4):20-30,Oct.-Dec 2019.
  26. Qaim, M. (2009). The economics of genetically modified crops. Ann. Rev. Resource Economics, 1, 665-694. [CrossRef]
  27. James, C. (2006). Global Status of commercialized Biotech/GM Crops ISAAA Brief 35-2006. Retrieved from https://www.isaaa.org/resources/publications.
  28. Iloh, AC., Onyenekwe, PC., & Ojo, OO. (2018). Detection of genetically modified DNA in processed maize and soybean products in Nigeria. African Journal of Biotechnology, 17(35), 1090-1098. [CrossRef]
  29. Pandey, A., Kamle, M., Yadava, L. P., Muthukuma, M., & Kumar, P. (2010). Genetically modified food: its uses, future prospects ad safety assessment. Biotechnology, 9, 444-458.
  30. Chen, MF., & Li, HL. (2007). The consumers’ attitude toward genetically modified foods in Taiwan. Food Quality and Preference, 18, 662-674. [CrossRef]
  31. Morufu OR, Tonye VO, Ogah A, Henry AE, Abinotami WE (2021) Articulating the effect of Pesticides Use and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): The Science of Improving Lives through Decision Impacts. Research on World Agricultural Economy. Vol 2, No. 1. [CrossRef]
  32. Boldura, OM., & Popescu, S. (2016). PCR: A Powerful Method in Food Safety Field. In A. Samadikuchaksaraei (Ed.), Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology "Polymerase Chain Reaction for Biomedical Applications" (pp. 135-158). Intech Publishers, USA. [CrossRef]
  33. Sateesh, MK. (2008). Use of genetically modified organisms and their release in the environment. In S. M. K. Sateesh (Ed.), Bioethics and Biosafety. (pp. 217-242). New Delhi: I.K. International Pvt. Ltd.
  34. Morufu OR (2021). “Self-reported Symptoms on Farmers Health and Commonly Used Pesticides Related to Exposure in Kura, Kano State, Nigeria”. Annals of Community Medicine & Public Health. 1(1): 1002. http://www.remedypublications.com/open-access/self-reported-symptoms-on-farmers-health-and-commonly-used-pesticides-related-6595.pdf. http://www.remedypublications.com/annals-of-community-medicine-public-health-home.php.
  35. Hussain MI, Morufu OR, Henry OS (2021) Patterns of Chemical Pesticide Use and Determinants of Self-Reported Symptoms on Farmers Health: A Case Study in Kano State for Kura Local Government Area of Nigeria. Research on World Agricultural Economy. Vol 2, No. 1. http://ojs.nassg.org/index.php/rwae/issue/view/31. [CrossRef]
  36. Hussain MI, Morufu OR, Henry OS (2021) Probabilistic Assessment of Self-Reported Symptoms on Farmers Health: A Case Study in Kano State for Kura Local Government Area of Nigeria. Research on World Agricultural Economy. Vol 2, No. 1. http://ojs.nassg.org/index.php/rwae-cn/article/view/336/pdf. [CrossRef]
  37. Olalekan MR, Abiola I, Ogah A, Dodeye EO (2021) Exploring How Human Activities Disturb the Balance of Biogeochemical Cycles: Evidence from the Carbon, Nitrogen and Hydrologic Cycles. Research on World Agricultural Economy. Volume 02, Issue 03. http://ojs.nassg.org/index.php/rwae. [CrossRef]
  38. Hussain MI, Morufu OR, Henry OS (2021). Probabilistic Assessment of Self-Reported Symptoms on Farmers Health: A Case Study in Kano State for Kura Local Government Area of Nigeria. Environmental Analysis & Ecology Studies 9(1). EAES. 000701. 2021. Pp. 975- 985. ISSN: 2578-0336. [CrossRef]
  39. Oshatunberu, MA., Oladimeji, A., Sawyerr, OH., & Raimi, MO. (2023). Searching for What You Can’t See - Evaluation of Pesticide Residues in Grain Sold at Selected Markets of Southwest Nigeria. Current Research in Public Health, 3(1), 10–36. Retrieved from https://www.scipublications.com/journal/index.php/crph/article/view/566. [CrossRef]
  40. Modupe Abeke Oshatunberu, Adebayo Oladimeji, Sawyerr Olawale Henry, Opasola Afolabi Olaniyan, Morufu Olalekan Raimi (2023) Concentrations of Pesticides Residues in Grain Sold at Selected Markets of Southwest Nigeria. Natural Resources for Human Health. 1-15 eISSN: 2583-1194. [CrossRef]
  41. Morufu OR, Aziba-anyam GR, Teddy CA (2021). Evidence-based Environmental and Public Health Practices to Respond to the COVID-19 Crisis, 07 May 2021, PREPRINT (Version 1) available at Research Square. https://europepmc.org/article/PPRID/PPR335534; EMSID:EMS123969. [CrossRef]
  42. Lateefat MH, Opasola AO, Misbahu G, Morufu OR (2022) A Wake-Up Call: Determination of Antibiotics Residue Level in Raw Meat in Abattoir and Selected Slaughterhouses in Five Local Government in Kano State, Nigeria. bioRxiv 2022.01.04.474991; Link: https://en.x-mol.com/paper/article/1479559526563860480. [CrossRef]
  43. Lateefat MH, Opasola AO, Adiama BY, Ibrahim A, Morufu OR (2022) Elixirs of Life, threats to Human and Environmental Well-being: Assessment of Antibiotic Residues in Raw Meat Sold Within Central Market Kaduna Metropolis, Kaduna State, Nigeria.
