IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jfpoli/v34y2009i6p539-548.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The views of key stakeholders on an evolving food risk governance framework: Results from a Delphi study

Author

Listed:
  • Wentholt, M.T.A.
  • Rowe, G.
  • König, A.
  • Marvin, H.J.P.
  • Frewer, L.J.

Abstract

Evidence of a decline in public trust associated with food risk governance over recent years has called into question the appropriateness of the current dominant risk analysis framework. Within the EU-funded SAFE FOODS project a novel risk analysis framework has been developed that attempts to address potential shortcomings by increasing stakeholder (including consumer) input, improving transparency, and formally incorporating benefit and non-health aspects into the analysis. To assess the viability of this novel framework, the views of food risk experts from the EU and beyond were sought using a distributed online questionnaire process called Delphi. In this paper the main results of this survey are described, revealing varying levels of support for the key innovations of the novel framework. Implications of our results for the new and old frameworks, for the future of risk analysis, and for the policy community more widely, are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Wentholt, M.T.A. & Rowe, G. & König, A. & Marvin, H.J.P. & Frewer, L.J., 2009. "The views of key stakeholders on an evolving food risk governance framework: Results from a Delphi study," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 539-548, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jfpoli:v:34:y:2009:i:6:p:539-548
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306-9192(09)00055-4
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Houghton, J.R. & Rowe, G. & Frewer, L.J. & Van Kleef, E. & Chryssochoidis, G. & Kehagia, O. & Korzen-Bohr, S. & Lassen, J. & Pfenning, U. & Strada, A., 2008. "The quality of food risk management in Europe: Perspectives and priorities," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 13-26, February.
    2. Rowe, Gene & Wright, George, 1999. "The Delphi technique as a forecasting tool: issues and analysis," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 353-375, October.
    3. Rowe, Gene & Wright, George, 1996. "The impact of task characteristics on the performance of structured group forecasting techniques," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 73-89, March.
    4. S French & A J Maule & G Mythen, 2005. "Soft modelling in risk communication and management: examples in handling food risk," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 56(8), pages 879-888, August.
    5. Arrow, Kenneth J. & Cropper, Maureen L. & Eads, George C. & Hahn, Robert W. & Lave, Lester B. & Noll, Roger G. & Portney, Paul R. & Russell, Milson & Schmalensee, Richard & Smith, V. Kerry & Stavins, , 1997. "Is there a role for benefit-cost analysis in environmental, health, and safety regulation?," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 195-221, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rodríguez-Ortega, T. & Olaizola, A.M. & Bernués, A., 2018. "A novel management-based system of payments for ecosystem services for targeted agri-environmental policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PA), pages 74-84.
    2. Horrillo, A. & Escribano, M. & Mesias, F.J. & Elghannam, A. & Gaspar, P., 2016. "Is there a future for organic production in high ecological value ecosystems?," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 114-125.
    3. José Alex Gualotuña Parra & Ana M. Tarquis & Juan B. Grau Olivé & Federico Colombo Speroni & Antonio Saa-Requejo, 2021. "An Analytical Approach to Assess the Influence of Expert Panel Answer on Decision Making: The Case of Sustainable Land Use in Ribadavia Banda Norte, Salta (Argentina)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-17, June.
    4. Devaney, Laura, 2016. "Good governance? Perceptions of accountability, transparency and effectiveness in Irish food risk governance," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1-10.
    5. Saggau, Volker, 2012. "Viele Köche Verderben Den Brei – Agentenbasierte Simulationen Zum Föderalismusdurcheinander Während Der Ehec-Krise," 52nd Annual Conference, Stuttgart, Germany, September 26-28, 2012 133052, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    6. Thomas Allen & Paolo Prosperi & Bruce Cogill & Martine Padilla & Iuri Peri, 2019. "A Delphi Approach to Develop Sustainable Food System Metrics," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 141(3), pages 1307-1339, February.
    7. Heleen van Dijk & Arnout R.H. Fischer & Lynn J. Frewer, 2011. "Consumer Responses to Integrated Risk‐Benefit Information Associated with the Consumption of Food," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(3), pages 429-439, March.
