IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i22p9840-d1518847.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

EU Citizens’ Perception of Risks Posed to the Sustainability of EU Food Security

Author

Listed:
  • Fernando Mata

    (CISAS—Centre for Research and Development in Agrifood Systems and Sustainability, Instituto Politécnico de Viana do Castelo, 4900-347 Viana do Castelo, Portugal)

  • Diana Barros

    (CISAS—Centre for Research and Development in Agrifood Systems and Sustainability, Instituto Politécnico de Viana do Castelo, 4900-347 Viana do Castelo, Portugal)

  • Ricardo Pereira-Pinto

    (CISAS—Centre for Research and Development in Agrifood Systems and Sustainability, Instituto Politécnico de Viana do Castelo, 4900-347 Viana do Castelo, Portugal)

  • Preciosa Pires

    (CISAS—Centre for Research and Development in Agrifood Systems and Sustainability, Instituto Politécnico de Viana do Castelo, 4900-347 Viana do Castelo, Portugal)

Abstract

Food security is a core global sustainability challenge and priority of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Events like COVID-19, extreme weather, and global conflicts have significantly impacted food prices, as evidenced by the FAO food price index rising from 95.1 in 2019 to 143.7 in 2022, heightening EU food security concerns. The European Commission responded with a food supply contingency plan. According to Eurobarometer data, our study shows that EU citizens’ food security concerns vary by demographic, political, and socioeconomic factors. While men prioritize external factors like climate change, women express greater concern for local social issues, including small farm viability. Age influences the concern focus, with younger people worried about agricultural stagnation, and older individuals recalling past economic crises. Education and income also play roles, with educated and wealthier citizens worried about environmental risks, and less educated, poorer individuals more concerned about socioeconomic impacts. Political leanings and urban/rural divides shape concerns, as well as EU policy dissatisfaction, which links to worries over economic vulnerability and nationalism. Effective EU food security policies require understanding complex factors, stakeholder collaboration, and tailored strategies for diverse needs. Our findings suggest the need for EU policies to incorporate demographic nuances, ensuring food security sustainability across socioeconomic and political spectrums.

