Abstract
With an increasing focus on the uptake of healthy and sustainable diets, a growing body of research has explored consumer perceptions and understanding of the environmental impacts and safety of foods. However, this body of research has used a wide range of methods to recruit participants, which can influence the results obtained. The current research explores the impact of different recruitment methods upon observed estimations of the carbon footprint (gCO2e), energy content (Kcal), food safety and animal using three different online recruitment platforms; Qualtrics (N= 397), Prolific (N= 407), Zooniverse (N~601, based on unique IP addresses). Qualtrics and Prolific participants rated the carbon footprint, energy content, food safety and animal welfare of all foods in the survey. Zooniverse citizens rated the carbon footprint or energy content then food safety or animal welfare of all foods in the survey. Kruskal-Wallis and Chi-square analyses compared the energy content and carbon footprint estimations with validated values, and differences in estimate accuracy and perceptions between recruitment methods. Participants were unable to accurately estimate the carbon footprint and energy content of foods. The carbon footprint of all foods were overestimated, with the exception of beef and lamb which was underestimated. The calorie content of fruits and vegetables are typically overestimated. Perceptions of animal welfare and food safety differed by recruitment method. Zooniverse citizens rated animal welfare standards to be lower for meat products and eggs, compared to Qualtrics and Prolific participants. Overall, Qualtrics participants typically held the highest food risk perceptions, however this varied by food type. The lack of knowledge about the carbon footprint and energy content of foods demonstrates the need for consumer education and communication to enable the move toward healthier and more sustainable diets. Perceptions of food safety and animal welfare demonstrate a baseline from which to develop consumer focused communications and governance. We have shown that different recruitment tools can result in differences in observed perceptions. This highlights the need to carefully consider the recruitment tool being used in research when assessing participant knowledge and perceptions.
Highlights
Food production and agriculture contributes 20–30% of global greenhouse gas emissions (GHGE) (Poore and Nemecek, 2018; Kause et al, 2019)
We observe a difference in carbon footprint estimation values between recruitment method [H(2) = 112.59, p< 0.001], with Zooniverse Beta citizens and Prolific participants providing lower estimations than Qualtrics participants, [H(2) = 112.59, p < 0.001]
Participants recruited via Zooniverse Beta, Qualtrics and Prolific typically overestimate carbon footprint values [χ(4) = 523.53, p < 0.001], few estimations are within range across all recruitment methods
Summary
Food production and agriculture contributes 20–30% of global greenhouse gas emissions (GHGE) (Poore and Nemecek, 2018; Kause et al, 2019). In addition to contributing to over-consumption and leading to dietrelated chronic diseases, misestimating portion size can create food waste which contributes to climate change (Rolls et al, 2002; Steenhuis and Vermeer, 2009; Miyazaki et al, 2011). As perceptions of energy density and carbon footprint of food are associated with purchase intention (Armstrong and Reynolds, 2020), understanding the current level of consumer knowledge about the calorie content and carbon footprint of foods provides an evidence base to develop interventions which will effectively nudge consumers toward healthier and more sustainable diets (Cohen and Story, 2014; Camilleri et al, 2019). In addition to assessing differences in consumer knowledge of energy density and carbon footprint of foods between recruitment platforms, the current research will explore consumer perceptions of animal welfare and food safety/risk
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
