Unwriting food labels: discursive challenges in the regulation of package claims

This article examines the challenges resulting from the regulation of written discourse on food packages. It uses as a case study Hong Kong’s strict new food-labeling law that requires distributers and retailers to remove certain nutritional claims from packages of imported food before they sell them. This practice of redacting unlawful text on packages requires that distributers and retailers engage in complex processes of discursive reasoning, and it some- times results in packages that are difficult for customers to interpret. The case study highlights important issues in the regulation of commercial texts concerning collaboration, intertextuality, and the conflicts that can arise when the principals, authors, and animators of such texts have different agendas.

Consumer welfare effects of introducing and labeling genetically modified food

Non-hypothetical valuations obtained from experimental auctions in three United States and two European locations were used to calculate welfare effects of introducing and labeling of genetically modified food. Under certain assumptions, we find that introduction of genetically modified food has been welfare enhancing, on average, for United States consumers but not so for Europeans and while mandatory labeling has been beneficial for European consumers, such a policy would be detrimental in the United States. (c) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Updated empirical model of genetically-modified maize grain production practices to achieve European Union labeling thresholds

An updated empirical approach is proposed for specifying coexistence requirements for genetically modified (GM) maize (Zea mays L.) production to ensure compliance with the 0.9% labeling threshold for food and feed in the European Union. The model improves on a previously published (Gustafson et al., 2006) empirical model by adding recent data sources to supplement the original database and including the following additional cases: (i) more than one GM maize source field adjacent to the conventional or organic field, (ii) the possibility of so-called “stacked” varieties with more than one GM trait, and (iii) lower pollen shed in the non-GM receptor field. These additional factors lead to the possibility for somewhat wider combinations of isolation distance and border rows than required in the original version of the empirical model. For instance, in the very conservative case of a 1-ha square non-GM maize field surrounded on all four sides by homozygous GM maize with 12 m isolation (the effective isolation distance for a single GM field), non-GM border rows of 12 m are required to be 95% confident of gene flow less than 0.9% in the non-GM field (with adventitious presence of 0.3%). Stacked traits of higher GM mass fraction and receptor fields of lower pollen shed would require a greater number of border rows to comply with the 0.9% threshold, and an updated extension to the model is provided to quantify these effects.