Search

The article presents a best practice model that can be utilized by food system actors to assist with (re)building trust in the food system, before, during and after a food incident defined as 'any situation within the food supply chain where there is a risk or potential risk of illness or confirmed illness or injury associated with the consumption of a food or foods' (Commonwealth of Australia. National Food Incident Response Protocol. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, 2012). Interviews were undertaken with 105 actors working within the media, food industry and food regulatory settings across Australia, New Zealand (NZ) and the United Kingdom (UK). Interview data produced strategy statements, which indicated participant views on how to (re)build consumer trust in the food system. These included: (i) be transparent, (ii) have protocols and procedures in place, (iii) be credible, (iv) be proactive, (v) put consumers first, (vi) collaborate with stakeholders, (vii) be consistent, (viii) educate stakeholders and consumers, (ix) build your reputation and (x) keep your promises. A survey was designed to enable participants to indicate their agreement/disagreement with the ideas, rate their importance and provide further comment. The five strategies considered key to (re)building consumer trust were used to develop a model demonstrating best practice strategies for (re)building consumer trust in the food system before, during and after a food incident. In a world where the food system is increasingly complex, strategies for (re)building and fostering consumer trust are important. This study offers a model to do so which is derived from the views and experiences of actors working across the food industry, food regulation and the media., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Food regulatory bodies play an important role in public health, and in reducing the costs of food borne illness that are absorbed by both industry and government. Regulation in the food industry involves a relationship between regulators and members of the industry, and it is imperative that these relationships are built on trust. Research has shown in a variety of contexts that businesses find the most success when there are high levels of trust between them and their key stakeholders. An evidence-based understanding of the barriers to communication and trust is imperative if we are to put forward recommendations for facilitating the (re)building of trusting and communicative relationships., Methods: We present data from 72 interviews with regulators and industry representatives regarding their trust in and communication with one another. Interviews were conducted in the UK, New Zealand, and Australia in 2013., Results: Data identify a variety of factors that shape the dynamic and complex relationships between regulators and industry, as well as barriers to communication and trust between the two parties. Novel in our approach is our emphasis on identifying solutions to these barriers from the voices of industry and regulators., Conclusions: We provide recommendations (e.g., development of industry advisory boards) to facilitate the (re)building of trusting and communicative relationships between the two parties.

This study aims to report and critically analyze the responses of governance actors to a set of consumers' concerns relating to food labeling, and by doing so describe how these actors construct both consumer perspectives and the food policy environment in which they work. Fifteen food‐labeling governance actors in Australia and New Zealand were asked to view an online presentation of the findings from a previous study exploring consumer perspectives on food labeling and trust before completing a one‐hour, in‐depth, semi‐structured interview. Colebatch's social constructionist perspective on policy was adopted in the analysis. Participants used their own constructions of Australian food policy, the role of labeling and consumer trust as a means to minimize the consumer concerns. Inadequate critical engagement with the moral dimension of consumer concerns is a core driver of the inertia demonstrated in the Australian government's approach to addressing consumer concerns regarding food matters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Consumer trust in food system actors is foundational for ensuring consumer confidence in food safety. As food labelling is a direct communication between consumers and food system actors, it may influence consumer perceptions of actor trustworthiness. This study explores the judgements formed about the trustworthiness of the food system and its actors through labelling, and the expectations these judgements are based on. In-depth, semi-structured interviews with 24 Australian consumers were conducted. Theoretical sampling focussed on shopping location, dietary requirements, rurality, gender, age and educational background. The methodological approach used (adaptive theory) enabled emerging data to be examined through the lens of a set of guiding theoretical concepts, and theory reconsidered in light of emerging data. Food labelling acted as a surrogate for personal interaction with industry and government for participants. Judgements about the trustworthiness of these actors and the broader food system were formed through interaction with food labelling and were based on expectations of both competence and goodwill. Interaction with labelling primarily reduced trust in actors within the food system, undermining trust in the system as a whole. Labelling has a role as an access point to the food system. Access points are points of vulnerability for systems, where trust can be developed, reinforced or broken down. For the participants in this study, in general labelling demonstrates food system actors lack goodwill and violate their fiduciary responsibility. This paper provides crucial insights for industry and policy actors to use this access point to build, rather than undermine, trust in food systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The importance of consumer trust in the food supply has previously been identified, and dimensions of consumer trust in food-who they trust and the type of trust that they exhibit-has been explored. However, there is a lack of research about the mechanisms through which consumer trust in the food supply is developed, maintained, broken and repaired. This study seeks to address this gap by exploring if, and how, consumer trust in the food supply is considered by the media, food industry and governments when responding to food scares. The aim of the research is to develop models of trust building that can be implemented following food scares. Methods: Semi-structured interviews will be undertaken with media, public relations officials and policy makers in Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. Participants will be recruited through purposive sampling and will be asked to discuss a hypothetical case study outlining a food incident, and any experiences of specific food scares. Models of trust development, maintenance and repair will be developed from interview data. Comment on these models will be sought from experts in food-related organizations through a Delphi study, where participants will be asked to consider the usefulness of the models. Participants' comments will be used to revise the models until consensus is reached on the suitability and usability of the models. Discussion: This study will contribute to the literature about systems-based trust, and explore trust as a social and regulatory process. The protocol and results will be of interest and use to the food industry, food regulators, consumer advocate groups, media seeking to report food-related issues and policy makers concerned with public health and consumer health and well-being. This research represents an important contribution to the translation of the theoretical conceptualizations of trust into practical use in the context of food. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Researchers and food system actors have developed a best practice model to assist with (re)building or maintaining consumer trust in the food system in the event of a food incident. The aim of the present study was to determine how well the model aligns with consumer views of the strategies required to maintain consumer trust during and following a food incident. This qualitative public deliberation study employed experimental, developmental vignettes during 2 full-day sessions in May 2018. Following general discussion of the food incident scenario presented in the vignettes, 15 South Australian adults (in two groups) developed a collated and ranked list of key strategies to be used by food system actors during a food incident to assist in maintaining consumer trust. Participants were then introduced to the existing model, and engaged in discussions about if and how their strategies aligned with those in the existing model. Findings demonstrate broad consistency between the two groups and the model in the strategies identified as key for (re)building and maintaining consumer trust during a food incident. For example, timely transparency was reported by consumers as the key strategy for maintaining consumer trust during and after a food incident. However, participants expressed pessimism regarding actors' ability to implement strategies. Although minimal, differences were noted in strategy descriptions between the groups and the Model. This study suggests that overall the model is highly consistent with consumer views. If actors are to demonstrably apply the Model in the event of a food incident, our data suggest that the identified strategies will successfully assist them in (re)building and/or maintaining consumer trust in the food supply. Highlights • Timely transparency is the key strategy for consumer trust during a food incident. • Consumers and food actors propose similar strategies for maintaining consumer trust. • Consumers express pessimism regarding food actors' ability to implement strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]