Advertisement

Consumer perceptions

  • A. C. D. Hayward
Chapter
  • 301 Downloads

Abstract

Food risks form a diverse and considerable spectrum. Potentially hazardous substances such as preservatives, colourings and insecticides are intentionally applied to food products because they provide offsetting benefits. Veterinary medicines and migrants from food packaging can also be sources of risk. Other food hazards occur as accidental and unwanted contamination; for example, chemicals such as dioxins, lead and mercury sometimes enter the food chain from the surrounding air, soil and water. Microbiological contamination, e.g. Salmonella and Literia, can arise through poor handling and hygiene practices. Food itself is a source of risk: aflatoxins (produced by moulds on nuts and grains) and glycoalkaloids (present in green potatoes) are examples of many naturally occurring sources of possibly carcinogenic harm; equally, consuming an unbalanced diet can have lethal results.

Keywords

Risk Perception Food Safety Pesticide Residue Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy Cultural Theory 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food (1993) Interim Report on Campylobacter. HMSO, London.Google Scholar
  2. Aldrich, L. (1994) Food-safety policy: balancing risks and costs. Food Review, 17(2), 9–13.Google Scholar
  3. Beck, U. (1992) Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. Sage Publications, London.Google Scholar
  4. Brell, M. (1979) Food safety and the consumer. Food Technology in Australia, 31(2), 65–67.Google Scholar
  5. Brewer, M.S., Sprouls, G.K. and Russon, C. (1993) Consumer attitudes toward food safety issues. Journal of Food Safety, 14, 63–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown, C.A. (1984) The central Arizona water control study: a case for multi-objective planning and public involvement. Water Resources Bulletin , 20(3), 331–337.Google Scholar
  7. Burke, D.C. (1991) Public acceptance of innovation. In: Roberts, L. and Weale, A. (eds) Innovation and Environmental Risk. Belhaven Press, London, pp. 75–79.Google Scholar
  8. Buss, D.M. and Craik, K.H. (1983) Contemporary worldviews: personal and policy implications. Journal of Applied Social Psychology , 13(3), 259–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Buzby, J.C. and Skees, J.R. (1994) Consumers want reduced exposure to pesticides on food. Food Review, 16(2), 19–22.Google Scholar
  10. Collins, E.J.T. (1993) Food adulteration and food safety in Britain in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Food Policy, 18(2), 95–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Council for Science and Society (1977) The Acceptability of Risks: The Logic and Social Dynamics of Fair Decisions and Effective Controls. Barry Rose Ltd, Chichester.Google Scholar
  12. Dake, K. (1991) Orienting dispositions in the perception of risk: an analysis of contemporary worldviews and cultural biases. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 22(1), 61–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Department of Health (1993) Key Area Handbook: Coronary Heart Disease and Stroke. Department of Health, Heywood, Lancashire.Google Scholar
  14. Douglas, M. (1966) Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Douglas, M. (1986) Risk Acceptability According to the Social Sciences. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.Google Scholar
  16. Douglas, M. (1992) Risk and Blame: Essays in Cultural Theory. Routledge, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Douglas, M. and Wildavsky, A. (1982) Risk and Culture: An Essay on the Selection of Technological and Environmental Dangers. University of California Press, Berkeley, California.Google Scholar
  18. Fischhoff, B. (1989) Risk: a guide of controversy. Appendix C in Improving Risk Communication. National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington DC.Google Scholar
  19. Fischhoff, B. (1990) Psychology and public policy: tool or toolmaker? American Psychologist, 45(5), 647–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Flynn, J., Slovic, P. and Mertz, C.K. (1994) Gender, race and perception of environmental health risks. Risk Analysis, 14(6), 1101–1108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Forsythe, R.H. (1993) Risk: reality versus perception. Poultry Science, 72(6), 1152–1156.Google Scholar
  22. Frewer, L.J., Shepherd, R. and Sparks, P. (1994) The interrelationship between perceived knowledge, control and risk associated with a range of food-related hazards targeted at the individual, other people and society. Journal of Food Safety, 14, 19–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gardner, G.T. and Gould, L.C. (1989) Public perceptions of the risks and benefits of technology. Risk Analysis, 9(2), 225–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gross, J.L. and Rayner, S. (1985) Measuring Culture. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  25. Hall, R.L. (1971) Information, confidence and sanity in the food sciences. The Flavour Industry, August, 455–459.Google Scholar
  26. Harding, C. and Eiser, J. (1984) Characterising the perceived risks and benefits of some health issues. Risk Analysis, 4(2), 131–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jenkins-Smith, H.C. (1994) Stigma Models: Testing Hypotheses of How Images of Nevada are Acquired and Values Attached to Them. Research Report Policy and Economic Analysis Group, University of Albuquerque, New Mexico.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jukes, D. (1993) Regulation and enforcement of food safety in the UK. Food Policy, 18(2), 131–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jussaume, R.A. and Judson, D.H. (1992) Public perceptions about food safety in the United States and Japan. Rural Sociology , 57(2), 235–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Keeney, R.L., von Winterfeldt, D. and Eppel, T. (1990) Eliciting public values for complex policy decisions. Management Science, 36(9), 1011–1030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lee, K. (1989) Food neophobia: major causes and treatments. Food Technology, December, 62–73.Google Scholar
