Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Public Participation in Developing Policy Related to Food Issues

  • Chapter
Food, People and Society

Abstract

There are a variety of practical and ethical reasons for policy making bodies to involve lay people in decision making on issues in which the public has a stake. Political theorists and ethicists discuss concepts such as democracy, procedural justice, and human rights, in providing the moral basis for involvement; but in a practical and expedient sense, making decisions without knowledge of the views of the public majority, or without public support, is liable to lead to confrontation, dispute, disruption, boycott, unrest, distrust, and simple public dissatisfaction. This need for public involvement would seem particularly evident in the food domain, as the food we eat, its taste, safety, price, and so on, are of fundamental, unavoidable and everyday interest to us all.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 279.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Asch, S.E. (1956) Studies of independence and conformity: L A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monograpghs, 70 (9, whole No.416)

    Google Scholar 

  • Bainbridge, J. (2000) The Scientific Advisory Committee Experience. Presentation given to Office of Science and Technology Seminar: Sharing Techniques for wider Consultation, 22nd March, London, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Barthes, Y., and C. Mays (1998.) High profile and deep strategy: Communication and information practices in France’s underground laboratory siting process. Technical Note SEGR/98, 18, Institute De Protection Et De Surete Nucleaire

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, H., and R.B. Johnson (1991) Comments: Public policy issues. In The Genetic Revolution. Scientific prospects and public perceptions, edited by B. Davies. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, D. ( 1999. ) The recent excitement over genetically modified foods. In Risk communication and public health, edited by P. Bennett, and K. Calman, 140–151. Oxford: Oxford University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnigo, C.A. (1989.) Public input and siting of a waste-disposal facility: New York state Low-Level Radioactive-Waste Policy Act of 1986. Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine,65 (4): 511–516

    Google Scholar 

  • Chipman, H., P. Kendall, M. Slater, and G. Auld (1996) Audience responses to a risk communication message in 4 media formats. Journal of Nutrition Education, 28 (3): 133–139

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunlap, R.E., Kraft, M.E. and Rosa, E.A. (Eds.) (1993) Public reactions to nuclear waste: citizens’ views of repository siting. Durham, NC: Duke University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Earle, T.C., and G.T. Cvetkovich (1995) Social Trust. Westport, Connecticut: Praegor

    Google Scholar 

  • Eiser, J.R. (1994) Attitudes, chaos and the connectionist mind. Oxford, Blackwell

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellahi, B. (1995) UK National Consensus Conference on Plant Biotechnology. Trends in Food Science and Technology, 6 (2): 35–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiorino, D.J. (1990) Citizen participation and environmental risk: A survey of institutional mechanisms. Science, Technology and Human Values, 15 (2): 226–243

    Google Scholar 

  • Frewer, L.J., Howard, C., Hedderley, D. and Shepherd, R. (1996) What determines trust in information about food-related risks? Underlying psychological constructs. Risk Analysis, 16: 473–486

    Google Scholar 

  • Frewer, L.J., and R. Shepherd (1998) Consumer Perceptions of Modern Food Biotechnology. In Genetic engineering for the Food industry: A strategy for food quality improvement, edited by S. Roller, and S. Harlander, 27–46. New York: Blackie Academic

    Google Scholar 

  • Flynn, J., Slovic, P. and Mertz, C.K. (1993) Decidedly different: Expert and public views of risks from a radioactive waste repository. Risk Analysis, 13: 643–648

    Google Scholar 

  • Golding, D., S. Krimsky, and A. Plough (1992) Evaluating risk communication: Narrative vs technical presentations of information about radon. Risk Analysis, 12 (1): 27–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Jasanoff, S. (1993) Bridging the two cultures of risk analysis. Risk Analysis, 13 (2): 123–129 Jasanoff, S. (1997) Civilization and madness: The great BSE scare of 1996. Public Understanding of Science, 6 (3): 221–232

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, B. (1999) Exploring dimensionality in the origins of hazard-related trust. Journal of Risk Research, 2: 325–354

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, B. and Slovic, P. (1995) Presenting uncertainty in health risk assessment: Initial studies of its effects on risk perception and trust. Risk Analysis, 15: 485–494

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasperson, R.E., D. Golding, and S. Tuler (1992) Social distrust as a factor in siting hazardous facilities and communicating risks. Journal of Social Issues, 48: 161–187

