iForest - Biogeosciences and Forestry


Exploring the potential behavior of consumers towards transgenic forest products: the Greek experience

Lambros Tsourgiannis (1)   , Vassiliki Kazana (2), Valasia Iakovoglou (2)

iForest - Biogeosciences and Forestry, Volume 8, Issue 5, Pages 707-713 (2015)
doi: https://doi.org/10.3832/ifor1339-007
Published: Jan 13, 2015 - Copyright © 2015 SISEF

Research Articles

Collection/Special Issue: COST Action FP0905
Biosafety of forest transgenic trees and EU policy directives
Guest Editors: Cristina Vettori, Matthias Fladung

Recently, the interest in wood products and bioenergy applications of transgenic forest trees is increasing worldwide, though plantations have been established to this purposes only in China. Information on the anticipated attitudes of consumers towards products from genetically-modified forest trees would therefore be of a particular interest both for developers and policy makers. This study investigated the purchasing behavior of potential Greek consumers towards the products from transgenic forest trees. In 2011, a survey was conducted based on randomly selected interviews of 418 potential consumers from all over Greece. Principal Components Analysis (PCA) was performed to identify the main factors affecting the potential purchasing behavior of consumers towards products from transgenic forest trees. Hierarchical and non- hierarchical cluster analysis was applied to PCA scores to identify homogeneous groups of consumers sharing a similar purchasing behavior. Discriminant analysis was used to cross-validate cluster membership of consumers based on PCA factors. Four groups of consumers showing similar potential purchasing behavior towards the products of transgenic forest trees were identified: (a) those interested in the quality of products; (b) those oriented towards lower prices; (c) those influenced by curiosity and labeling issues; and (d) consumers mainly interested in health safety issues and environmental impacts. Finally, a most frequent profile for each group of consumers was outlined according to their demographic characteristics and their opinions on the use of transgenic-tree derived products. Although it is unlikely that products from GM forest trees will be marketed in the next 10 to 15 years, information on the anticipated attitudes of consumers has to be taken into consideration by the developers and policy makers.


Consumer Purchasing Behavior, Transgenic Forest Products, Transgenic Forest Trees

Authors’ address

Lambros Tsourgiannis
Region of Eastern Macedonia & Thrace, 67100 Xanthi (Greece)
Vassiliki Kazana
Valasia Iakovoglou
Department of Forestry & Natural Environment Management, Eastern Macedonia & Thrace Institute of Technology, 66100 Drama (Greece)

Corresponding author

Lambros Tsourgiannis


Tsourgiannis L, Kazana V, Iakovoglou V (2015). Exploring the potential behavior of consumers towards transgenic forest products: the Greek experience. iForest 8: 707-713. - doi: 10.3832/ifor1339-007

Academic Editor

Cristina Vettori

Paper history

Received: May 05, 2014
Accepted: Sep 08, 2014

First online: Jan 13, 2015
Publication Date: Oct 01, 2015
Publication Time: 4.23 months

Breakdown by View Type

(Waiting for server response...)

Article Usage

Total Article Views: 22816
(from publication date up to now)

Breakdown by View Type
HTML Page Views: 17820
Abstract Page Views: 875
PDF Downloads: 2954
Citation/Reference Downloads: 12
XML Downloads: 1155

Web Metrics
Days since publication: 3443
Overall contacts: 22816
Avg. contacts per week: 46.39

Article Citations

Article citations are based on data periodically collected from the Clarivate Web of Science web site
(last update: Nov 2020)

Total number of cites (since 2015): 3
Average cites per year: 0.50


Publication Metrics

by Dimensions ©

Articles citing this article

List of the papers citing this article based on CrossRef Cited-by.

