QUALITY IN CHAINS: CONSUMERS AND RISK

Abstract

Consumer perceptions of food quality are dependent on many factors other than the organoleptic properties of products. Quality parameters include perceptions of risk associated with different potential food hazards, as well as ethical concerns associated with food production are likely to have an impact on consumer acceptance of quality. In addition, lack of consumer confidence in activities within the food chain reflects distrust in the activities of different stakeholders within foodproduction systems. It is these perceptions, beliefs and attitudes that may ultimately influence consumer behaviours. The focus of this paper is to briefly review individual difference in risk perceptions and attitudes associated with food production, and to discuss how this influences consumer acceptance of food quality. It is concluded that many public concerns about food production issues, are the result of perceived lack of transparency in regulatory and production systems, and public perceptions that the “truth” about risks is being concealed in order to protect the vested interests of regulators, scientists, producers or the food industry. It is concluded that new integrated risk analysis systems should be developed which do not a priori assume that risk assessment, risk management and risk communication should be functionally separated. INTRODUCTION Recent food scares have increased consumer concerns about quality of food and how this is related to food production practices. In particular, consumer confidence in the motives of food producers and retailers, and institutions which have responsibility for consumer protection, have decreased. Examples of recent food hazards that have exacerbated this effect include BSE (which has apparently increased consumer concerns about other animal diseases such as foot and mouth, and animal welfare issues associated with animal feeds), public concerns about the use of transgenic organisms in agriculture and food production, the presence of dioxins and endocrine disrupters in the food chain, and the acrylamide scare in Sweden. Consumer concern is not exclusively related to risk. Ethical concerns (such as those associated with animal husbandry practices, animal welfare in general, environmental impact of agricultural technologies and concerns about technology negatively impacting the integrity of nature) are also likely to determine the acceptability or otherwise of different food products. Thus consumer perception and interpretation of quality may include diverse factors such as organoleptic properties, risk perceptions, and ethical issues related to the method of production and the impact of agricultural practices on the environment or well-being of animals. Proc. Int. Conf. Quality in Chains Eds. Tijskens & Vollebregt Acta Hort. 604, ISHS 2003 234 It is now recognized that technical risk estimates alone do not form the basis for the development of a coherent and utilitarian food policy that is also acceptable to consumers. Research conducted by Paul Slovic and his co-workers (for example, see Slovic, 1993) has consistently demonstrated that factors such as whether a risk is perceived to be involuntary, potentially catastrophic, or uncontrolled are more important determinants of public response than technical risk estimates. Risk perceptions represent extremely important determinants of food choice behaviours and perceptions of food quality. Risk perceptions and related attitudes not only influence health behaviours associated with dietary and nutritional issues (such as high levels of fat consumption, or patterns of dietary intake that exclude particular nutrients), but also influence attitudes towards microbiological risks and food handling practices. Risk perception is important in the understanding of public attitudes towards the different processes and technologies used in agriculture and food manufacturing, and has been problematic in terms of introducing some innovations from within the biosciences into the food chain. The importance of such perceptions has been studied in the context of food safety (Fife-Schaw and Rowe, 2000; Verbeke and Viane, 1999; Verbeke, 2001; Frewer and Salter, 2002), transgenic organisms in the food chain (Frewer et al., 1997), and unintended negative environmental and health impacts of agricultural technologies (Levidow and Marris 2001). There has also been emphasis on institutional and cultural differences in risk analysis (Turner and Wynne, 1992). Individual differences in perceptions are also important, particularly under circumstances where risk exposure is perceived to be involuntary (Barnett and Breakwell, 2001). Affective factors, such as “worry’’, may also influence perceived risk (Baron et al, 2000), as may personality correlates such as “anxiety” (Bouyer et al, 2001). Differences in perceptions of risk and benefit associated with various hazards exist between different countries and cultures, between different individuals within countries, and within different individuals at different times and within different contexts (Burger et al, 2001; Frewer et al, in press). For example, gender or ethnicity is one of the best predictors of higher risk perception for a range of health and safety issues, (Dosman et al 2001; Flynn et al, 1994; Fincucane et al, 2000; Johnson 2002). One conclusion from this research is that ethnic minorities, less affluent individuals and women perceive that they are excluded from risk management decisionmaking processes. Otway (1987) has observed that effective risk management involves structuring decision-making processes in such a way that they can accommodate social concerns and provide institutional forms in which these social concerns can be discussed. In particular, societal priorities for risk mitigation activities may not align with those identified by expert groups. However, dismissing the former as irrelevant may result in public outrage, and increased distrust in the motives of regulators and industry. HOW DO CONSUMER PERCEPTIONS AND ATTITUDES INFLUENCE BEHAVIOURS? Consumer attitudes and perceptions can influence behaviours in various ways. Some examples of how risk perceptions may be associated with particular products or foods are summarised below: • Product choices and product substitution. Consumers may avoid the product category and turn to substitute products (of particular importance when a category of food product is affected by a risk for example, consumer tendency to choose beef products was impacted by both the BSE (Pennings, Warsink and Meulenberg, 2002) and dioxin scares (Verbeke 2001) • Brand choices. Consumers may turn to brands that they trust more strongly (Smith Young and Gibson, 1998) and that provide reassurance in terms of risk perception (Aaker, 1991). • Retail choice. Consumers may switch to retailers with a stronger image of trust-