  44. Modupe AO, Adebayo O, Sawyerr OH, Morufu OR (2022) Searching for What You Can’t See - Evaluation of Pesticide Residues in Grain Sold at Selected Markets of Southwest Nigeria.medRxiv 2022.12.09.22283068. [CrossRef]
  45. Fubara GE, Ukoima HN, Dokuboba A, Morufu OR (2024). Evaluating Bioremediation Strategies on Microbial Diversity in Crude Oil-Contaminated Soil Over Three to Six Months in Port Harcourt, Nigeria., 14 May 2024, PREPRINT (Version 1) available at Research Square. [CrossRef]
  46. Fubara GE, Dokuboba A, Ilemi JS, Esther OA, Diagha ON, Akayinaboderi AE, Enyinnaya O, Igoniama EG, Ayibatonyo MN, Morufu OR (2024). The Niger Delta is Under a Pollution Warning: Hydrocarbon profiles in crude oil polluted soil remediated with Pleurotus ostreatus and Eisenia fitida. bioRxiv 2024.06.04.597352. [CrossRef]
  47. Morufu OR, Aziba-anyam GR and Teddy CA (2021) ‘Silent Pandemic’: Evidence-Based Environmental and Public Health Practices to Respond to the Covid-19 Crisis. IntechOpen. ISBN 978-1-83969-144-7. https://www.intechopen.com/online-first/silent-pandemic-evidence-based-environmental-and-public-health-practices-to-respond-to-the-covid-19-Published: December 1st 2021; ISBN: 978-1-83969-144-7; Print ISBN: 978-1-83969-143-0; eBook (PDF) ISBN: 978-1-83969-145-4. Copyright year: 2021. [CrossRef]
  48. Raimi MO, Abiola I, Ogah A, Dodeye EO and Aziba-anyam GR (2021) Exploring How Human Activities Disturb the Balance of Biogeochemical Cycles: Evidence from the Carbon, Nitrogen and Hydrologic Cycles. IntechOpen. https://www.intechopen.com/online-first/77696. ISBN 978-1-83969-144-7. Published: December 1st 2021; ISBN: 978-1-83969-144-7; Print ISBN: 978-1-83969-143-0; eBook (PDF) ISBN: 978-1-83969-145-4. Copyright year: 2021. [CrossRef]
  49. Deinkuro NS, Charles WK, Raimi MO, Nimlang HN (2021) Oil Spills in the Niger Delta Region, Nigeria: Environmental Fate of Toxic Volatile Organics. 28 June 2021, PREPRINT (Version 1) available at Research Square. [CrossRef]
  50. Glory R, Sylvester CI, Morufu OR and AustinAsomeji I (2023) Public and environmental health implications of artisanal petroleum refining and risk reduction strategies in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria. Journal of Biological Research & Biotechnology. Vol. 21 No.1; pp. 1836-1851. ISSN (print):1596-7409; eISSN (online):2705-3822. http://www.bioresearch.com.ng. Publisher: Faculty of Biological Sciences, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria. [CrossRef]
  51. Asiegbu OV, Ezekwe IC, Raimi MO (2022). Assessing pesticides residue in water and fish and its health implications in the Ivo River basin of South-eastern Nigeria. MOJ Public Health. 2022;11(4):136‒142. [CrossRef]
  52. Clinton-Ezekwe IC, Osu IC, Ezekwe IC, Raimi MO (2022). Slow death from pollution: potential health hazards from air quality in the mgbede oil fields of south-south Nigeria. Open Access J Sci. 2022;5(1):61‒69. [CrossRef]
  53. Olalekan MR, Albert O, Iyingiala AA, Sanchez DN, Telu M (2022) An environmental/scientific report into the crude oil spillage incidence in Tein community, Biseni, Bayelsa state Nigeria. J Environ Chem Toxicol. 2022;6(4):01-06. [CrossRef]
  54. Deinkuro NS, Charles WK, Raimi MO, Nimlang HN (2021) Environmental Fate of Toxic Volatile Organics from Oil Spills in the Niger Delta Region, Nigeria. International Journal of Environment, Engineering and Education, 3(3), pp.89-101. [CrossRef]
  55. Raimi MO & Raimi AG (2020). The Toughest Triage in Decision Impacts: Rethinking Scientific Evidence for Environmental and Human Health Action in the Times of Concomitant Global Crises. CPQ Medicine, 11(1), 01-05.
