消费者对环境风险的认知和对食品安全的需求

M. Veeman, W. Adamowicz
{"title":"消费者对环境风险的认知和对食品安全的需求","authors":"M. Veeman, W. Adamowicz","doi":"10.7939/R3ZS2KG11","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Public concern regarding food safety has emerged as a major policy issue. Chemicals and biotechnological processes are perceived as risks of food safety despite their contribution to an efficient, low cost agriculture and food industry. Increases in uses of biotechnological processes for foods are expected to be a major potential source of productivity improvements for Alberta and Canadian agriculture in future years. However, the demand for food safety involves increasing awareness and concern by consumers of chemical inputs and biotechnological processes in the agriculture and food industries. Nonetheless, there is a lack of basic economic and agricultural economic theory and methodology to analyze these issues and a need for policy, socioeconomics and marketing research on biotechnology and other environmental risk situations in the agricultural and food industry. This project was directed at developing and applying economic theory and methodology to help fill this gap. A major contribution of the project is the identification and verification of methodologies of stated choice to analyse tradeoffs arising from food safety perceptions of concerns by consumers. One component of the research project involved assessment of Alberta consumers' stated preferences and purchase behaviour for foods exhibiting a range of environmental risks, including perceptions of pesticide residues and hormonal treatments derived from biotechnological processes. The results of this survey indicated that Albertans were more concerned about pesticide use in food production than about the use of hormones. In contingent valuation questions developed for the study, more Albertans wish to restrict pesticide use (relative to a base case of not restricting either hormones or pesticides). They tended to persist in these choices in the face of potential increases in food costs, reflecting a higher level of concern with pesticides than hormones. Increasing education increased this concern. Increasing food cost decreased the probability of choosing to restrict pesticide or hormone use. Women appeared to perceive pesticide use in food production as a greater food safety risk than was perceived by men. The inferred average willingness to pay to restrict pesticide and growth hormone use in food production amounted to about 25% and 13% respectively of the average Albertan's food expenditures respectively. In the second survey of consumers' food/environmental risk perceptions undertaken relative to this project, the responses of a random sample of consumers to the use of recombinant bovine somatotrophin (rBST) in milk production were elicited using a stated preference methodology. A conditional logit model of consumer choice was developed and tested to analyse consumers' choices of milk with varying characteristics of fat content, price, freshness and rBST treatment. Awareness of rBST presence or otherwise is implied by labelling. The approach attempts to simulate market conditions with and without rBST labelled milk and to predict consumers' responses to variations in these conditions. Welfare calculations for a representative consumer indicate welfare losses with the introduction of rBST. These were slightly less for a male than a female household food purchaser and were less for food purchasers with higher levels of income and education. There was a small welfare gain when the representative food purchaser was offered a full range of \"rBST\" and \"non-rBST\" milks. The results suggest that making appropriately labelled \"rBST-free\" milk available to consumers could decrease consumer welfare losses associated with any introduction of rBST. The outcomes from application of these methodologies were related to the evidence of consumers' purchasing behaviour after licensing of the technology of rBST for use in the United States; this introduction did not require labelling. The assessment suggests a critical impact of product labelling policies and strategies on potential market impacts. An assessment is also made of Canada's food safety regulatory framework. The need for increased transparency and greater public participation in regulatory processes as means to increase public confidence in such food safety regulatory processes, specifically relating to biotechnology, is also identified.","PeriodicalId":183610,"journal":{"name":"Project Report Series","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"CONSUMER'S PERCEPTIONS OF ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS AND THE DEMAND FOR FOOD SAFETY\",\"authors\":\"M. Veeman, W. Adamowicz\",\"doi\":\"10.7939/R3ZS2KG11\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Public concern regarding food safety has emerged as a major policy issue. Chemicals and biotechnological processes are perceived as risks of food safety despite their contribution to an efficient, low cost agriculture and food industry. Increases in uses of biotechnological processes