It has been assumed that the general public is unable to conceptualize information about risk uncertainties, and so communication about food risk has tended to avoid this type of information. However, recent societal and political pressure to increase transparency in risk management practices will result in the uncertainties inherent in risk analysis becoming subject to public scrutiny. Best practice regarding risk communication must address how to communicate risk uncertainty. A questionnaire was developed that aimed to assess how the general public characterized uncertainty associated with food risks. The results indicated that people wanted to be provided with information about food risk uncertainty as soon as the uncertainty was identified. People were more accepting of uncertainty associated with the scientific process of risk management than they were of uncertainty due to lack of action or lack of interest on the part of the government. The findings indicate that the focus of risk communication should be on “what is being done to reduce the uncertainty.” Recommendations are made regarding best practice for communicating risk uncertainty.

Consumers may encounter a number of potential food hazards through their food choice decisions and consumption behaviour. It is psychologically determined risk perceptions that drive acceptance of such potential food hazards, and define people's risk‐taking or self‐protective behaviours. As such, it is necessary to understand exactly what consumers are worried about. Food issues of concern to consumers were identified in a previous exploratory focus group study. A list of 18 food safety issues was developed for the purpose of the study reported here, with the aim of comparing worry about the different issues and investigating any demographic differences. Factor analysis indicated that attitudes to the 18 food safety issues reflected two underlying constructs, the first relating to technological food issues and the second to lifestyle food issues. In general, people were more worried about technological food hazards compared to lifestyle hazards. Demographic differences were observed for gender, age and social class, but not for geographical region, or having children; furthermore, experience of food allergy or intolerance increased worry about technological issues.

No abstract

Background: The deterioration of the health status of the Romanian population during the economic transition from a centrally planned to a free market economy has been linked to lifestyles factors (e.g. diet) regarded as a main determinants of the disparity in life expectancy between Eastern and Western Europe. Reforms in the health care system in this transition economy aim to focus on preventive action. The purpose of this study was to identify the factors that impact on the individual decision to engage in Dietary Health Preventive Behaviour (DHPB) and investigate their influence in the context of an adapted health cognition model.

Food safety experts have a key role in constructing food risk messages and thus their perceptions will influence how food risk issues are communicated to the public. This research examined the perceptions of food safety experts regarding public understanding of food risk issues and food risk messages on the island of Ireland. It also looked into expert views of the barriers to effective food risk communication and how to improve food risk messages. One hundred and forty‐three experts, working in areas related to food safety, completed an online questionnaire. Questionnaire and statement design was guided by the results of four in‐depth interviews with food safety experts. The findings indicate that most experts surveyed have little confidence in the public's understanding of food risk issues, their assessment of food risks, their ability to deal with scientific information and their food safety practices. Experts are of the view that the public under‐assesses the risk associated with some microbiological hazards and over‐assesses the risk associated with other hazards such as genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and bovine spongiform encephalopathy. The opinion of experts with regard to GMOs is not supported by previous consumer research. Experts noted that the level of education and age were important determinants for the level of understanding of food risk issues and messages. Experts were of the view that early intervention via school curricula was the best method to improve public understanding of food risk messages in the long term. Furthermore, experts are of the view that the media have the ability to improve awareness and knowledge about food risk issues but believe that the media tend to communicate information that is misleading. The majority of experts also believe that they should communicate uncertainty but are not confident that the public is able to cope with this uncertainty. Many of the experts also indicated a desire for training on how to interact with the media. The results may be used by those experts who are involved in the construction of food risk messages to improve the design and communication of food risk messages.

This study employs a focus group methodology to examine the factors affecting the acceptability of gene technology in food production, using genetically modified (GM) farmed salmon as a focus for the research. The results identified a small group of “triers” ‐ willing to try any GM food product, and a small group of “refusers” ‐ rejecting the technology and derivative products. For the middle majority of “undecided” consumers, the decision to accept or reject GM food products was based on a number of interrelated factors, associated with the food product and the benefits conferred.

No abstract

No abstract