    Google Scholar 

  • Klauenberg, B.J., and E.K. Vermulen (1994) Role for risk communication in closing military waste sites. Risk Analysis, 14 (3): 351–356

    Google Scholar 

  • Kraus, N., T. Malmfors, and P. Slovic (1992) Intuitive toxicology: Expert and lay judgments of chemical risks. Risk Analysis, 12 (2): 215–232

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewenstein, B. (1995) Science and the media. In: Jasanoff, S., Markle, G.E., Petersen, J.C. and Pinch, T. (Eds.) Handbook of Science and Technology Studies (pp. 343–360 ) Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowndes, V., G. Stoker, D. Pratchett, D. Wilson, S. Leach, and M. Wingfield (1998) Enhancing public participation in local government: A research report. London: Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions

    Google Scholar 

  • McGuire, W. J. (1985) Attitudes and attitude change. In: G. Lindzey and E. Aronson. (Eds) The Handbook of Social Psychology. (3rd Edition, Vol. 2, pp. 233–346 ) New York, Random House

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, S. and Frewer, L.J. (2000) The impact of information content and presentational context on perceptions of specific food risks. Report submitted to the UK Food Standards Agency. Institute of Food Research, Norwich UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Moffet, J. (1996) Environmental priority setting based on comparative risk and public input. Canadian Public Administration, 39 (3): 362–385

    Google Scholar 

  • Moscovici, S. (1976) Social influence and social change. Academic Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Moscovici, S. and Zavalloni, M (1969) The group as a polarizer of attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 12: 125–135

    Google Scholar 

  • National Consensus Conference (1994) The Lay Preliminary Report UK National Consensus Conference on Plant Biotechnology, Science Museum, London: UK

    Google Scholar 

  • National Consumer Council (1994) Consumer representation in the public sector: How the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the Benefit Agency consult users

    Google Scholar 

  • Perhac, R.M. (1996) Defining risk: Normative considerations. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 2 (2): 381–392

    Google Scholar 

  • Perhac, R.M. (1998) Comparative risk assessment: Where does the public fit in Science, Technology, and Human Values, 23 (2): 221–241

    Google Scholar 

  • Petts, J. (1997) The public-expert interface in local waste management decisions: expertise, credibility and process. Public Understanding of Science, 6 (4): 359–381

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn, O. (1992) Risk communication: Towards a rational discourse with the public. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 29 (3): 465–519

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowe, G. and Frewer, L.J. (2000) Public Participation Methods: A Framework for Evaluation, Science, Technology, and Human Values, 25 (1): 3–29

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandman, P. (1993) Responding to Community Outrage: Strategies for effective risk communication. Fairfax, VA: American Industrial Hygiene Association

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Stoner, J.A.F. (1968) Risky and cautious shifts in group decisions. The influence of widley held values. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 4: 442–459

    Google Scholar 

  • Turney, J. (1995) The public understanding of genetics–where next? The European Journal of the Genetics Society, 1: 5–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Webler, T. (1995) `Right’ discourse in citizen participation: An evaluative yardstick. In Fairness and competence in citizen participation: Evaluating models for environmental discourse, edited by O. Renn, T. Webler, and P. Wiedemann, 35–86. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers

    Google Scholar 

  • Worcester, R.M. (1999) Seeking consensus on contentious Scientific issues: Science and Democracy. Paper presented to the Foundation for Science and Democracy, 12th July, Royal Society, London

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Gene Rowe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Catherine Reynolds
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lynn J. Frewer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Norwich Research Park, NR47UA, Colney, Norwich, UK

    Lynn J. Frewer (Consumer Science Section) (Consumer Science Section)

  2. Matforsk, Osloveien 1, N-1430, As, Norway

    Einar Risvik (Research Director) (Research Director)

  3. Department of Industrial Design, Delft University of Technology, Jaffalaan 9, 2628 BX, Delft, The Netherlands

    Hendrik Schifferstein

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Rowe, G., Reynolds, C., Frewer, L.J. (2001). Public Participation in Developing Policy Related to Food Issues. In: Frewer, L.J., Risvik, E., Schifferstein, H. (eds) Food, People and Society. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-04601-2_25

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-04601-2_25

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-07477-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-04601-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation