Making sense of the "clean label" trends: A review of consumer food choice behavior and discussion of industry implications.

Sorting out food waste behaviour: A survey on the motivators and barriers of self-reported amounts of food waste in households

Background Consumers’ perceptions of naturalness are important for the acceptance of foods and food technologies. Thus, several studies have examined the significance of naturalness among consumers. Nonetheless, the aspects that are considered essential in perceiving a food item as natural may vary across consumers and different stakeholder groups. Scope and approach This systematic review identified 72 studies conducted in 32 countries involving 85,348 consumers. We aimed to answer the following questions: 1) How has the perceived importance of naturalness for consumers been defined and measured? 2) To what extent is perceived naturalness important to consumers? 3) Are there individual differences regarding the importance given to food naturalness that can be explained by consumers' characteristics? 4) Do consumers’ attitudes toward food naturalness influence their intentions and behavior? Key findings and conclusions The review clearly shows that for the majority of consumers, food naturalness is crucial. This finding could be observed across countries and in the different years when the studies were conducted. Therefore, neglecting the aspect of naturalness in the food industry may be very costly in the end. Our review also reveals differences across studies in how naturalness has been defined and measured. Based on a content analysis of the measurement scales, the items used to measure the importance of naturalness can be classified into three categories: 1) the way the food has been grown (food origin), 2) how the food has been produced (what technology and ingredients have been used), and 3) the properties of the final product.

The importance of food naturalness for consumers: Results of a systematic review

In a time where the public is more aware and interested with what they eat, natural additives have been gaining interest both from the food industries and the consumers. Some studies show that consumers prefer food prepared with natural additives rather than chemical ones, due to health reasons. Although quite promising, natural additives still face some drawbacks and limitations as well as conflicting information. In this manuscript, the most important natural additives are overviewed, as well as their use, benefits and risks. The future of these molecules along with new types of additives is also summarized.

/pdf/natural-food-additives-quo-vadis-2srr702w1o.pdf

Natural food additives: Quo vadis?

The use of pesticides made it possible to increase yields, simplify cropping systems, and forego more complicated crop protection strategies. Over-reliance on chemical control, however, is associated with contamination of ecosystems and undesirable health effects. The future of crop production is now also threatened by emergence of pest resistance and declining availability of active substances. There is therefore a need to design cropping systems less dependent on synthetic pesticides. Consequently, the European Union requires the application of eight principles (P) of Integrated Pest Management that fit within sustainable farm management. Here, we propose to farmers, advisors, and researchers a dynamic and flexible approach that accounts for the diversity of farming situations and the complexities of agroecosystems and that can improve the resilience of cropping systems and our capacity to adapt crop protection to local realities. For each principle (P), we suggest that (P1) the design of inherently robust cropping systems using a combination of agronomic levers is key to prevention. (P2) Local availability of monitoring, warning, and forecasting systems is a reality to contend with. (P3) The decision-making process can integrate cropping system factors to develop longer-term strategies. (P4) The combination of non-chemical methods that may be individually less efficient than pesticides can generate valuable synergies. (P5) Development of new biological agents and products and the use of existing databases offer options for the selection of products minimizing impact on health, the environment, and biological regulation of pests. (P6) Reduced pesticide use can be effectively combined with other tactics. (P7) Addressing the root causes of pesticide resistance is the best way to find sustainable crop protection solutions. And (P8) integration of multi-season effects and trade-offs in evaluation criteria will help develop sustainable solutions.

Eight principles of Integrated Pest Management.

http://ssu.ac.ir/cms/fileadmin/user_upload/Mtahghighat/tfood/asil-article/q-z2/The-consumer-s-perception-of-artificial-food-additives-Influences-on-acceptance-risk-and-benefit-perceptions_2014_Food-Quality-and-Preference.pdf

The consumer’s perception of artificial food additives: Influences on acceptance, risk and benefit perceptions

Research goal This paper pursued two goals: first, to investigate the much disputed question of whether risk or benefit perceptions are more influential in people's acceptance of food technologies and second, to shed light on the relationship between the two perceptions. Scope and approach In total, 26 studies were selected for a random-effects meta-analysis. Key findings and conclusions The results suggest a high degree of variability in correlation coefficients for all three investigated relationships. This paper presents the insights gained into the perception and acceptance of food technologies, the relationships between these three factors and discusses potential moderators of the relationship strengths. Furthermore, this paper's discussion offers insights for future risk communication research by highlighting important research gaps and possibilities.

Are risk or benefit perceptions more important for public acceptance of innovative food technologies: A meta-analysis

The SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19 has had a large impact on the lives of many people worldwide. At the peak of confirmed COVID-19 cases during the first wave in Switzerland (March-April 2020), we conducted a survey in the German-speaking part of the country (N = 1,585). The results suggest that the implemented measures are accepted. The survey participants are more concerned that other family members could catch the virus compared with themselves, and they are worried about its economic impact. The results suggest that how trust is measured is crucial because general trust and social trust have opposite effects on the participants' risk perceptions. People with high general trust perceive less risks associated with COVID-19 compared with people who have low general trust, and people with high social trust perceive more risks compared with people who have low social trust. The results further indicate that perceived risks are important drivers for the acceptance of the government's implemented measures to control COVID-19 and for more precautionary behavior (i.e., contact with fewer people and more hygienic behavior). Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/risa.13675

The Impact of Trust and Risk Perception on the Acceptance of Measures to Reduce COVID-19 Cases.

Poultry consumers' behaviour, risk perception and knowledge related to campylobacteriosis and domestic food safety

Because of the outbreak of COVID-19, most countries have implemented measures aimed at reducing the number of infected people. However, these measures only work if they are generally accepted by the public. We conducted a two-wave longitudinal survey in Switzerland (n = 1,223) to study the factors that would influence perceived risks and the acceptance of the measures. Our findings showed that people with individualistic worldviews, high general interpersonal trust, low social trust, a low level of perceived risks, and the conviction that risks other than health risks were neglected had less acceptance of the implemented measures compared with people who held the opposite views on the mentioned variables. The number of infected people declined between survey waves 1 and 2. This desired effect not only reduced people's perceived risks but also decreased their social trust and increased the conviction that other risks were neglected. Finally, the acceptance of the measures declined. Our data also support the idea that reduced risk perceptions and a decline in social trust are important drivers for the reduction in the acceptance of the measures in survey wave 2. Our results suggest that as soon as the measures attain success or the public is tired of the implemented restrictions, public acceptance declines, and it seems difficult to prolong the measures as may be desirable from an epidemiological standpoint. The importance of worldviews and trust for public acceptance of the measures further suggests the necessity of a political discussion about the implemented measures.

https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/118/24/e2100411118.full.pdf

Angela Bearth

Papers

The consumer’s perception of artificial food additives: Influences on acceptance, risk and benefit perceptions

Are risk or benefit perceptions more important for public acceptance of innovative food technologies: A meta-analysis

The Impact of Trust and Risk Perception on the Acceptance of Measures to Reduce COVID-19 Cases.

Poultry consumers' behaviour, risk perception and knowledge related to campylobacteriosis and domestic food safety

Worldviews, trust, and risk perceptions shape public acceptance of COVID-19 public health measures.