  32. Lowrance, W.W. (1976) Of Acceptable Risk: Science and the Determination of Safety. William Kaufman Inc., Los Altos, California.Google Scholar
  33. Lynch, S. and Lin, C.T.J. (1994) Food safety: meal planners express their concerns. Food Review, 17(2), 14–18.Google Scholar
  34. Marris, C.D., O’Riordan, T. and Simpson, A.C.D. (1995) Redefining the cultural context of risk perception. Paper presented to the Annual Meeting of the Society for Risk Analysis (Europe), 21–25 May, Stuttgart, Germany.Google Scholar
  35. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1990) Risk Assessment and Risk Management in Food Safety. MAFF Consumer Panel paper CP (90) 4/6. MAFF, London.Google Scholar
  36. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1994) Chemicals in Food: Managing the Risks. Fooense Booklet PB1695. MAFF, London.Google Scholar
  37. Oltersdorf, U. (1995) Differences in German consumer concerns over suggested health and food hazards. In: Feichtinger, E. and Köhler, B.M. (eds) Current Research into Eating Practices, Contributions of Social Sciences. 16th Annual Meeting of AGEV in Potsdam, Germany, 14–16 October 1993. AGEV Publication Series Volume 10. Supplement to Ernährungs-Umschau, 42, 171–173.Google Scholar
  38. Otway, H. (1992) Public wisdom, expert fallibility: toward a contextual theory of risk. In: Krimsky, S. and Golding, D. (eds) Social Theories of Risk. Praeger, Westport, Connecticut, pp. 215–228.Google Scholar
  39. Rayner, S. (1987) Risk and relativism in science for policy. In: Johnson, B.B. and Covello, V.T. (eds) The Social and Cultural Construction of Risk. D. Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 5–23.Google Scholar
  40. Rayner, S. (1992) Cultural theory and risk analysis. In: Krimsky, S. and Golding, D. (eds) Social Theories of Risk. Westport, Connecticut, pp. 83–115.Google Scholar
  41. Rayner, S. and Cantor, R. (1987) How fair is safe enough? The cultural approach to societal technology choice. Risk Analysis, 7(1), 3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Renn, O., Webler, T., Rakel, H. et al. (1993) Public participation in decision making: a three step procedure. Policy Sciences, 26, 189–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rohrmann, B. (1991) A Survey of Social-Scientific Research on Risk Perception. Research Report, Programme Group Man, Environment, Technology. KFA Jülich, Germany.Google Scholar
  44. Royal Society (1992) Risk: Analysis, Perception and Management. The Royal Society, London.Google Scholar
  45. Schafer, E., Schafer, R.B., Bultena, G.L. and Hoiberg, E.O. (1993) Safety of the US food supply: consumer concerns and behaviour. Journal of Consumer Studies and Home Economics, 17, 137–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Schwarz, M. and Thompson, M. (1990) Divided We Stand: Redefining Politics, Technology and Social Choice. Harvester Wheatsheaf, London.Google Scholar
  47. Simpson, A.C.D. (1994) Integrating Public And Scientific Judgements into a Tool Kit for Managing Food-Related Risks, Stage III: Pilot Test. Research Report 23. Centre for Environmental and Risk Management, University of East Anglia, Norwich.Google Scholar
  48. Simpson, A.C.D. (1995) Exploring consumer perceptions of food-related risks and benefits using focus groups. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Risk Analysis (Europe), May 21–25, Stuttgart, Germany.Google Scholar
  49. Sjöberg, L. and Drottz-Sjöberg, B-M. (1994) Risk perception. In: Radiation and Society: Comprehending Radiation Risk, Vol. 1. Proceedings of an International Conference Organized by the International Atomic Agency, Paris, October. IAEA, Vienna, pp. 29–59.Google Scholar
  50. Sjödén, P-O. (1990) Oro och uppfattningar bland konsumenter. Vår Föda, 42(3), 1756–185.Google Scholar
  51. Slovic, P. (1987) Perceived risk. Science, 236(4799), 280–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Slovic, P. (1993) Perceived risk, trust and democracy. Risk Analysis, 13(6), 675–682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B. and Lichtenstein, S. (1979) Rating the risks. Environment, 21(3), 14–20, 36–39.Google Scholar
  54. Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B. and Lichtenstein, S. (1980) Facts and fears: understanding perceived risk. In: Schwing, R.C. and Albers, W.A. (eds) Societal Risk Assessment: How Safe is Safe Enough? Plenum Press, New York, pp. 181–214.Google Scholar
  55. Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B. and Lichtenstein, S. (1985) Characterizing perceived risk. In: Kates, R., Hohenemser, C. and Kasperson, J. (eds) Perilous Progress: Managing the Hazards of Technology. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado, pp. 91–125.Google Scholar
  56. Sparks, P. and Shepherd, R. (1994) Public perceptions of the potential hazards associated with food production and food consumption: an empirical study. Risk Analysis, 14(5), 799–806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Starr, C. (1969) Social benefit versus technological risk: what is our society willing to pay for safety? Science, 165(3899), 1232–1238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Thompson, M. and Wildavsky, A. (1982) A proposal to create a cultural theory of risk. In: Kunreuther, H.C. and Ley, E.V. (eds) The Risk Analysis Controversy: An Institutional Perspective. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 145–161.Google Scholar
  59. Thompson, M., Ellis, R. and Wildavsky, A. (1990) Cultural Theory. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado.Google Scholar
  60. Wandel, M. (1994) Understanding consumer concern about food-related health risks. British Food Journal, 96(7), 35–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wildavsky, A. and Dake, K. (1990) Theories of risk perception: who fears what and why? Daedalus, 119(4), 41–60.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Chapman & Hall 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. C. D. Hayward

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations