Using best–worst scaling to explore perceptions of relative responsibility for ensuring food safety
We examine stakeholders’ perceptions of the share of the overall responsibility of each stage in the food supply chain has in ensuring that the meat people cook and eat at home is safe to consume. We elicit these perceptions of relative responsibility via surveys using the best–worst scaling technique and analyse the data via Bayesian estimation of mixed logit models. Results are reported for two groups of stakeholders: consumers and farmers, and for two meat food chains: chicken and beef. The results reveal that consumers tend to think farmers are more responsible for ensuring meat safety than farmers do. Similarly, farmers tend to think consumers have a greater degree of responsibility than consumers believe they have themselves. Such beliefs might affect stakeholders’ willingness to take actions and reduce hazards in the supply chain. From a policy perspective, the research findings provide useful insights to support policymakers and other decision-makers in the industry in developing mitigation strategies. Communication with consumers and farmers about emerging food safety problems in a supply chain and their involvement in proactive practices would need to be attuned to their subjective perceptions of relative responsibilities in order for integrated risk management systems to be effective.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Marette, Stéphan & Roosen, Jutta & Blanchemanche, Sandrine & