Consumers' Preferences for Nanotechnology in Food Packaging: A Discrete Choice Experiment

Seda Erdem

doi:10.1111/1477-9552.12088

Abstract

AbstractWe examine consumers' preferences for chickens under different levels of foodborne health risk, animal welfare and pric attributes. We analyse how their preferences vary according to the risk reduction method. Our comparison is between risk reductions achieved by conventional improvements in the meat supply chain system (e.g. more stringent regulations and inspection regimes), and risk reductions achieved by food packaging nanosensors. Our comparison uses a two‐treatment discrete choice experiment in which each treatment sample is only presented with one of the risk reductions: either nanotechnology or conventional methods. We also investigate heterogeneity in preferences for two consumer groups: (i) consumers who usually buy conventional raw, whole chickens, and (ii) consumers who usually buy niche, welfare‐improved chickens, such as free‐range and organic. Our results show evidence of heterogeneity in preferences and willingness‐ to‐pay values of the both consumer groups. We find that consumers, on average, prefer raw, whole chicken with a lower risk of food poisoning, better animal welfare, and lower costs, regardless of the presence of nanosensors. Although consumers in general showed no strong preferences towards or resistance to nanotechnology, those who buy chickens with better animal welfare, on average, showed higher WTP for food risk reduction and animal welfare relative to conventional chicken consumers.

Highlights

Food safety remains one of the key topics in the agri-food industry
This comparison is achieved by conducting a two-treatment web-based discrete choice experiment (DCE) in which each treatment sample is only presented with the risk reductions achieved by one of the means
We could have used the method of risk reduction as another attribute in the DCE survey to examine consumers’ preferences for these risk reduction methods, in this paper, we investigate views and preferences for nanotechnology and for conventional methods separately using two treatments

Summary

Introduction

Recent food contaminations and scandals have attracted considerable media interest and have prompted an increased concern among the public over food safety. According to the Food Standard Agency’s foodborne disease strategy report (FSA, 2011), each year in the UK, around a million people suffer a foodborne illness, around 20,000 people receive hospital treatment and 500 die due to foodborne illnesses, and it has a total economic cost of around £2 billion.. There is an increased demand for better safety practices and techniques ensuring the safety of foods in the entire supply chain. High pressure treatments have been used to inactivate microbial activity to ensure food safety and retain food quality, freshness, as well as to extend the shelf life (Yang et al, 2012)

Methods

Results

Conclusion