for foods are expected to be a major potential source of productivity improvements for Alberta and Canadian agriculture in future years. However, the demand for food safety involves increasing awareness and concern by consumers of chemical inputs and biotechnological processes in the agriculture and food industries. Nonetheless, there is a lack of basic economic and agricultural economic theory and methodology to analyze these issues and a need for policy, socioeconomics and marketing research on biotechnology and other environmental risk situations in the agricultural and food industry. This project was directed at developing and applying economic theory and methodology to help fill this gap. A major contribution of the project is the identification and verification of methodologies of stated choice to analyse tradeoffs arising from food safety perceptions of concerns by consumers. One component of the research project involved assessment of Alberta consumers' stated preferences and purchase behaviour for foods exhibiting a range of environmental risks, including perceptions of pesticide residues and hormonal treatments derived from biotechnological processes. The results of this survey indicated that Albertans were more concerned about pesticide use in food production than about the use of hormones. In contingent valuation questions developed for the study, more Albertans wish to restrict pesticide use (relative to a base case of not restricting either hormones or pesticides). They tended to persist in these choices in the face of potential increases in food costs, reflecting a higher level of concern with pesticides than hormones. Increasing education increased this concern. Increasing food cost decreased the probability of choosing to restrict pesticide or hormone use. Women appeared to perceive pesticide use in food production as a greater food safety risk than was perceived by men. The inferred average willingness to pay to restrict pesticide and growth hormone use in food production amounted to about 25% and 13% respectively of the average Albertan's food expenditures respectively. In the second survey of consumers' food/environmental risk perceptions undertaken relative to this project, the responses of a random sample of consumers to the use of recombinant bovine somatotrophin (rBST) in milk production were elicited using a stated preference methodology. A conditional logit model of consumer choice was developed and tested to analyse consumers' choices of milk with varying characteristics of fat content, price, freshness and rBST treatment. Awareness of rBST presence or otherwise is implied by labelling. The approach attempts to simulate market conditions with and without rBST labelled milk and to predict consumers' responses to variations in these conditions. Welfare calculations for a representative consumer indicate welfare losses with the introduction of rBST. These were slightly less for a male than a female household food purchaser and were less for food purchasers with higher levels of income and education. There was a small welfare gain when the representative food purchaser was offered a full range of \\\"rBST\\\" and \\\"non-rBST\\\" milks. The results suggest that making appropriately labelled \\\"rBST-free\\\" milk available to consumers could decrease consumer welfare losses associated with any introduction of rBST. The outcomes from application of these methodologies were related to the evidence of consumers' purchasing behaviour after licensing of the technology of rBST for use in the United States; this introduction did not require labelling. The assessment suggests a critical impact of product labelling policies and strategies on potential market impacts. An assessment is also made of Canada's food safety regulatory framework. The need for increased transparency and greater public participation in regulatory processes as means to increase public confidence in such food safety regulatory processes, specifically relating to biotechnology, is also identified.\",\"PeriodicalId\":183610,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Project Report Series\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"13\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Project Report Series\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7939/R3ZS2KG11\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Project Report Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7939/R3ZS2KG11","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

摘要

公众对食品安全的关注已经成为一个重大的政策问题。尽管化学品和生物技术过程有助于高效、低成本的农业和食品工业,但它们仍被视为食品安全的风险。预计在未来几年,食品生物技术工艺的使用增加将成为阿尔伯塔省和加拿大农业生产力提高的主要潜在来源。然而,对食品安全的需求涉及到消费者对农业和食品工业中的化学投入和生物技术过程的认识和关注的提高。然而,缺乏基本的经济和农业经济理论和方法来分析这些问题,需要对农业和食品工业中的生物技术和其他环境风险情况进行政策、社会经济学和市场研究。该项目旨在发展和应用经济理论和方法来帮助填补这一空白。该项目的一项主要贡献是确定和核实所选择的方法,以分析消费者对食品安全的看法和所关注的问题所产生的权衡。该研究项目的一个组成部分是评估阿尔伯塔省消费者对表现出一系列环境风险的食品的偏好和购买行为,包括对农药残留和生物技术过程中产生的激素治疗的看法。这项调查的结果表明,阿尔伯塔人更关心食品生产中农药的使用,而不是激素的使用。在为研究开发的条件评估问题中,更多的阿尔伯塔人希望限制农药的使用(相对于不限制激素或农药的基本情况)。面对潜在的食品价格上涨,他们倾向于坚持这些选择,这反映出他们对农药的担忧程度高于激素。教育水平的提高加剧了这种担忧。增加的食品成本降低了选择限制农药或激素使用的可能性。与男性相比,女性似乎认为在食品生产中使用农药会带来更大的食品安全风险。由此推断,为限制食品生产中农药和生长激素的使用而支付的平均意愿分别约占阿尔伯塔人平均食品支出的25%和13%。在与该项目相关的消费者食品/环境风险认知的第二次调查中,随机抽样的消费者对在牛奶生产中使用重组牛生长激素(rBST)的反应,使用既定的偏好方法。开发并测试了消费者选择的条件logit模型,以分析消费者对脂肪含量、价格、新鲜度和rBST处理等不同特征的牛奶的选择。标签暗示了对rBST存在或其他方面的认识。该方法试图模拟有和没有rBST标签的牛奶的市场条件,并预测消费者对这些条件变化的反应。对代表性消费者的福利计算表明引入rBST后的福利损失。男性家庭食品购买者的这一比例略低于女性家庭食品购买者,而收入和教育水平较高的食品购买者的这一比例更低。当向有代表性的食品购买者提供全系列的“rBST”和“非rBST”牛奶时,有一个小的福利增加。结果表明,向消费者提供适当标记的“不含rBST”牛奶可以减少与引入rBST相关的消费者福利损失。这些方法的应用结果与消费者在美国使用rBST技术许可后购买行为的证据有关;这种介绍不需要标签。评估表明产品标签政策和战略对潜在市场影响的关键影响。对加拿大的食品安全监管框架也进行了评估。报告还指出,需要增加管理过程的透明度和更多的公众参与,以增加公众对这种食品安全管理过程,特别是与生物技术有关的管理过程的信心。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
CONSUMER'S PERCEPTIONS OF ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS AND THE DEMAND FOR FOOD SAFETY
Public concern regarding food safety has emerged as a major policy issue. Chemicals and biotechnological processes are perceived as risks of food safety despite their contribution to an efficient, low cost agriculture and food industry. Increases in uses of biotechnological processes for foods are expected to be a major potential source of productivity improvements for Alberta and Canadian agriculture in future years. However, the demand for food safety involves increasing awareness and concern by consumers of chemical inputs and biotechnological processes in the agriculture and food industries. Nonetheless, there is a lack of basic economic and agricultural economic theory and methodology to analyze these issues and a need for policy, socioeconomics and marketing research on biotechnology and other environmental risk situations in the agricultural and food industry. This project was directed at developing and applying economic theory and methodology to help fill this gap. A major contribution of the project is the identification and verification of methodologies of stated choice to analyse tradeoffs arising from food safety perceptions of concerns by consumers. One component of the research project involved assessment of Alberta consumers' stated preferences and purchase behaviour for foods exhibiting a range of environmental risks, including perceptions of pesticide residues and hormonal treatments derived from biotechnological processes. The results of this survey indicated that Albertans were more concerned about pesticide use in food production than about the use of hormones. In contingent valuation questions developed for the study, more Albertans wish to restrict pesticide use (relative to a base case of not restricting either hormones or pesticides). They tended to persist in these choices in the face of potential increases in food costs, reflecting a higher level of concern with pesticides than hormones. Increasing education increased this concern. Increasing food cost decreased the probability of choosing to restrict pesticide or hormone use. Women appeared to perceive pesticide use in food production as a greater food safety risk than was perceived by men. The inferred average willingness to pay to restrict pesticide and growth hormone use in food production amounted to about 25% and 13% respectively of the average Albertan's food expenditures respectively. In the second survey of consumers' food/environmental risk perceptions undertaken relative to this project, the responses of a random sample of consumers to the use of recombinant bovine somatotrophin (rBST) in milk production were elicited using a stated preference methodology. A conditional logit model of consumer choice was developed and tested to analyse consumers' choices of milk with varying characteristics of fat content, price, freshness and rBST treatment. Awareness of rBST presence or otherwise is implied by labelling. The approach attempts to simulate market conditions with and without rBST labelled milk and to predict consumers' responses to variations in these conditions. Welfare calculations for a representative consumer indicate welfare losses with the introduction of rBST. These were slightly less for a male than a female household food purchaser and were less for food purchasers with higher levels of income and education. There was a small welfare gain when the representative food purchaser was offered a full range of "rBST" and "non-rBST" milks. The results suggest that making appropriately labelled "rBST-free" milk available to consumers could decrease consumer welfare losses associated with any introduction of rBST. The outcomes from application of these methodologies were related to the evidence of consumers' purchasing behaviour after licensing of the technology of rBST for use in the United States; this introduction did not require labelling. The assessment suggests a critical impact of product labelling policies and strategies on potential market impacts. An assessment is also made of Canada's food safety regulatory framework. The need for increased transparency and greater public participation in regulatory processes as means to increase public confidence in such food safety regulatory processes, specifically relating to biotechnology, is also identified.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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