IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i23p6656-d290581.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Study on Evolution of Food Safety Status and Supervision Policy—A System Based on Quantity, Quality, and Development Safety

Author

Listed:
  • Jianhui Yang

    (China Institute of Regulation Research, Zhejiang University of Finance & Economics, Hangzhou 310018, China)

  • Yaoben Lin

    (School of Public Affairs, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China)

Abstract

This paper aims to construct an index system of evaluating food safety status, composed of three sub-systems—quantity safety, quality safety, and development safety. The index system is designed to collect annual data from 2005 to 2017 and run a chronological evaluation on China’s food safety status based on an entropy method. The evaluation results indicate that though China’s food safety supervision effect has been stably sound, the highest score is 0.7392 (in 2017). In addition, the proportions of the above three sub-systems were changed towards a balanced trend, with quality safety rising from less than 7% to 36.19% as a significant part of the evaluation of the effect of food safety supervision. In terms of single indexes, agrochemical input intensity and the ontology of agro-production safety have made relatively great contributions, while the indexes that embody price safety lack stability, and the roles of indexes related to development safety in the effect of food safety supervision have been increasingly recognized and valued.

Suggested Citation

  • Jianhui Yang & Yaoben Lin, 2019. "Study on Evolution of Food Safety Status and Supervision Policy—A System Based on Quantity, Quality, and Development Safety," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-13, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:23:p:6656-:d:290581
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/23/6656/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/23/6656/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jouanjean, Marie-Agnès & Maur, Jean-Christophe & Shepherd, Ben, 2015. "Reputation matters: Spillover effects for developing countries in the enforcement of US food safety measures," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 81-91.
    2. P. T. de Boer & D. P. Kroese & R. Y. Rubinstein, 2004. "A Fast Cross-Entropy Method for Estimating Buffer Overflows in Queueing Networks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(7), pages 883-895, July.
    3. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Wu, Laping & Olynk, Nicole J., 2011. "Modeling heterogeneity in consumer preferences for select food safety attributes in China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 318-324, April.
    4. Julie A. Caswell & Eliza M. Mojduszka, 1996. "Using Informational Labeling to Influence the Market for Quality in Food Products," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(5), pages 1248-1253.
    5. John M. Antle, 2000. "No Such Thing as a Free Safe Lunch: The Cost of Food Safety Regulation in the Meat Industry," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(2), pages 310-322.
    6. John M. Antle, 1996. "Efficient Food Safety Regulation in the Food Manufacturing Sector," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(5), pages 1242-1247.
    7. Julie A. Caswell & Neal H. Hooker, 1996. "HACCP as an International Trade Standard," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(3), pages 775-779.
    8. Perry, William R. & Marsh, Thomas & Jones, Rodney & Sanderson, M.W. & Sargeant, J.M. & Griffin, D.D. & Smith, R.A., 2007. "Joint product management strategies for E. coli O157 and feedlot profits," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(5-6), pages 544-565.
    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. Anat Goldstein & Lior Fink & Gilad Ravid, 2021. "A Framework for Evaluating Agricultural Ontologies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-12, June.

    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. Zhou, Li & Turvey, Calum & Hu, Wuyang & Ying, Ruiyao, 2015. "Fear and Trust: How Risk Perceptions of Avian Influenza Affect the Demand for Chicken," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 202077, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Zhou, Li & Turvey, Calum G. & Hu, Wuyang & Ying, Ruiyao, 2016. "Fear and trust: How risk perceptions of avian influenza affect Chinese consumers’ demand for chicken," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 91-104.
    3. Irz, Xavier & Mazzocchi, Mario & Réquillart, Vincent & Soler, Louis-Georges, 2015. "Research in Food Economics: past trends and new challenges," Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, Editions NecPlus, vol. 96(01), pages 187-237, March.
    4. E. Rouvière & K. Latouche, 2014. "Impact of liability rules on modes of coordination for food safety in supply chains," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 111-130, February.
    5. Yan, Zhen & Zhou, Jie-hong, 2015. "Measuring consumer heterogeneous preferences for pork traits under media reports: choice experiment in sixteen traceability pilot cities, China," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212609, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Jayasinghe-Mudalige, Udith K. & Henson, Spencer J., 2004. "Quantifying The Impact Of Economic Incentives On Firms' Food Safety Responsiveness: The Case Of Red Meat And Poultry Processing Sector In Canada," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20419, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    7. Miguel Carriquiry & Bruce A. Babcock, 2007. "Reputations, Market Structure, and the Choice of Quality Assurance Systems in the Food Industry," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(1), pages 12-23.
    8. Just, David R. & Wansink, Brian & Turvey, Calum G., 2009. "Biosecurity, Terrorism, and Food Consumption Behavior: Using Experimental Psychology to Analyze Choices Involving Fear," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 34(1), pages 1-18, April.
    9. Joseph, Siny & Lavoie, Nathalie, 2008. "Effectiveness of COOL in the U.S. Seafood Industry," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6260, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    10. McCluskey, Jill J., 2000. "A Game Theoretic Approach to Organic Foods: An Analysis of Asymmetric Information and Policy," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 29(1), pages 1-9, April.
    11. Yan, Zhen & Zhou, Jie-hong, 2015. "Measuring consumer heterogeneous preferences for pork traits under media reports: choice experiment in sixteen traceability pilot cities, China," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211884, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Noelke, Corinna M. & Caswell, Julie A., 2000. "A Model Of The Implementation Of Quality Management Systems For Credence Attributes," 2000 Annual meeting, July 30-August 2, Tampa, FL 21874, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    13. Kathleen Segerson, 1999. "Mandatory versus voluntary approaches to food safety," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(1), pages 53-70.
    14. Jingjing Wang & Chengyan Yue & Karina Gallardo & Vicki McCracken & James Luby & Jim McFerson, 2017. "What Consumers Are Looking for in Strawberries: Implications from Market Segmentation Analysis," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(1), pages 56-69, January.
    15. Caswell, Julie A., 1998. "Valuing the benefits and costs of improved food safety and nutrition," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 42(4), pages 1-16.
    16. Nganje, William E. & Mazzocco, Michael A. & McKeith, Floyd K., 1999. "Food Safety Regulation, Product Pricing, And Profitability: The Case Of Haccp," AE Series 23077, North Dakota State University, Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
    17. Yan, Zhen & Zhou, Jie-hong & Li, Kai, 2015. "Measuring consumer heterogeneous preferences for pork traits under media reports: choice experiment in sixteen traceability pilot cities," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205599, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    18. Yan, Zhen & Yu, Xiaohua & Zhou, Jiehong, 2016. "Measure consumer preferences for pork attributes under different media coverage in China," GlobalFood Discussion Papers 232028, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, GlobalFood, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
    19. Nilsson, Tomas K.H. & Foster, Kenneth A., 2005. "Certification of Pork Products," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19350, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    20. Cho, Bo-Hyun & Hooker, Neal H., 2004. "Measuring The Impact Of Food Safety Regulation-An Output Directional Distance Function Approach," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20016, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).

    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:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:23:p:6656-:d:290581. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.