Suggested Citation

  • Fernando Mata & Diana Barros & Ricardo Pereira-Pinto & Preciosa Pires, 2024. "EU Citizens’ Perception of Risks Posed to the Sustainability of EU Food Security," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(22), pages 1-18, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:22:p:9840-:d:1518847
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/22/9840/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/22/9840/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Neumayer, Eric, 2004. "The environment, left-wing political orientation and ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(3-4), pages 167-175, December.
    2. Beckman, Jayson & Ivanic, Maros & Jelliffe, Jeremy L & Baquedano, Felix G & Scott, Sara G, 2020. "Economic and Food Security Impacts of Agricultural Input Reduction Under the European Union Green Deal’s Farm to Fork and Biodiversity Strategies," Economic Brief 327231, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    3. Cäzilia Loibl & Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Barbara Summers & Simon McNair & Pieter Verhallen, 2022. "Which financial stressors are linked to food insecurity among older adults in the United Kingdom, Germany, and the Netherlands? An exploratory study," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 14(2), pages 533-556, April.
    4. Mohammad Fazle Rabbi & Tarek Ben Hassen & Hamid El Bilali & Dele Raheem & António Raposo, 2023. "Food Security Challenges in Europe in the Context of the Prolonged Russian–Ukrainian Conflict," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-20, March.
    5. Ziegler, Andreas, 2017. "Political orientation, environmental values, and climate change beliefs and attitudes: An empirical cross country analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 144-153.
    6. Maksym Chepeliev & Maryla Maliszewska & Maria Filipa Seara e Pereira, 2023. "The War in Ukraine, Food Security and the Role for Europe," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 22(1), pages 4-13, April.
    7. Fernando Mata & Maria J. P. L. Dos-Santos, 2024. "European Citizens’ Evaluation of the Common Agricultural Policy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-19, May.
    8. Janette Leroux & Kathryn Morrison & Mark Rosenberg, 2018. "Prevalence and Predictors of Food Insecurity among Older People in Canada," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-17, November.
    9. Alison Blay-Palmer & Roberta Sonnino & Julien Custot, 2016. "A food politics of the possible? Growing sustainable food systems through networks of knowledge," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 33(1), pages 27-43, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Johansson, Alva & Berggren, Niclas & Nilsson, Therese, 2022. "Intolerance predicts climate skepticism," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    2. Tobias Böhmelt, 2022. "Environmental-agreement design and political ideology in democracies," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 507-525, September.
    3. Andreea-Emanuela Dragoi, 2023. "Quo Vadis the Common Agricultural Policy amid Tomorrow’s Challenges?," Global Economic Observer, "Nicolae Titulescu" University of Bucharest, Faculty of Economic Sciences;Institute for World Economy of the Romanian Academy, vol. 11(1), pages 24-31, May.
    4. Niklas Jakobsson & Raya Muttarak & Mi Ah Schoyen, 2018. "Dividing the pie in the eco-social state: Exploring the relationship between public support for environmental and welfare policies," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 36(2), pages 313-339, March.
    5. Alessandro Concari & Gerjo Kok & Pim Martens, 2020. "A Systematic Literature Review of Concepts and Factors Related to Pro-Environmental Consumer Behaviour in Relation to Waste Management Through an Interdisciplinary Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-50, May.
    6. Minjeong Kim & Changki Shim & Jaehyeong Lee & Choeki Wangchuk, 2022. "Hot Water Treatment as Seed Disinfection Techniques for Organic and Eco-Friendly Environmental Agricultural Crop Cultivation," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-16, July.
    7. Mavisakalyan, Astghik & Tarverdi, Yashar, 2019. "Gender and climate change: Do female parliamentarians make difference?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 151-164.
    8. Sara A. L. Smaal & Joost Dessein & Barend J. Wind & Elke Rogge, 2021. "Social justice-oriented narratives in European urban food strategies: Bringing forward redistribution, recognition and representation," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(3), pages 709-727, September.
    9. E. Keith Smith & Adam Mayer, 2019. "Anomalous Anglophones? Contours of free market ideology, political polarization, and climate change attitudes in English-speaking countries, Western European and post-Communist states," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 152(1), pages 17-34, January.
    10. Davide Dell’Unto & Gabriele Dono & Raffaele Cortignani, 2023. "Impacts of Environmental Targets on the Livestock Sector: An Assessment Tool Applied to Italy," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-15, March.
    11. Martín-García, Jaime & Gómez-Limón, José A. & Arriaza, Manuel, 2024. "Conversion to organic farming: Does it change the economic and environmental performance of fruit farms?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    12. Artur Santoalha & Ron Boschma, 2021. "Diversifying in green technologies in European regions: does political support matter?," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(2), pages 182-195, February.
    13. Zeynep Clulow & Michele Ferguson & Peta Ashworth & David Reiner, 2021. "Political ideology and public views of the energy transition in Australia and the UK," Working Papers EPRG2106, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    14. Panarello, Demetrio, 2021. "Economic insecurity, conservatism, and the crisis of environmentalism: 30 years of evidence," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    15. Nicholas Bamegne Nambie & Philomena Dadzie & Dorcas Oye Haywood-Dadzie, 2023. "Measuring the Effect of Income Inequality, Financial Inclusion, Investment, and Unemployment, on Economic Growth in Africa: A Moderating Role of Digital Financial Technology," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 13(4), pages 111-124, July.
    16. Jayson Beckman & Noé J. Nava & Angelica S. Williams & Steven Zahniser, 2024. "Land competition and welfare effects from Mexico's proposal to ban genetically engineered corn," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 106(3), pages 1300-1325, May.
    17. Guillaume Peterson St-Laurent & Shannon Hagerman & Robert Kozak, 2018. "What risks matter? Public views about assisted migration and other climate-adaptive reforestation strategies," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 151(3), pages 573-587, December.
    18. Jana Lososová & Radek Zdeněk, 2023. "Simulation of the impacts of the proposed direct payment scheme - The case of the Czech Republic," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 69(1), pages 13-24.
    19. Douenne, Thomas & Fabre, Adrien, 2020. "French attitudes on climate change, carbon taxation and other climate policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    20. Maite D. Laméris & Richard Jong-A-Pin & Rasmus Wiese, 2018. "An Experimental Test of the Validity of Survey-Measured Political Ideology," CESifo Working Paper Series 7139, CESifo.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:22:p:9840-:d:1518847. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.