IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jriskr/v21y2018i8p996-1018.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Extrapolating understanding of food risk perceptions to emerging food safety cases

Author

Listed:
  • Gülbanu Kaptan
  • Arnout R.H. Fischer
  • Lynn J. Frewer

Abstract

Important determinants of risk perceptions associated with foods are the extent to which the potential hazards are perceived to have technological or naturally occurring origins, together with the acute vs. chronic dimension in which the potential hazard is presented (acute or chronic). This study presents a case study analysis based on an extensive literature review examining how these hazard characteristics affect people’s risk and benefit perceptions, and associated attitudes and behaviors. The cases include E. coli incidences (outbreaks linked to fresh spinach and fenugreek sprouts), contamination of fish by environmental pollutants, (organochlorine contaminants in farmed salmon), radioactive contamination of food following a nuclear accident (the Fukushima accident in Japan), and GM salmon destined for the human food chain. The analysis of the cases over the acute vs. chronic dimension suggests that longitudinal quantification of the relationship between risk perceptions and impacts is important for both acute and chronic food safety, but this has infrequently been applied to chronic hazards. Technologies applied to food production tend to potentially be associated with higher levels of risk perception, linked to perceptions that the risk is unnatural. However, for some risks (e.g. those involving biological irreversibility), moral or ethical concerns may be more important determinants of consumer responses than risk or benefit perceptions. (Lack of) trust has been highlighted in all of the cases suggesting transparent and honest risk–benefit communications following the occurrence of a food safety incident. Implications for optimizing associated risk communication strategies, additional research linking risk perception, and other quantitative measures, including comparisons in time and space, are suggested.

Suggested Citation

  • Gülbanu Kaptan & Arnout R.H. Fischer & Lynn J. Frewer, 2018. "Extrapolating understanding of food risk perceptions to emerging food safety cases," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(8), pages 996-1018, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:21:y:2018:i:8:p:996-1018
    DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2017.1281330
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13669877.2017.1281330
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13669877.2017.1281330?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shimshack, Jay P. & Ward, Michael B. & Beatty, Timothy K.M., 2007. "Mercury advisories: Information, education, and fish consumption," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 158-179, March.
    2. Maarten J. Nauta & Arnout R. H. Fischer & Esther D. Van Asselt & Aarieke E. I. De Jong & Lynn J. Frewer & Rob De Jonge, 2008. "Food Safety in the Domestic Environment: The Effect of Consumer Risk Information on Human Disease Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(1), pages 179-192, February.
    3. Fischhoff, Baruch & Kadvany, John, 2011. "Risk: A Very Short Introduction," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199576203.
    4. Mario Mazzocchi, 2006. "No News Is Good News: Stochastic Parameters versus Media Coverage Indices in Demand Models after Food Scares," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(3), pages 727-741.
    5. Michael Greenberg & Heather Barnes Truelove, 2011. "Energy Choices and Risk Beliefs: Is It Just Global Warming and Fear of a Nuclear Power Plant Accident?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(5), pages 819-831, May.
    6. Stephen C. Whitfield & Eugene A. Rosa & Amy Dan & Thomas Dietz, 2009. "The Future of Nuclear Power: Value Orientations and Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(3), pages 425-437, March.
    7. Goodfellow, Martin J. & Williams, Hugo R. & Azapagic, Adisa, 2011. "Nuclear renaissance, public perception and design criteria: An exploratory review," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 6199-6210, October.
    8. Mora, Cristina & Menozzi, Davide & Kleter, Gijs & Aramyan, Lusine H. & Valeeva, Natasha I. & Zimmermann, Karin L. & Pakki Reddy, Giddalury, 2012. "Factors Affecting the Adoption of Genetically Modified Animals in the Food and Pharmaceutical Chains," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 1(3), pages 1-17, December.
    9. M. P. McCullough & T. L. Marsh & R. Huffaker, 2013. "Reconstructing market reactions to consumption harms," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(2), pages 173-179, February.
    10. Gelting, Richard J. & Baloch, Mansoor A. & Zarate-Bermudez, Max A. & Selman, Carol, 2011. "Irrigation water issues potentially related to the 2006 multistate E. coli O157:H7 outbreak associated with spinach," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 98(9), pages 1395-1402, July.
    11. Joanna Burger, 2012. "Rating of worry about energy sources with respect to public health, environmental health, and workers," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(9), pages 1159-1169, October.
    12. Poortinga, Wouter & Aoyagi, Midori & Pidgeon, Nick F., 2013. "Public perceptions of climate change and energy futures before and after the Fukushima accident: A comparison between Britain and Japan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1204-1211.
    13. Heleen van Dijk & Arnout R.H. Fischer & Lynn J. Frewer, 2011. "Consumer Responses to Integrated Risk‐Benefit Information Associated with the Consumption of Food," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(3), pages 429-439, March.
    14. Felicia Wu, 2006. "Bt Corn’s Reduction of Mycotoxins: Regulatory Decisions and Public Opinion," Natural Resource Management and Policy, in: Richard E. Just & Julian M. Alston & David Zilberman (ed.), Regulating Agricultural Biotechnology: Economics and Policy, chapter 0, pages 179-200, Springer.
    15. Carlos Arnade & Linda Calvin & Fred Kuchler, 2009. "Consumer Response to a Food Safety Shock: The 2006 Food-Borne Illness Outbreak of E. coli O157: H7 Linked to Spinach," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 31(4), pages 734-750, December.
    16. Arnout R. H. Fischer & Lynn J. Frewer & Maarten J. Nauta, 2006. "Toward Improving Food Safety in the Domestic Environment: A Multi‐Item Rasch Scale for the Measurement of the Safety Efficacy of Domestic Food‐Handling Practices," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(5), pages 1323-1338, October.
    17. Brook, Barry W., 2012. "Could nuclear fission energy, etc., solve the greenhouse problem? The affirmative case," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 4-8.
    18. Wim Verbeke & Filiep Vanhonacker & Lynn J. Frewer & Isabelle Sioen & Stefaan De Henauw & John Van Camp, 2008. "Communicating Risks and Benefits from Fish Consumption: Impact on Belgian Consumers' Perception and Intention to Eat Fish," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(4), pages 951-967, August.
    19. Kato, Takaaki & Takahara, Shogo & Nishikawa, Masashi & Homma, Toshimitsu, 2013. "A case study of economic incentives and local citizens' attitudes toward hosting a nuclear power plant in Japan: Impacts of the Fukushima accident," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 808-818.
    20. Jay Shimshack, 2004. "Are Mercury Advisories Effective? Inofrmation, Education, and Fish Consumption," Discussion Papers Series, Department of Economics, Tufts University 0423, Department of Economics, Tufts University.
    21. Hallman, William K. & Cuite, Cara L. & Hooker, Neal H., 2009. "Consumer Responses to Food Recalls: 2008 National Survey Report," Research Reports 310308, Rutgers University, Food Policy Institute.
    22. Alexander Belyakov, 2015. "From Chernobyl to Fukushima: an interdisciplinary framework for managing and communicating food security risks after nuclear plant accidents," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 5(3), pages 404-417, September.
    23. Kimberly M. Thompson, 2002. "Variability and Uncertainty Meet Risk Management and Risk Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(3), pages 647-654, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Angela Bearth & Gulbanu Kaptan & Sabrina Heike Kessler, 2022. "Genome-edited versus genetically-modified tomatoes: an experiment on people’s perceptions and acceptance of food biotechnology in the UK and Switzerland," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(3), pages 1117-1131, September.
    2. Michael J. Weir & Thomas W. Sproul, 2019. "Identifying Drivers of Genetically Modified Seafood Demand: Evidence from a Choice Experiment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-21, July.

    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. Lin, Wen & Ma, Baojie & Liang, Jiangyuan & Jin, Shaosheng, 2024. "Price response to government disclosure of food safety information in developing markets," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    2. Okubo, Toshihiro & Narita, Daiju & Rehdanz, Katrin & Schröder, Carsten, 2020. "Preferences for Nuclear Power in Post-Fukushima Japan: Evidence from a Large Nationwide Household Survey," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 13(11).
    3. Chantal Toledo & Sofia Berto Villas-Boas, 2019. "Safe or Not? Consumer Responses to Recalls with Traceability," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 519-541, September.
    4. Chen, Xiaohong & Zhao, Jinhua & Zhou, Li, 2024. "Knowledge protects against pollution: The health effects of the cadmium rice event in China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    5. Roh, Seungkook & Lee, Jin Won, 2018. "Differentiated effects of risk perception dimensions on nuclear power acceptance in South Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 727-735.
    6. Vladimir M. Cvetković & Adem Öcal & Yuliya Lyamzina & Eric K. Noji & Neda Nikolić & Goran Milošević, 2021. "Nuclear Power Risk Perception in Serbia: Fear of Exposure to Radiation vs. Social Benefits," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-19, April.
    7. Adam Dvir, 2022. "Is mass media an effective channel for conveying nutritional information? Welfare implications of the WHO classification of processed meats as carcinogenic on consumers in Israel," French Stata Users' Group Meetings 2022 21, Stata Users Group.
    8. Judith I. M. de Groot & Elisa Schweiger & Iljana Schubert, 2020. "Social Influence, Risk and Benefit Perceptions, and the Acceptability of Risky Energy Technologies: An Explanatory Model of Nuclear Power Versus Shale Gas," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(6), pages 1226-1243, June.
    9. Gupta, Kuhika & Nowlin, Matthew C. & Ripberger, Joseph T. & Jenkins-Smith, Hank C. & Silva, Carol L., 2019. "Tracking the nuclear ‘mood’ in the United States: Introducing a long term measure of public opinion about nuclear energy using aggregate survey data," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    10. Hallstein, Eric & Villas-Boas, Sofia Berto, 2009. "Are Consumers Color Blind?: an empirical investigation of a traffic light advisory for sustainable seafood," CUDARE Working Papers 120535, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    11. Janet Currie & Joshua Graff Zivin & Katherine Meckel & Matthew Neidell & Wolfram Schlenker, 2013. "Something in the water: contaminated drinking water and infant health," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 46(3), pages 791-810, August.
    12. Seth Freedman & Melissa Kearney & Mara Lederman, 2012. "Product Recalls, Imperfect Information, and Spillover Effects: Lessons from the Consumer Response to the 2007 Toy Recalls," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 94(2), pages 499-516, May.
    13. Willson, Tina M. & Kazmierczak, Richard F., Jr., 2007. "The Public Health and Economic Impacts of Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic (PBT) Contaminants on U.S. Fisheries," 2007 Annual Meeting, February 4-7, 2007, Mobile, Alabama 34963, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    14. Mariano J. Rabassa & Mariana Conte Grand & Christian M. García-Witulski, 2021. "Heat warnings and avoidance behavior: evidence from a bike-sharing system," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 23(1), pages 1-28, January.
    15. Bojian Chen & Shiyuan Dong, 2022. "Mercury Contamination in Fish and Its Effects on the Health of Pregnant Women and Their Fetuses, and Guidance for Fish Consumption—A Narrative Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-16, November.
    16. Kiesel, Kristin, 2012. "“A Definition at Last, But What Does it All Mean?” Newspaper Coverage of Organic Food Production and its Effects on Milk Purchases," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 37(1), pages 1-24, April.
    17. Wang, Yu & Gu, Jibao & Wu, Jianlin, 2020. "Explaining local residents’ acceptance of rebuilding nuclear power plants: The roles of perceived general benefit and perceived local benefit," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    18. Lee, You-Kyung, 2020. "Sustainability of nuclear energy in Korea: From the users’ perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    19. Taylor, Mykel & Klaiber, H. Allen & Kuchler, Fred, 2016. "Changes in U.S. consumer response to food safety recalls in the shadow of a BSE scare," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 56-64.
    20. Wang, Fan & Gu, Jibao & Wu, Jianlin, 2020. "Perspective taking, energy policy involvement, and public acceptance of nuclear energy: Evidence from China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:jriskr:v:21:y:2018:i:8:p:996-1018. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJRR20 .

    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.