Consumer beliefs about the risks and benefits of novel foods will determine whether they are accepted by the consumer. Factors such as ethical concerns, worries about the potential environmental impact of novel crops, and trust in risk regulators and science will also be of importance in consumer decision making. Potentially useful and benevolent technologies may fail when products are introduced to consumers if these issues are not adequately understood. Effective labelling, the development of effective risk-benefit communication strategies, and increased transparency in the regulatory process will all improve consumer confidence in novel foods. However, sensory properties are also important in determining food choices, and it is important to simultaneously consider more ‘traditional’ elements of novel product evaluation during product development.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
TurnerG.WynneB.‘Risk communication: A literature review and some implications for biotechnology’, in DurantJ., ed, Biotechnology in Public: A Review of Recent Research, Science Museum for the European Federation of Biotechnology, London, 1992, pp 109–142.
2.
BoulterDon‘Scientific and public perception of plant genetic manipulation — a critical review’, Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences, Vol 16, 1997, pp 231–251.
3.
WarrenVictoriaHillersVirginiaJenningsGladys, ‘Beliefs about food supply safety: A study of co-operative extension clientele’, Journal of the American Dieticians Association, Vol 90, 1990, pp 713–714.
4.
RandallA.‘Reinterpreting “Luddism”: Resistance to new technology in the British industrial revolution’ in BauerM., ed, Resistance to New Technology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995, pp 97–124.
5.
HobanThomasWoodrumEricCzajaRonald, ‘Public opposition to genetic engineering’, Rural Sociology, Vol 57, 1992, pp 476–479.
6.
CommissionEuropeanEthical, Legal and Social Aspects of the Life Sciences and Technologies Programmes of the Fourth Framework Programme, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, 1998.
7.
FrewerLynnHowardChayaHedderleyDuncanShepherdRichard, ‘What determines trust in information about food-related risks? Underlying psychological constructs’, Risk Analysis, Vol 16, 1996, pp 473–186.
8.
ThompsonP. B., Food Biotechnology in Ethical Perspective, Blackie Academic and Professional, London, 1997.
9.
StraughanR.ReissM.Improving Nature? The Science and Ethics of Genetic Engineering, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996.
10.
US Presidents Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Bio-Medical and Behavioural Research, Splicing Life: The Social and Ethical Issues of Genetic Engineering, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1982.
11.
FrewerLynnShepherdRichard, ‘Ethical concerns and risk perceptions associated with different applications of genetic engineering: Interrelationships with the perceived need for regulation of the technology’, Agriculture and Human Values, Vol 12, 1995, pp 48–57.
12.
ThompsonP.B.‘Public understanding and acceptance. Ethical aspects’, in NilssonA., ed, Transgenic Animals and Food Production, Royal Swedish Academy of Agriculture and Forestry, Stockholm, 1997, pp 145–151.
13.
FrewerLynn‘Food labelling and biotechnology’, World of Ingredients, Feb, 1997, pp 35–36.
14.
FrewerLynnHowardChayaShepherdRichard, ‘Understanding of risk perceptions associated with different food-processing technologies used in cheese production — a case study using conjoint analysis’, Food Quality and Preference, Vol 8, 1997, pp 271–290.
15.
AlhakamiAliSlovicPaul, ‘A psychological study of attitudes’, Risk Analysis, Vol 14, 1994, pp 1085–1096.
16.
FrewerLynnHowardChayaShepherdRichard, ‘Are some technologies more technological than others? Development of a scale to assess attitudes towards technology’, Journal of Risk Research,1998, pp 221–237.
17.
FrewerLynnHowardChayaShepherdRichard, ‘The importance of initial attitudes on responses to communication about genetic engineering in food production’, in press, Agriculture and Human Values.
18.
SabaAnnaMolesAnnaFrewerLynn, ‘Public concerns about general and specific applications of genetic engineering: A comparative study between the UK and Italy’, Journal of Nutrition and Food Science, Vol 28, 1998, pp 19–29.
19.
ReynoldsThomasGutmanJonathan, ‘Laddering theory, method, analysis and interpretation,’Journal of Advertising Research, February/March, 1988, pp 11–31.
20.
MilesSusanFrewerLynn, ‘Similarities and differences in assessments of risk and benefit for different types of food hazard’, in preparation.
21.
Op cit, Ref 17.
22.
FrewerLynnRaatsMoniqueShepherdRichard, ‘Modelling the media: The transmission of risk information in the British quality press’, Journal of the Institute of Mathematics and its Applications to industry, Vol 5, 1993/4, pp 235–247.
23.
FrewerLynn‘Public perceptions of the risks and benefits of emerging technologies — implications for novel functional foods, in Proceedings, Safety Assessment of Biotechnological Processes and Products in the Agro-Food Area (SABAF), Zeist, the Netherlands, 1997.