  56. Raimi MO, Moses T, Okoyen E, Sawyerr HO, Joseph BO, Oyinlola BO (2020) “A Beacon for Dark Times: Rethinking Scientific Evidence for Environmental and Public Health Action in the Coronavirus Diseases 2019 Era” Medical and Research Microbiology, Vol. 1, Issues 3.
  57. Olalekan RM, Muhammad IH, Okoronkwo UL, Akopjubaro EH (2020). Assessment of safety practices and farmer’s behaviors adopted when handling pesticides in rural Kano state, Nigeria. Arts & Humanities Open Access Journal. 2020;4(5):191‒201. [CrossRef]
  58. Isah HM, Raimi MO, Sawyerr HO, Odipe OE, Bashir BG, Suleiman H (2020) Qualitative Adverse Health Experience Associated with Pesticides Usage among Farmers from Kura, Kano State, Nigeria. Merit Research Journal of Medicine and Medical Sciences (ISSN: 2354-323X) Vol. 8(8) pp. 432-447, August, 2020. https://meritresearchjournals.org/mms/content/2020/August/Isah%20et%20al.htm. [CrossRef]
  59. Raimi MO, Ihuoma BA, Esther OU, Abdulraheem AF, Opufou T, Deinkuro NS, Adebayo PA and Adeniji AO (2020) “Health Impact Assessment: Expanding Public Policy Tools for Promoting Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in Nigeria”. EC Emergency Medicine and Critical Care 4.9 (2020).
  60. Adedoyin OO, Olalekan RM, Olawale SH, et al (2020). A review of environmental, social and health impact assessment (Eshia) practice in Nigeria: a panacea for sustainable development and decision making. MOJ Public Health. 2020;9(3):81‒87. https://medcraveonline.com/MOJPH/MOJPH-09-00328.pdf. [CrossRef]
  61. Olalekan RM, Oluwatoyin OA, Olawale SH, Emmanuel OO, Olalekan AZ (2020) A Critical Review of Health Impact Assessment: Towards Strengthening the Knowledge of Decision Makers Understand Sustainable Development Goals in the Twenty-First Century: Necessity Today; Essentiality Tomorrow. Research and Advances: Environmental Sciences. 2020(1): 72-84. https://ospopac.com/journal/environmental-sciences/early-online. [CrossRef]
  62. Olalekan R.M, Dodeye E.O, Efegbere H.A, Odipe O.E. Deinkuro N.S, Babatunde A and Ochayi E.O (2020) Leaving No One Behind? Drinking-Water Challenge on the Rise in Niger Delta Region of Nigeria: A Review. Merit Research Journal of Environmental Science and Toxicology (ISSN: 2350-2266) Vol. 6(1): 031-049. [CrossRef]
  63. Olalekan RM, Oluwatoyin O and Olalekan A (2020) Health Impact Assessment: A tool to Advance the Knowledge of Policy Makers Understand Sustainable Development Goals: A Review. ES Journal of Public Health; 1(1); 1002. https://escientificlibrary.com/public-health/in-press.php.
  64. Suleiman RM, Raimi MO and Sawyerr HO (2019) A Deep Dive into the Review of National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (NESREA) Act. International Research Journal of Applied Sciences. pISSN: 2663-5577, eISSN: 2663-5585. DOI No. Irjas.2019.123.123. www.scirange.com. https://scirange.com/abstract/irjas.2019.108.125.
  65. Raimi MO, and Sabinus CE. (2017) Influence of Organic Amendment on Microbial Activities and Growth of Pepper Cultured on Crude Oil Contaminated Niger Delta Soil. International Journal of Economy, Energy and Environment. Vol. 2, No. 4, 2017, pp. 56-76. [CrossRef]
  66. Raimi MO, Sawyerr HO and Isah HM (2020) Health risk exposure to cypermethrin: A case study of kano state, Nigeria. Journal of Agriculture. 7th International Conference on Public Healthcare and Epidemiology. September 14-15, 2020 | Tokyo, Japan.
  67. Omidiji AO and Raimi MO (2019) Practitioners Perspective of Environmental, Social and Health Impact Assessment (ESHIA) Practice in Nigeria: A Vital Instrument for Sustainable Development. Paper Presented at the Association for Environmental Impact Assessment of Nigeria (AEIAN) On Impact Assessment: A Tool for Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals in Nigeria, 7th and 8th November, 2019 In University of Port Harcourt. https://aeian.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/EIA-Presentations-Portharcourt.pdf.
  68. Raimi MO, Omidiji AO, Adio ZO (2019) Health Impact Assessment: A Tool to Advance the Knowledge of Policy Makers Understand Sustainable Development Goals. Conference paper presented at the: Association for Environmental Impact Assessment of Nigeria (AEIAN) On Impact Assessment: A Tool for Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals in Nigeria, 7th and 8th November, 2019 in University of Port Harcourt. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35999.51366.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337146101.
  69. European Commission (EC). (2015). Fact sheet: Questions and answers on EU’s policies on GMOs. Available at http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-15-4778_en.htm.
  70. Okpara, CN., Elijah, AI., Adamu, LOG., & Uzochukwu, SVA. (2016). Screening for genetically modified maize in raw and processed foods sold commercially in Southern Nigeria Border States. Applied Food Biotechnology, 3, 50-158.
  71. Sönmezoğlu, OA., & Keskin, H (2015). Determination of genetically modified corn and soy in processed food products. Journal of Applied Biology and Biotechnology, 3, 32-37. [CrossRef]
  72. Al-Khayri, JM., & Hassan, MI. (2012). Socio-demographic Factors influencing Public Perception of GM foods in Saudi Arabia. American Journal of Food Technology, 7(3), 101-112. [CrossRef]
  73. Doering, C. (2005). Americans split overbuying cloned meats. Poll (Reuters). Retrieved from http://forums.seochat.com/Science-news-71/Americans-split-overbuying-cloned-meats/57478.html.
  74. Pew Research Center. (2016). The New Food Fights: U.S. Public Divides Over Food Science, 100pp.
  75. Al-jebreen, DH. (2010). Perception and attitude of Riyadh University Students towards products derived from Genetically modified Crops in Saudi Arabia. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences, 13(1), 28-33. [CrossRef]
  76. Akinola, AA. (2017). Influence of socio-economic factors on farmers’ use of mobile phones for agricultural information in Nigeria. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/.
  77. Ali, A., Rahut, D.B., & Imtiaz, M. (2016). Acceptability of GM foods among Pakistani consumers. GM Crops & Food, 7(2), 117-124. [CrossRef]
  78. Pachico, D., & Wolf, M. (2002, July). Attitudes toward genetically modified food in Colombia. Paper presented at the 6th International ICABR Conference, Ravello, Italy.
  79. Matthew, R., & Huffman, W. E. (2001). GM Food and its trading partners. Staff Paper No.344, Iowa State University, Department of Economics. Retrieved from http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/18245/I/isu344.pdf.
  80. Onyango, B. (2004). Consumer acceptance of Genetically modified foods: Role of product benefits and perceived risk. Journal of Food Distribution Resources, 35, 154-161.
  81. Baker, GA., & Burnham, TA. (2001). Consumer response to genetically modified foods: Market segment analysis and implications for producers and policy makers. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 26(2), 1-17.
  82. Gaskell, G., Allum, N., Bauer, MW., Durant, J., Allansdottir, A., Bonfadelli, H., ... & de Cheveigné, S. (2004). GM foods and the misperception of risk perception. Risk Analysis, 24(1), 185-194. [CrossRef]
  83. Lusk, JL, Roosen, J., & Fox, JA. (2003). Demand for beef from contaminated growth hormones or fed genetically modified corn: A comparison of consumers in France, Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States. American Journal of Agriculture, 81, 16-21.
