Search Results
You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for :
- Author or Editor: Julie H. Campbell x
- HortScience x
Using conjoint analysis and market simulations, the impact of the introduction of certified genetically modified organism (GMO)-free; GMO-free, not certified; and nonlabeled turfgrass was examined for Connecticut consumers. We categorized consumers into five distinct segments according to their preferences. The largest segment consisted of 38% of respondents (multifaceted), whereas the smallest consisted of 8% of respondents (extremely price sensitive). For most consumers GMO labeling was not a major driver for purchasing decisions, accounting for only 11% of purchasing decisions. However, holding all factors constant except GMO labeling and price, 66% of the market preferred a noncertified GMO-free label, with a significant number of consumers willing to pay for the certified GMO-free label. Based on market simulations, the noncertified GMO-free-labeled seed would maximize revenue at a 60% premium whereas the certified GMO-free label maximizes revenue when there is no premium.
A mail survey was distributed to school turfgrass managers throughout Connecticut focusing on the differences between turfgrass management practices for kindergarten through eighth-grade (K-8) school grounds before, during, and after a 2010 ban on pesticide use at these facilities. The results indicate that as turf care protocol transitioned from an integrated pest management (IPM) program to new pesticide-free regulatory requirements, school grounds/athletic field managers did not significantly adjust their management programs. The percentage of managers applying pesticides on K-8 grounds decreased, as expected, with the implementation of the new pesticide ban; however, pesticide applications on high school grounds/athletic fields also decreased. Furthermore, it was observed that there had been minimal adoption of minimum risk 25(b) products, the suggested alternative to traditional synthetic pesticides. With respect to other cultural practices, we found that few changes have been made to other cultural practices that would improve turf quality. Budgetary issues facing school grounds/athletic field managers may have limited their ability to implement potentially costly management practices necessary to offset the loss of pesticides. Educational efforts to promote new management practices have the potential to inform school grounds/athletic field managers about new methods, thereby, potentially increasing adoption.