Comparison of the Importance and Prioritization of Information Communicated to Consumers by Experts Regarding Food Safety.

Food safety (Tokyo, Japan) Pub Date : 2022-05-13 eCollection Date: 2022-06-01 DOI:10.14252/foodsafetyfscj.D-21-00010
Itsuko Horiguchi, Kazuo Koyama, Azusa Hirakawa, Mieko Shiomi, Kaoruko Tachibana, Katsuyuki Watanabe
{"title":"Comparison of the Importance and Prioritization of Information Communicated to Consumers by Experts Regarding Food Safety.","authors":"Itsuko Horiguchi,&nbsp;Kazuo Koyama,&nbsp;Azusa Hirakawa,&nbsp;Mieko Shiomi,&nbsp;Kaoruko Tachibana,&nbsp;Katsuyuki Watanabe","doi":"10.14252/foodsafetyfscj.D-21-00010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Key topics related to risk communication and food safety were investigated by three different expert groups. In this study, the Delphi method was used to systematically and iteratively aggregate experts' opinions, and the topics to be communicated to consumers were expressed and prioritized. The opinions of three groups, consisting of 26 members of the expert committee (EC) from the Food Safety Commission of Japan (FSCJ), 29 local government officials (LGOs) from their respective food safety departments, and 25 food safety monitors (FSM) appointed by the FSCJ, were obtained in the period of June through September 2017. \"Safety and security concept\" was identified and ranked high in all groups. This topic identified \"Zero-risk\" demand of consumers without understanding risks as the reverse side of safety. The EC group prioritized additional issues, such as \"concept of risk\" and \"safety costs and relevant risk management\". The LGO and FSM groups prioritized specific hazard items for food poisoning and preventive measures. With regard to the so-called \"health foods\", the EC and LGO groups indicated insufficient transmission of scientific evidence from the government to consumers, and the FSM group indicated insufficient understanding by consumers of the food labeling system for health and nutrition. Because consumers do not fully understand all concepts of food safety, governments are encouraged to disseminate the probability of risk and the knowledge of risk reduction directly to the consumers by using simple and easy-to-understand terms.</p>","PeriodicalId":73044,"journal":{"name":"Food safety (Tokyo, Japan)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9233749/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Food safety (Tokyo, Japan)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14252/foodsafetyfscj.D-21-00010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/6/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Key topics related to risk communication and food safety were investigated by three different expert groups. In this study, the Delphi method was used to systematically and iteratively aggregate experts' opinions, and the topics to be communicated to consumers were expressed and prioritized. The opinions of three groups, consisting of 26 members of the expert committee (EC) from the Food Safety Commission of Japan (FSCJ), 29 local government officials (LGOs) from their respective food safety departments, and 25 food safety monitors (FSM) appointed by the FSCJ, were obtained in the period of June through September 2017. "Safety and security concept" was identified and ranked high in all groups. This topic identified "Zero-risk" demand of consumers without understanding risks as the reverse side of safety. The EC group prioritized additional issues, such as "concept of risk" and "safety costs and relevant risk management". The LGO and FSM groups prioritized specific hazard items for food poisoning and preventive measures. With regard to the so-called "health foods", the EC and LGO groups indicated insufficient transmission of scientific evidence from the government to consumers, and the FSM group indicated insufficient understanding by consumers of the food labeling system for health and nutrition. Because consumers do not fully understand all concepts of food safety, governments are encouraged to disseminate the probability of risk and the knowledge of risk reduction directly to the consumers by using simple and easy-to-understand terms.

Abstract Image

专家就食品安全向消费者传达信息的重要性和优先次序的比较。
三个不同的专家组调查了与风险沟通和食品安全有关的关键议题。本研究采用德尔菲法对专家意见进行系统迭代汇总,并对需要传达给消费者的话题进行表达和排序。在2017年6月至9月期间,日本食品安全委员会(FSCJ)专家委员会(EC)的26名成员、各自食品安全部门的29名地方政府官员(LGOs)和FSCJ任命的25名食品安全监察员(FSM)组成的三个小组获得了意见。“安全及保安概念”在所有组别中均名列前茅。这个主题在没有理解风险是安全的反面的情况下,确定了消费者的“零风险”需求。欧共体小组优先考虑了其他问题,如“风险概念”和“安全成本和相关风险管理”。LGO和FSM小组对食物中毒的具体危害项目和预防措施进行了优先排序。关于所谓的"健康食品",欧共体和地方政府组织表示,政府向消费者传递的科学证据不足,FSM组织表示,消费者对健康和营养食品标签制度的了解不足。由于消费者并不完全了解食品安全的所有概念,因此鼓励政府使用简单易懂的术语,直接向消费者传播风险的概率和降低风险的知识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信