  84. Ganiere, PW., Chen, DH., & Chiang, F. (2004). Consumers attitudes towards genetically modified foods in emerging markets: The impact of labeling in Taiwan. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, 7, 1-3. [CrossRef]
  85. Koleayo OO, Morufu OR, Temitope OW, Oluwaseun EO, Amos LO (2021) Public Health Knowledge and Perception of Microplastics Pollution: Lessons from the Lagos Lagoon, 10 May 2021, PREPRINT (Version 1) available at Research Square. [CrossRef]
  86. Omoyajowo K., Raimi M., Waleola T., Odipe O., Ogunyebi A (2022) Public Awareness, Knowledge, Attitude and Perception on Microplastic Pollution around Lagos Lagoon. Ecological Safety and Balanced use of Resources, 2(24), 35-46. [CrossRef]
  87. Omoyajowo, KO; Raimi, MO; Omoyajowo, KA; Makengo, MB; Adegboyo, S; Innocent, DC; Oni, S; Oguntuyi, J; Oyediran, A; Ogunyebi, A; Kakwi, D (2024). Towards a Reduced Pollution Society: Systematic Review on the Role of Storytelling, Social Media, Humor and Celebrities’Influence for Research Communication. J. Appl. Sci. Environ. Manage. 28 (2) 603-623. [CrossRef]
  88. Abdelal, R., Herrera, YM., Johnston, AI., & McDermott, R (2009). Measuring identity: A guide for social scientists (pp. 1–16). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  89. Omoyajowo, K., Agbaogun, B., Ogunyebi, A., Kanaan, M., Omoyajowo, B., Makengo, B. M., Alayemi, A., Omoyajowo, K., & Alao, R. (2024b). Is bisphenol A (BPA) a public health concern? A cross-sectional study of public knowledge, attitude and risk perception in southwestern part of Nigeria. FUDMA Journal of Sciences, 8(2), 364-372. [CrossRef]
  90. Omoyajowo, K., Raimi, M., Waleola, T., Odipe, O., & Ogunyebi, A. (2021). Public Awareness, Knowledge, Attitude, and Perception on Microplastics pollution around Lagos Lagoon. Ecology Safety and Balanced Use of Resources, 2(24), 35-46.
  91. Omoyajowo, K., Danjin, M., Omoyajowo, K., Odipe, O., Mwadi, B., May, A., ... Alao, R. (2023). Exploring the interplay of environmental conservation within spirituality and multicultural perspective: insights from a cross-sectional study. Environ Dev Sustain, (2(24)), 35–46. [CrossRef]
  92. Omoyajowo, KO., Adewunmi, MA., Omoyajowo, KA., Ogunyebi, AL., Njoku, KL., Makengo, B. M., ... Ojo-Emmanuel, G. (2024a). Transitioning to a Сlimate-Resilient Society: Empirical Evidence on What Drives the Adoption of Green Computing Policies in Nigerian Organizations. Trends in Ecological and Indoor Environmental Engineering, 2(1), 28-34. [CrossRef]
  93. Huang, J., Qiu, H., Bai, J., & Pray, C. (2006). Awareness, acceptance of and willingness to buy genetically modified foods in Urban China. Appetite, 46(2), 144-151. [CrossRef]
  94. Hartman Group. (2018). Organic & Natural 2018. Retrieved from https://www.hartman-group.com/reports/45201607/organic-natural-2018 02/11/2022.
  95. Pattron, D. (2005). A survey of GM foods consumed health implications and recommendations for public health food safety in Trinidad. International Journal of food safety, 7, 4-14.
  96. Ali, A., & Rahut, DB. (2018). Farmer’s willingness to grow GM food and cash crops: empirical evidence from Pakistan. GM crops & food, 9(4), 199–210. [CrossRef]
  97. Alliance For Science. (AFS) (2018). 10 Myths about GMOs. Retrieved from https://allianceforscience.cornell.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/mythsFINAL.pdf.
  98. Pew Research Center. (2016). The New Food Fights: U.S. Public Divides Over Food Science, 100pp.
  99. Omobowale, EB., Singer, PA., & Daar, AS. (2009). The three main monotheistic religions and GM food technology: an overview of perspectives. BMC international health and human rights, 9, 18. [CrossRef]
  100. Mittal, S., & Mehar, M. (2013). Socio-Economic Impact of the Mobile Phone based Agricultural Extension. Mobile Phones for Agricultural Extension.
  101. Efiok, JN, Oluseye, O, Uduak, T and Olalekan, R (2015) Safety Culture, Policies and Practices in Nigeria Maritime Industry: The Exxon – Mobil Experience. Open Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 5, 69-76. [CrossRef]
  102. Raimi MO & Odubo TR (2022) Dutch Diseases and Resources Curse: Key Regulatory Challenges and Opportunities Associated with Extractive Industries in Nigeria. 8th National Conference on Political Stability, Security and Economic Development. Merit House, Abuja-Nigeria. 21st - 22nd July 2022.
  103. Sawyerr O. H, Odipe O. E, Olalekan R. M, et al. (2018) Assessment of cyanide and some heavy metals concentration in consumable cassava flour “lafun” across Osogbo metropolis, Nigeria. MOJ Eco Environ Sci. 2018;3(6):369‒372.
  104. Raimi Morufu Olalekan, Ochayi Ekoja Owobi, Babatunde Anu, Okolosi-Patani Innocent Edewor, Oluwaseun Emmanuel Odipe, Adio Zulkarnaini Olalekan and Bilewu Olaolu Oyinlola (2019) “Environmental Ethics Relevance to Public Health: Current Narratives and Implications for Policy”. EC Emergency Medicine and Critical Care 3.12:01-09.
  105. Olalekan RM, Olawale SH, Christian A, Simeon AO (2020). Practitioners Perspective of Ethical Cases and Policy Responses by Professional Regulator: The Case of Environmental Health Officers Registration Council of Nigeria (EHORECON). American Journal of Epidemiology & Public Health. 2020;4(1): 016-023. https://www.scireslit.com/PublicHealth/AJEPH-ID23.pdf. https://www.scireslit.com/PublicHealth/articles.php?volume=4&issue=1.
  106. Olalekan RM (2020). “What we learn today is how we behave tomorrow”: a study on satisfaction level and implementation of environmental health ethics in Nigeria institutions. Open Access Journal of Science; 4(3):82‒92. [CrossRef]
  107. Morufu OR, Ebikapaye O, Tuebi M, Aziba-anyam GR, Adedoyin OO, Aishat FA, Mariam OR, Beatrice OJ (2021) Do Weak Institutions Prolong Crises? [#ENDSARs] in the Light of the Challenges and opportunities beyond COVID-19 Pandemic and the Next Normal in Nigeria. Communication, Society and Media. ISSN 2576-5388 (Print) ISSN 2576-5396 (Online) Vol. 4, No. 2. http://www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm/article/view/3790. [CrossRef]
  108. Morufu OR, Tonye VO & Adedoyin OO (2021) Creating the Healthiest Nation: Climate Change and Environmental Health Impacts in Nigeria: A Narrative Review. Scholink Sustainability in Environment. ISSN 2470-637X (Print) ISSN 2470-6388 (Online) Vol. 6, No. 1, 2021 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/se. URL: http://www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/se/article/view/3684. [CrossRef]
  109. Raimi, MO., Mcfubara, KG., Abisoye, OS., Ifeanyichukwu EC., Henry SO., & Raimi, GA (2021) Responding to the call through Translating Science into Impact: Building an Evidence-Based Approaches to Effectively Curb Public Health Emergencies [COVID-19 Crisis]. Global Journal of Epidemiology and Infectious Disease, 1(1). Retrieved from https://www.scipublications.com/journal/index.php/gjeid/article/view/72. [CrossRef]
  110. Habeeb ML, Opasola AO, Garba M, Olalekan MR. (2022). A Wake-Up Call: Determination of Antibiotics Residue Level in Raw Meat in Abattoir and Selected Slaughterhouses in Five Local Government in Kano State, Nigeria. J Vet Heal Sci, 3(1), 54-61. [CrossRef]
  111. Erezina, AE., Gift, RA.- anyam, Odipe, OE., Raimi, MO., Abaya, ST., & Kakwi, DJ. (2023). Level of Professional Awareness among Health Record Officers in Bayelsa State and Their Implications for Patient Care, Health Systems, and Health Policy. American Journal of Physical Education and Health Science, 1(1), 19–30. Retrieved from https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajpehs/article/view/1582. [CrossRef]
  112. Samuel TA, Chris O, Aziba-anyam GR, Morufu OR, & Daniel JK (2023) Implementation Assessment of Electronic Records Management System in Bayelsa State, Nigeria. Communication, Society and Media. ISSN 2576-5388 (Print) ISSN 2576-5396 (Online) Vol. 6, No. 3, 2023. URL: www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm. [CrossRef]
  113. Abaya, ST., Enuma, EU., Chukwueze, BC., Raimi, AG., Kakwi, DJ., & Raimi, MO. (2023). Prevalence, Determinants and Benefits of Use of Internet for Health-Related Information among Adults in Abuja, Nigeria. AfricArXiv. [CrossRef]
  114. Abaya, ST; Orga, C; Raimi, AG; Raimi, MO; Kakwi, DJ (2023): Assessment of the Implementation of Electronic Records Management System in Bayelsa State. Lippincott® Preprints. Preprint. [CrossRef]
  115. Erezina, AE; Raimi, AG; Emmanuel, OO; Raimi, MO; Abaya, ST; Kakwi, DJ (2023): Level of Professional Awareness among Health Record Officers in Bayelsa State and their Implications for Patient Care, Health Systems, and Health Policy. Lippincott® Preprints. Preprint. [CrossRef]
  116. Mordecai O, Uchenna GE, Emma A, Elemuwa TD; Gabriel JO; Egberipou TE; Elizabeth O; Christopher OE; Morufu OR; Anuoluwapo B (2024). Analyzing Nigeria’s Journey Towards Sustainable Development Goals: A Comprehensive Review from Inception to Present. Qeios. [CrossRef]
  117. Li, Q., Curtis, KR., McCluskey, JJ., & Wahl, TI. (2002). Consumer attitudes toward genetically modified foods in Beijing, China. AgBioForum, 5(4), 145-152.
  118. Ebuete AW, Raimi MO, Ebuete IY & Oshatunberu M (2019) Renewable Energy Sources for the Present and Future: An Alternative Power Supply for Nigeria. Energy and Earth Science. Vol. 2, No. 2, 2019. URL: http://www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ees/article/view/2124. [CrossRef]
Preprints 110817 g001
Figure 1. showing study Location.
Figure 1. showing study Location.
Preprints 110817 g001
Preprints 110817 g002
Figure 2. Respondents’ Demographic data (Age, Gender, Marital Status).
Figure 2. Respondents’ Demographic data (Age, Gender, Marital Status).
Preprints 110817 g002
Preprints 110817 g003
Figure 3. Respondents’ Demographic data (Education, Religion and Job Sector).
Figure 3. Respondents’ Demographic data (Education, Religion and Job Sector).
Preprints 110817 g003
Preprints 110817 g004
Figure 4. Level of Awareness on GM foods (n=369).
Figure 4. Level of Awareness on GM foods (n=369).
Preprints 110817 g004
Preprints 110817 g005
Figure 5. Source of Information on GM foods Awareness. Source: Field Survey 2019.
Figure 5. Source of Information on GM foods Awareness. Source: Field Survey 2019.
Preprints 110817 g005
Preprints 110817 g006
Figure 6. How often do Respondents buy or eat GM Foods.
Figure 6. How often do Respondents buy or eat GM Foods.
Preprints 110817 g006
Table 1. Perception on the level of Public Acceptance of GM Foods.
Table 1. Perception on the level of Public Acceptance of GM Foods.
Strongly Disagree
(SD)		 Disagree
(D)		 Somewhat Disagree (SWD)
 Undecided
(U)		 Somewhat Agree (SWA)
 Agree
(A)		 Strongly Agree (SA)
I think my community lacks awareness of the nutritional and health benefits of consuming GM food products. 18
4.9%		 19
5.1%		 62
16.8%		 100
27.1%
 60
16.3%
 39
10.6%
 71
19.2%
I think GM seeds are not available to farmers to use 20
5.4%		 6
1.6%		 59
16.0%		 130
35.2%		 19
5.1%		 59
16.0%		 76
20.6%
I think GM seeds are not user-friendly or easily reproducible 48
13.0%		 47
12.7%		 60
16.3%		 143
38.8%		 26
7.0%		 24
6.5%		 21
5.7%
Producing GM foods requires some sort of special education and training. 33
8.9%		 17
4.6%
 47
12.7%		 108
29.3%		 31
8.4%
 18
4.9%
 155
31.2%
GM production can lead to the loss of local food sources or cultivars 37
10.0%		 53
14.4%		 48
13.0%		 108
29.3%		 55
14.9%		 26
7.0%		 42
11.4%
I doubt if the government supports GM foods 50
13.6%		 57
15.4%		 36
9.8%		 104
28.2%		 70
19.0%		 24
6.5%		 28
7.6%
No existing policies to sustain the adoption and patronage of GM foods 18
4.9%		 23
6.2%		 38
10.3%		 151
40.9%		 74
20.1%		 24
6.5%		 41
11.1%
GM foods are very expensive and can only be purchased by wealthy people 40
10.8%		 37
10.0%		 40
10.8%		 153
41.5%		 32
8.7%		 31
8.4%		 36
9.8%
I have a reserved taste for organic foods compared to GM foods 61
16.5%		 42
11.4%		 41
11.1%		 126
34.1%		 12
3.3%		 19
5.1%		 68
18.4%
The production and consumption of GM foods is against my belief 151
40.9%		 38
10.3%		 27
7.3%		 86
23.3%		 53
14.4%		 9
2.4%		 5
1.4%
GM foods are not real “They are not what they claimed to be” 106
28.7%		 45
12.2%		 33
8.9%		 132
35.8%		 15
4.1%		 13
3.5%		 25
6.8%
I am afraid of the potential health havoc that the consumption of GM foods may cause in the future 49
13.3%		 73
19.8%
 56
15.2%
 82
22.2%
 15
4.1%
 30
8.1%
 64
17.3%
Consuming GM foods may reduce my life expectancy 107
29.0%		 12
3.3%		 47
12.7%		 121
32.8%		 20
5.4%		 27
7.3%		 35
9.5%
(Calculated Agreement % = %SWA+%A+%SA, Disagreement% = %SD+%D+%SWD). Source: Field Survey 2019.
Table 2. Public Perception and Knowledge on the Environmental Benefits of GM Food Production System.
Table 2. Public Perception and Knowledge on the Environmental Benefits of GM Food Production System.
Variables/Statements Yes NO Undecided
Production of biotech plants (GM plants) could help save space, water, energy inputs and other resources 210 (56.9%)
118 (32.0%)
41 (11.2%)
Willingness to be involved in the production of GM foods 221 (59.9%) 114 (30.9%)
34 (9.2%)
I think farmers and other stakeholders involved the national food production system will benefit from the economic gains of GM foods 279 (75.6%)
55 (14.9%)
35 (9.5%)
Biotech (GM) food production could sustainably help reduce the use of chemical pesticides, fertilisers, and other energy inputs as well as their impacts 228 (61.8%)
117 (31.7%) 24 (6.50%)
Source: Field Survey 2019.
Table 3. Correlation Matrix between Socio-demographic information, Awareness, and Perception.
Table 3. Correlation Matrix between Socio-demographic information, Awareness, and Perception.
Age (1) Gender
(2)		 Marital Status
(3)		 Religion
(4)		 Education
(5)		 Awareness on GM Foods
(6)		 Perception
(7)
1 1 .149** .594** -.044 -.463** .054 .238**
.004 .000 .400 .000 .298 .000
2 1 .393** -.194** -.313** .081 .137**
.000 .000 .000 .122 .009
3 1 .076 -.308** .164** .320**
.144 .000 .002 .000
4 1 -.044 .057 .147**
.403 .277 .005
5 1 .216** -.275**
.000 .000
6 1 -.007
.898
7 1
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Table 4. Cross Tabulation between Respondents’ level of awareness and Socio-Demographic information.
Table 4. Cross Tabulation between Respondents’ level of awareness and Socio-Demographic information.
Variables Respondents’ Level of Awareness on GM Foods
Categories Yes No Not Sure Total
1. Age 18-25 47a 41b 0a 88
26-35 140a 57a, b 5b 202
36-45 35a 16a 14b 65
46-55 10a 4a 0a 14
Total 232 118 19 369
2. Gender Male 84a 47a 0b 131
Female 148a 71a 19b 238
Total 232 118 19 369
3. Religion Christianity 217a 101b 19a, b 337
Islam 15a 17b 0a, b 32
Total 232 118 19 369
4. Education Master’s Degree 82a 7b 5a 94
Bachelors or Eq. 134a 82a 14a 230
OND/NCE 0a 11b 0a, b 11
High School 16a 18b 0a, b 34
Total 232 118 19 369
5. Marital Status Single 124a 60a 0b 184
Married 108a 58a 19b 185
Total 232 118 19 369
OND/NCE=National Diploma/Certificate, Eq. =Equivalent, each subscript letter denotes a subset of Respondents’ Awareness on GM Foods categories whose column proportions do not differ significantly from each other at the 0.05 level. Results of Z-test, column proportions were compared, and P-values were adjusted (by Bonferroni Method). Yes – awareness, No– Lack of Awareness, Not Sure–Indecision. (Source: Field Survey 2019).
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
Prerpints.org logo

Preprints.org is a free preprint server supported by MDPI in Basel, Switzerland.

facebook logotwitter logolinkedin logo
MDPI Initiatives
Important Links
Subscribe

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy

© 2024 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated