Search

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]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: This paper explores how food regulators respond to food incidents and the barriers and enablers associated with doing so. Methods: Twenty‐six semi‐structured interviews lasting between 30 and 60 minutes were undertaken with Australian food regulators. Regulators worked across food policy development, implementation, enforcement and standards setting. These interviews ascertained food regulators' views on food safety and responses to real and hypothetical food incidents. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. Results: Food regulators reported that working together with other food regulators is an important part of effective food regulation and response to food incidents. Strategies for working together included clarifying expectations and developing formal documents such as a memorandum of understanding. However, challenges in working together were reported, including different risk thresholds, different political agendas and a lack of clarity on regulators' roles. Conclusions: A focus on partnerships and good communication between food regulators is likely to facilitate effective management of food incidents, and maximise the chances that food incidents do not lead to increased consumer morbidity and mortality as a result of a poor response to a food incident. [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]

This article explores the expression of three forest value orientations that emerged from an analysis of Australian news media discourse about the management of Australian native forests from August 1, 1997 through December 31, 2004. Computer-coded content analysis was used to measure and track the relative importance of commodity, ecological and moral/spiritual/aesthetic forest value orientations. The number of expressions of these forest value orientations followed major events in forest management and policy, with peaks corresponding to finalization of Regional Forest Agreements and conflicts over forest management. Over the time period analyzed, the relative share of commodity value orientation decreased and the shares of the ecological and moral/spiritual/aesthetic value orientations increased. The shifts in forest value orientations highlight the need for native forests to be managed for multiple values and the need for continued monitoring of forest values. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

General consumer knowledge of and engagement with the production of food has declined resulting in increasing consumer uncertainty about, and sensitivity to, food risks. Emphasis is therefore placed on providing information for consumers to reduce information asymmetry regarding food risks, particularly through food labelling. This study examines the role of food labelling in influencing consumer perceptions of food risks. In-depth, 1-h interviews were conducted with 24 Australian consumers. Participants were recruited based on an a priori defined food safety risk scale, and to achieve a diversity of demographic characteristics. The methodological approach used, adaptive theory, was chosen to enable a constant interweaving of theoretical understandings and empirical data throughout the study. Participants discussed perceiving both traditional (food spoilage/microbial contamination) and modern (social issues, pesticide and 'chemical' contamination) risks as present in the food system. Food labelling was a symbol of the food system having managed traditional risks, and a tool for consumers to personally manage perceived modern risks. However, labelling also raised awareness of modern risks not previously considered. The consumer framing of risk presented demonstrates the need for more meaningful consumer engagement in policy decision making to ensure risk communication and management meet public expectations. This research innovatively identifies food labelling as both a symbol of, and a tool for, the management of perceived risks for consumers. Therefore it is imperative that food system actors ensure the authenticity and trustworthiness of all aspects of food labelling, not only those related to food safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Consumer trust in food systems is essential for consumers, food industry, policy makers and regulators. Yet no comprehensive tool for measuring consumer trust in food systems exists. Similarly, the impact that trust in the food system has on health-related food behaviours is yet to be empirically examined. The aim of this research was to develop a comprehensive instrument to measure trust in the food system (the Dimensions of Trust in Food Systems Scale (DOTIFS scale) and use it to explore whether trust in the food system impacts consumers' health-related behaviours., Methods: The DOTIFS scale was developed using sociological theories of trust and pre-existing instruments measuring aspects of trust. It was pilot tested and content validity was assessed with 85 participants. A mixed-methods exploration of the health-related behaviours of 18 conveniently sampled Australian consumers with differing trust scores determined by the DOTIFS scale was then conducted. During March-July 2019 shopping- and home-observations were used to assess participants' food safety practices and exposure to public health fortification programs, while the CSIRO Healthy Diet Score determined their adherence to national dietary guidelines., Results: The DOTIFS scale was found to have high comprehension, ease of use and content validity. Statistical analysis showed scale scores significantly trended as predicted by participants' stated level of trust. Differences were found in the way individuals with more or less trust in the food system comply with national dietary guidelines, are exposed to public health fortification programs, and adhere to recommended food safety practices., Conclusions: The DOTIFS scale is a comprehensive, sociologically- and empirically- informed assessment of consumer trust in food systems that can be self-administered online to large populations and used to measure changes in consumer trust over time. The differences in health-related behaviours between individuals with varying levels of trust warrant further investigation., (© 2021. The Author(s).)