Aguilera J, Nielsen KM, Sweet J (2013)
Risk assessment of GM trees in the EU: current regulatory framework and guidance. iForest 6: 127-131.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Ajzen I (1991)
The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50: 179-211.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Ajzen I, Fishbein M (1980)
Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA. pp. 278.
Beckett A, Nayak A (2008)
The reflexive consumer. Marketing Theory 8 (3): 299-299.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Carman N, Langelle O, Perry A, Petermann A, Smith JD, Tokar B (2006)
Ecological and social impacts of fast growing timber plantations and genetically engineered trees. Dogwood Alliance, Ashville, NC, USA, pp. 12.
Online | Gscholar
Chen M (2007)
Consumers attitudes and purchase intentions in relation to organic foods in Taiwan: moderating effects of food-related personality traits. Food Quality and Preference 18: 1008-1021.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Cohen J (1988)
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd edn). Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, USA, pp. 273-406.
DuPuis EM (2000)
Not in my body: BGH and the rise of organic milk. Agriculture and Human Values 17 (3): 285-295.
CrossRef | Gscholar
ELSTAT (2014)
Greek national accounts. Hellenic Statistical Authority, Web site.
Online | Gscholar
FAO (2008)
The potential environmental, cultural and socio-economic impacts of genetically modified trees. UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/13/INF/6, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy, pp. 17.
FAO (2010)
Forests and genetically modified trees. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy, pp. 235.
Farnum P, Lucier A, Meilan R (2007)
Ecological and population genetics research initiatives for transgenic trees. Tree Genetics and Genomes 3: 119-133.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Faul F, Erdfelder E, Buchner A, Lang A (2009)
Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods 41 (4): 1149-1160.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Gartland K, Crow R, Fenning T, Gartland J (2003)
Genetically modified trees: production, properties, and potential. Journal of Arboriculture 29 (5): 259-266.
Online | Gscholar
Häggman H, Find JM, Pilate G, Gallardo F, Ruohonen-Lehto M, Kazana V, Migliacci F, Ionita L, Sijacic-Nikolic M, Donnarumma F, Harfouche A, Biricolti S, Glandorf B, Tsourgiannis L, Minol K, Paffetti D, Fladung M, Vettori C (2012)
Biosafety of genetically modified forest trees (GMTs). COST Action FP0905 - a common action of European scientists. In: Proceedings of the “2nd International Conference of the IUFRO Working Party 2.09.02”. Mendel lectures and Plenary MLP-3, IUFRO, Brno, Czech Republic, pp. 13.
Hair JF, Anderson RE, Tatham RL, Black WC (1998)
Multivariate data analysis. Prentice Hall Inc, New Jersey, USA, pp. 730.
Harfouche A, Meilan R, Altman A (2011)
Tree genetic engineering and applications to sustainable forestry and biomass production. Trends in Biotechnology 29 (1): 11-17.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Hinchee M, Rottman W, Mullinax L, Zhang C, Chang S, Cunningham M, Pearson L, Nehra N (2009)
Short-rotation woody crops for bioenergy and biofuels applications. In Vitro Cellular and Developmental Biology - Plant 45 (6): 619-629.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Jonsson R (2012)
Econometric modelling and projections of wood products demand, supply and trade in Europe. Geneva Timber and Forest Discussion Paper 59, EE/TIM/DP/59, UNECE/ FAO, Geneva, Switzerland, pp. 196.
McCluskey J, Grimsrud K, Ouchi H, Wahl T (2003)
Consumer response to genetically modified food products in Japan. Agricultural and Resource Economic Review 32 (2): 222-231.
Online | Gscholar
Oppenheim AN (2000)
Questionnaire design, interviewing and attitude measurement. Continuum, New York, USA, pp. 303.
Pajari B, Peck T, Rametsteiner E (1999)
Potential markets for certified forest products in Europe. EFI Proceedings No. 25, European Forest Institute, Joensuu, Finland, pp. 352.
Siardos G (1997)
Methodology of agricultural sociological research. Ziti Publications, Thessaloniki, Greece, pp 367.
Sedjo RA (2004)
Transgenic trees: implementation and outcomes of the plant protection act. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 28.
Online | Gscholar
Sedjo RA (2006)
Toward commercialization of genetically engineered forests: economic and social considerations. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 46.
Online | Gscholar
Sedjo RA (2010)
Transgenic trees for biomass. The effects of regulatory restrictions and court decisions on the pace off commercialization. AgBioForum 13 (4): 391-397.
Thomas S (2001)
Ethical and social considerations in commercial uses of food and fiber crops. In: Proceedings of the “First International Symposium on Ecological and Societal Aspects of Transgenic Plantations: Tree Biotechnology in the New Millenium” (Strauss SH, Bradshaw HD eds). Columbia River George (OR, USA) 22-24 July 2001. College of Forestry, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA pp. 92-98.
Online | Gscholar
Tokarczyk J, Hansen E (2006)
Creating intangible competitive advantage in the forest products industry. Forest Products Journal 56 (7/8): 4-13.
Tsourgiannis L, Eddison J, Warren M (2008)
Factors affecting the marketing channel choice of sheep and goat farmers in the region of East Macedonia in Greece regarding the distribution of their milk production. Small Ruminant Research 79: 87-97.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Tsourgiannis L, Kazana V, Karasavvoglouc A, Nikolaidisc M, Florouc G, Polychronidouc P (2013)
Exploring consumers’ attitudes towards wood products that could be derived from transgenic plantations in Greece. Procedia Technology 8: 554-560.
CrossRef | Gscholar
UNECE (2012)
Forest products statistics 2007-2011. Timber Bulletin ECE/TIM/BULL/65/2, UNECE-FAO Forestry Department, web site.
Online | Gscholar
Van Frankenhuyzen K, Beardmore T (2004)
Current status and environmental impact of transgenic forest trees. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 34: 1163-1180.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Vlosky R, Ozanne L, Fontenot R (1999)
A conceptual model for US consumers willingness-to-pay for environmentally certified wood products. Journal of Consumer Marketing 16 (2): 122-136.
CrossRef | Gscholar
Zhu J, Pan X (2010)
Woody biomass pretreatment for cellulosic ethanol production: Technology and energy consumption evaluation . Bioresource Technology 101 (13): 4992-5002.
CrossRef | Gscholar

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. More info