This discussion highlights some of the strengths and weaknesses of the literature on animal welfare. Most pointedly, the literature on the economics of animal welfare is quite scant. As exemplified by these papers, however, there is a growing body of literature, especially those related to added costs of production and consumer demand for animal welfare attributes.

There has been almost no overlap between behavior genetics and consumer behavior research, despite each field's importance in understanding society. In particular, both have neglected to study genetic influences on consumer adoption and usage of new technologies — even technologies as important as the mobile phone, now used by 5.8 out of 7.0 billion people on earth. To start filling this gap, we analyzed self-reported mobile phone use, intelligence, and personality traits in two samples of Australian teenaged twins (mean ages 14.2 and 15.6 years), totaling 1,036 individuals. ACE modeling using Mx software showed substantial heritabilities for how often teens make voice calls (.60 and .34 in samples 1 and 2, respectively) and for how often they send text messages (.53 and. 50). Shared family environment – including neighborhood, social class, parental education, and parental income (i.e., the generosity of calling plans that parents can afford for their teens) — had much weaker effects. Multivariate modeling based on cross-twin, cross-trait correlations showed negative genetic correlations between talking/texting frequency and intelligence (around –.17), and positive genetic correlations between talking/texting frequency and extraversion (about .20 to .40). Our results have implications for assessing the risks of mobile phone use such as radiofrequency field (RF) exposure and driving accidents, for studying adoption and use of other emerging technologies, for understanding the genetic architecture of the cognitive and personality traits that predict consumer behavior, and for challenging the common assumption that consumer behavior is shaped entirely by culture, media, and family environment.

Nutrigenomics is a new and promising development in nutritional science which aims to understand the fundamental molecular processes affected by foods. Despite general agreement on its promise for better understanding diet–health relationships, less consensus exists among experts on the potential of spin-offs aimed at the consumer such as personalised nutrition. Research into consumer acceptance of such applications is scarce. The present study develops a set of key hypotheses on public acceptance of personalised nutrition and tests these in a representative sample of Dutch consumers. An innovative consumer research methodology is used in which consumers evaluate short films which are systematically varied scenarios for the future of personalised nutrition. Consumer evaluations of these films, which are pre-tested in a pilot study, allow a formal test of how consumer perceptions of personalised nutrition drive consumer acceptance and through which fundamental psychological processes these effects are mediated. Public acceptance is enhanced if consumers can make their genetic profile available free at their own choice, if the actual spin-off products provide a clearly recognisable advantage to the consumer, and are easy to implement into the daily routine. Consumers prefer communication on nutrigenomics and personalised nutrition by expert stakeholders to be univocal and aimed at building support with consumers and their direct environments for this intriguing new development. Additionally, an exploratory segmentation analysis indicated that people have different focal points in their preferences for alternative scenarios of personalised nutrition. The insights obtained from the present study provide guidance for the successful further development of nutrigenomics and its applications.

We surveyed shoppers at a food cooperative in New York state to measure the relationship between organic produce purchases and attitudes related to pesticide use in agriculture, food costs, and other factors affecting produce buying. Two-fifths of the co-op shoppers surveyed usually or almost always purchased organically grown produce, and one-third were somewhat or very likely to pay 100 percent more than conventional produce for residue-free produce. Those who usually or almost always purchased organic produce were less concerned than other shoppers about price when they shop for produce, had higher levels of concern about food safety, and were less concerned about insects and surface blemishes on produce. There was no relationship between income and frequency of organic purchases. Most shoppers were concerned about pesticide residues in produce, but a high level of concern appeared necessary to affect the frequency of organic purchases. In their support of organic agriculture, respondents ranked environmental protection higher than consumer protection. Educators should emphasize both the environmental and food safety benefits of organic farming to consumers.