Pass or Fail: Economic Incentives to Reduce <i>Salmonella</i> Contamination in Ground Beef Sold to the National School Lunch Program

Öllinger, Michael; Bovay, John

doi:10.1093/ajae/aax088

Cited by 9 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, McGarry Wolf and McLennan (2017) found that consumers demanding meat products purchased local brands because of quality but also because of proximity to their home. The food safety of beef served through the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) National School Lunch Program is a continuing public concern receiving periodic attention in the media (Ollinger, Guthrie, and Bovay, 2014). Higher consumer income also correlates positively with demand for animal products raised using humane practices or more stringent sanitary standards (Halbrook, Armbruster, and Thompson, 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consequentiality Beliefs and Consumer Valuation of Extrinsic Attributes in Beef

Jensen

Lambert

et al. 2017

J. Agric. Appl. Econ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This study measures willingness to pay (WTP) for extrinsic attributes (Angus, local, DNA traceable, raised carbon friendly, and humanely treated cattle) in steak and ground beef using choice-based experiments from a national consumer survey. Belief that survey responses could have consequences on beef products offered by the steak and ground beef industry is investigated, as well as its effect on attribute WTP. For most attributes, belief in consequentiality increases WTP. Results suggest that although consequentiality believers tend to place greater importance on certain food industry issues, they are less certain about the attribute's provision actually effecting change in the industry.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consequentiality Beliefs and Consumer Valuation of Extrinsic Attributes in Beef

Jensen

Lambert

et al. 2017

J. Agric. Appl. Econ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…can cause food‐borne illnesses, which may have life‐long health effects. 27 , 28 Chemicals stored and used at schools could easily be introduced through mishandling during the preparation, storage, and distribution phases, leading to residual exposures and potential adverse outcomes. 29 Hard, or sharp objects (eg, metal, glass, and plastic) in food can cause cuts to the mouth or throat, damage to teeth, gums intestines, or even cause suffocation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mobilizing and Delivering Essential Meals to Children and Families Affected by School Closures During COVID‐19 and Beyond

Ryan

Telford

Brickhouse

et al. 2022

Journal of School Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND The closure of schools in response to COVID‐19 compromised access to essential meals for many students. The Emergency Meals‐to‐You program, a public/private partnership, was set up to address this challenge. More than 38.7 million meals were delivered between April and August 2020. This study explores lessons learned and identifies strategies for strengthening food access and security at schools and beyond. METHODS Qualitative research methods were used. This included interviews and focus groups with participants involved in setting up and delivering the Emergency Meals‐to‐You program. Data were thematically analyzed using key phrases, ideas, and concepts, and interpreted. RESULTS The program leveraged a multisectoral approach. Components relied on each other and included: schools, public/private partnership, eligibility, relationships, experience, centralized communication, food quality and branding, logistics, and transport. Strategies identified to strengthen food access focused on integration with emergency management structures, understanding food needs at the school level, building a fully procurable menu, and allowing distribution to be rapidly scaled. CONCLUSIONS The lessons identified and strategies recommended provide a framework for working across the emergency management spectrum (school to national level) to strengthen food access and availability for students and their families affected by a pandemic, disaster, or crisis situation.

show abstract

“…Private‐sector solutions may include contracts between buyers and sellers. Golan et al (2004) and Ollinger and Bovay (2018) have shown that suppliers and buyers offering and searching for higher quality seek each other out, as suppliers undertake additional practices to better assure food safety in exchange for higher prices or sales guarantees. Ollinger, Moore, and Chandran (2004) report that at the time of their survey, about two‐thirds of chicken plants had contracts with buyers that were more stringent than the food‐safety standards of FSIS.…”

Section: Food Safety Information and Moral Hazardmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When it issued the PR/HACCP rule in 1996, the FSIS mandated that meat and poultry plants have a HACCP process control plan and required most slaughter and ground meat and poultry plants to meet standards for Salmonella . FSIS inspectors monitored compliance with HACCP process control tasks and also Sanitation Standard Operating Procedures (SSOPs) and issued noncompliance reports if tasks were poorly performed (Ollinger and Bovay 2018). The introduction of Salmonella testing marked a distinct departure from past regulatory oversight.…”

Section: Background On Fsis Regulationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Plant characteristics variables included in the model are the number of chickens slaughtered, plant age in years, and three dummy variables indicating whether the plant slaughtered animal species other than chickens, cooked, or in any way further processed chicken, thereby diminishing the need for strict control over harmful pathogens, and was part of a multi‐plant firm. Most of these have been found to be correlated with performance on tests for Salmonella (Muth et al 2007; Ollinger and Moore 2008, 2009; Ollinger and Bovay 2018). Three process control variables include each plant's annual shares of HACCP tasks and pre‐operational, and operational SSOP tasks in compliance with FSIS standards.…”

Section: Empirical Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Producer Response to Public Disclosure of Food‐Safety Information

Öllinger¹,

Bovay²

2019

American J Agri Economics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Beginning in 2003, the USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) put forth a series of Federal Register announcements regarding the public disclosure of results of tests for Salmonella in chicken carcasses. In particular, FSIS suggested in 2003 that it might disclose the identities of any slaughter or ground meat plant failing its Salmonella tests if test performance did not improve, and in 2004 the service increased regulatory scrutiny of plants not meeting FSIS Salmonella standards. In 2006, FSIS introduced a more easily-understood measure of food-safety quality and indicated that public disclosure would be forthcoming if results of tests for Salmonella did not improve; FSIS targeted the chicken-slaughter industry with a high degree of specificity. In 2008, FSIS began reporting the names of chicken-slaughter plants with poor performance on tests for Salmonella in chicken carcasses. This article examines the effects of these regulatory actions on Salmonella test outcomes. We find that (1) announcements in 2003 and 2004 were associated with improved performance by the poorestperforming chicken-slaughter plants;(2) the introduction of an easily-understood measure of foodsafety quality and the threat of disclosure of the identities of poorly performing plants in 2006 were associated with improved performance by all chicken-slaughter plants; and (3) implementation of a public disclosure program in 2008 was associated with improvements among better-performing chicken-slaughter plants.

show abstract

Pass or Fail: Economic Incentives to Reduce Salmonella Contamination in Ground Beef Sold to the National School Lunch Program

Cited by 9 publications

References 29 publications

Consequentiality Beliefs and Consumer Valuation of Extrinsic Attributes in Beef

Consequentiality Beliefs and Consumer Valuation of Extrinsic Attributes in Beef

Mobilizing and Delivering Essential Meals to Children and Families Affected by School Closures During COVID‐19 and Beyond

Producer Response to Public Disclosure of Food‐Safety Information

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About