TABLE 3.

Benefits and risk perception indices toward gene editing technology (%ages).

		Statement	Agree/strongly agree	Neither agree nor disagree/don’t know	Disagree/strongly disagree	Perception score
Perceived benefits	1	Gene editing technology has the potential to create foods with enhanced nutritional value	56.28	37.13	6.59	0.3
	2	Gene editing has the potential to reduce pesticide residue on food	49.1	45.71	5.19	0.26
	3	Gene editing has the potential to reduce pesticide residue in the environment	45.31	49.7	4.99	0.25
	4	Gene editing technology can result in insect-resistant crops	53.29	42.52	4.19	0.31
		Benefits perception index	—	—	—	0.28
	5	Gene-edited crops are negative for the environment	17.17	57.28	25.55	-0.03
Perceived environmental risks	6	Insect-resistant crops developed using gene editing could cause death of untargeted insects	38.32	54.29	7.39	0.2
	7	Gene editing can lead to a loss of original plant varieties	49.7	37.32	12.98	0.24
		Environmental perception index	—	—	—	0.14
Perceived health risks	8	Consuming gene-edited food products can damage human health	19.56	55.49	24.95	-0.02
	9	Consuming gene-edited foods products can lead to more allergies	20.96	62.08	16.96	0.04
	10	Consuming gene-edited foods might lead to an increase in antibiotic-resistant diseases	26.15	58.48	15.37	0.06
		Health risk perception index	—	—	—	0.03
Ethical concerns	11	Gene editing is tampering with nature	55.69	27.75	16.56	0.24
	12	Gene editing technology makers are imitating God	21.76	40.12	38.13	-0.13
	13	Gene-edited food is not natural	46.11	36.92	16.97	0.19
		Ethical perception index	—	—	—	0.10
Equity concerns	14	Gene-edited products only benefit multinational producers	23.75	48.31	27.94	0
	15	Gene-edited products don’t benefit smaller farms	24.75	49.9	25.35	0.02
	16	Gene-edited products are being forced on developing countries by developed countries	17.96	65.87	16.17	0.02
		Equity concerns perception index	—	—	—	0.01

Note: bolded numbers are significant at the 95% confidence level.