    8. Cope, S. & Frewer, L.J. & Houghton, J. & Rowe, G. & Fischer, A.R.H. & de Jonge, J., 2010. "Consumer perceptions of best practice in food risk communication and management: Implications for risk analysis policy," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 349-357, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Makkonen, Marika & Hujala, Teppo & Uusivuori, Jussi, 2016. "Policy experts' propensity to change their opinion along Delphi rounds," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 61-68.
    2. Kawamoto, Carlos Tadao & Wright, James Terence Coulter & Spers, Renata Giovinazzo & de Carvalho, Daniel Estima, 2019. "Can we make use of perception of questions' easiness in Delphi-like studies? Some results from an experiment with an alternative feedback," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 296-305.
    3. Meijering, Jurian Vincent & Tobi, Hilde, 2018. "The effects of feeding back experts’ own initial ratings in Delphi studies: A randomized trial," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 216-224.
    4. Barrios, Maite & Guilera, Georgina & Nuño, Laura & Gómez-Benito, Juana, 2021. "Consensus in the delphi method: What makes a decision change?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    5. Gebhardt, Maximilian & Spieske, Alexander & Birkel, Hendrik, 2022. "The future of the circular economy and its effect on supply chain dependencies: Empirical evidence from a Delphi study," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    6. Daniel E. O'Leary, 2007. "Knowledge representation of rules: a note," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(1‐2), pages 73-84, January.
    7. Meijering, Jurian V. & Tobi, Hilde, 2016. "The effect of controlled opinion feedback on Delphi features: Mixed messages from a real-world Delphi experiment," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 166-173.
    8. Kauko, Karlo & Palmroos, Peter, 2014. "The Delphi method in forecasting financial markets— An experimental study," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 313-327.
    9. Song, Haiyan & Gao, Bastian Z. & Lin, Vera S., 2013. "Combining statistical and judgmental forecasts via a web-based tourism demand forecasting system," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 295-310.
    10. Delke, Vincent & Schiele, Holger & Buchholz, Wolfgang & Kelly, Stephen, 2023. "Implementing Industry 4.0 technologies: Future roles in purchasing and supply management," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    11. Winkler, Jens & Moser, Roger, 2016. "Biases in future-oriented Delphi studies: A cognitive perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 63-76.
    12. Ian Belton & Kerstin Cuhls & George Wright, 2022. "A critical evaluation of 42, large‐scale, science and technology foresight Delphi surveys," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(2), June.
    13. Kopyto, Matthias & Lechler, Sabrina & von der Gracht, Heiko A. & Hartmann, Evi, 2020. "Potentials of blockchain technology in supply chain management: Long-term judgments of an international expert panel," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    14. Bolger, Fergus & Rowe, Gene & Belton, Ian & Crawford, Megan M & Hamlin, Iain & Sissons, Aileen & Taylor Browne Lūka, Courtney & Vasilichi, Alexandrina & Wright, George, 2020. "The Simulated Group Response Paradigm: A new approach to the study of opinion change in Delphi and other structured-group techniques," OSF Preprints 4ufzg, Center for Open Science.
    15. Nur, Suardi & Burton, Bruce & Bergmann, Ariel, 2023. "Evidence on optimal risk allocation models for Indonesian geothermal projects under PPP contracts," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    16. Perera, H. Niles & Hurley, Jason & Fahimnia, Behnam & Reisi, Mohsen, 2019. "The human factor in supply chain forecasting: A systematic review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(2), pages 574-600.
    17. Prommer, Lisa & Tiberius, Victor & Kraus, Sascha, 2020. "Exploring the future of startup leadership development," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 14(C).
    18. Bas Kolen & Matthijs Kok & Ira Helsloot & Bob Maaskant, 2013. "EvacuAid: A Probabilistic Model to Determine the Expected Loss of Life for Different Mass Evacuation Strategies During Flood Threats," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(7), pages 1312-1333, July.
    19. Meissner, Philip & Brands, Christian & Wulf, Torsten, 2017. "Quantifiying blind spots and weak signals in executive judgment: A structured integration of expert judgment into the scenario development process," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 244-253.
    20. Bokrantz, Jon & Skoogh, Anders & Berlin, Cecilia & Stahre, Johan, 2017. "Maintenance in digitalised manufacturing: Delphi-based scenarios for 2030," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 154-169.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jfpoli:v:34:y:2009:i:6:p:539-548. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/foodpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.