IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/ualbnp/45495.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Risk Ranking: Investigating Expert and Public Differences in Evaluating Food Safety Risks

Author

Listed:
  • Webster, Kevin D.
  • Jardine, Cindy G.
  • McMullen, Lynn
  • Cash, Sean B.

Abstract

The allocation of resources with respect to food safety issues requires that decision-makers prioritize these issues, which may conflict with the public’s opinions on these matters. These differences between the experts’ perception of risk and that of the public were examined. A modified Carnegie Mellon risk ranking model was used to rank six food safety issues. The six food safety issues used in the discussions were: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE), Escherichia coli O157:H7, Salmonella, botulism, Paralytic Shellfish Poisoning (PSP), and acrylamide. Focus groups were conducted using public (n=29) and expert (n=21) participants, and a public survey was commissioned to further explore the focus group results. Key themes were identified from the focus groups as reasons why risks were rated high or low. Explanations for why choices were made included availability, affect, numeracy and optimistic bias. The effect of attribute framing seemed to be the most influential in a participant’s choices.

Suggested Citation

  • Webster, Kevin D. & Jardine, Cindy G. & McMullen, Lynn & Cash, Sean B., 2008. "Risk Ranking: Investigating Expert and Public Differences in Evaluating Food Safety Risks," Consumer and Market Demand Network Papers 45495, University of Alberta, Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ualbnp:45495
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.45495
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/45495/files/CMD%2008-02.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.45495?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
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Erdem, Seda & Rigby, Dan, 2011. "Using Best Worst Scaling To Investigate Perceptions Of Control & Concern Over Food And Non-Food Risks," 85th Annual Conference, April 18-20, 2011, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 108790, Agricultural Economics Society.
    2. Juliana Martins Ruzante & Valerie J. Davidson & Julie Caswell & Aamir Fazil & John A. L. Cranfield & Spencer J. Henson & Sven M. Anders & Claudia Schmidt & Jeffrey M. Farber, 2010. "A Multifactorial Risk Prioritization Framework for Foodborne Pathogens," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(5), pages 724-742, May.
    3. Jason Parker & Robyn Wilson & Jeffrey LeJeune & Douglas Doohan, 2012. "Including growers in the “food safety” conversation: enhancing the design and implementation of food safety programming based on farm and marketing needs of fresh fruit and vegetable producers," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 29(3), pages 303-319, September.

    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:ags:ualbnp:45495. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/drualca.html .

    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.