Short cuts to safety: Risk and 'rules of thumb' in accounts of food choice

Abstract

A number of 'food scares' over the past decade in Europe have generated considerable debate about public understandings of food risk, and the extent to which such understandings impact on decision making. This paper reports on a focus group study of how UK consumers discuss choosing safe food. Strategies for making food choices were, in general, characterised by confidence rather than anxiety. Although concerned in an abstract way with the safety of food and how it was monitored, 'risk' and 'safety' were rarely the primary discursive framework used for justifying food choices. Other discourses, such as health, naturalness, economy and convenience, competed with, overlapped with or were legitimated by that of 'risk'. However, everyday decision making was presented as a routine endeavour, aided by a number of 'short cuts' or rules of thumb for establishing food choices as routine and unremarkable. These short cuts divided safe from risky categories of food, but also divided preferred from despised foodstuffs in relation to other food discourses. Rules of thumb provided useful rhetorical devices for routinising accounts of food choice. In practice, however, rules of thumb are reported as being utilised in complex and contingent ways. They thus provide a sophisticated bulwark against the uncertainties of food risks when events (such as the media concern over BSE) threaten everyday trust in routine decisions.

Trust in the Australian food supply: Innocent until proven guilty

“…The participants for this study were spread evenly across the age range, with the largest group aged 40-49 years (n=13) and smallest groups aged 30-39 (n=8). As degree of trust in food has also been found to be related to gender (Green et al, 2003;Lupton 2005) both female and male participants were sought, however the requirement that participants be the primary shopper resulted in the recruitment of more females than males (13 males and 34 females).…”

“…The sample was also structured by age as younger consumers have been found to be are less concerned with food choice and healthy diets and were more likely to take risks in terms of food choice and health (Green et al 2003: Lupton 2005. Moreover, as a distinct subculture, young adults are recipients of targeted marketing of commodities, including foods and beverages Archived at Flinders University: dspace.flinders.edu.au (Coulson, 2002).…”

“…This is even more evident in literature around consumer concerns and perceptions of the trustworthiness of food. As a fundamental aspect of trust (Giddens, 1994;Luhmann, 1979), studies of trust and food have also stimulated an interest in understanding consumer perceptions and concerns around food risks and the extent to which exposure to risk challenges trust in the food system leading to greater reflection upon food safety (Green, Draper, & Dowler, 2003;Houghton, Van Kleef, Rowe, & Frewer, 2006;Lupton, 2004;Shaw, 2004). …”

Focus-group interview and data analysis

“…The uniqueness of a focus group is its ability to generate data based on the synergy of the group interaction (Green et al 2003). The members of the group should, therefore, feel comfortable with each other and engage in discussion.…”

Deprem Deneyimini Yaşamış Kişilerin Deprem Öncesi Hazırlık Algılarının Belirlenmesi: Bir Durum Çalışması

“…Odak grup görüşmeleri bireylerin belirli bir konu hakkında fikirlerini, duygularını ve sorunlarını daha derinlemesine ifade etmelerine fırsat verdiği ve bireyler arasındaki farklılıkları daha net ortaya çıkardığı için (Rabiee, 2004) araştırmada bu yöntem kullanılmıştır. Ayrıca odak grup görüşmelerinde bireyler kendi aralarında etkileşime dayalı olarak sinerji oluşturabilir ve tartışma ortamında daha net veriler üretebilirler (Green, Draper & Dowler, 2003). Görüşme rehberi, araştırma soruları doğrultusunda alan yazından yararlanılarak araştırmacılar tarafından geliştirilmiştir.…”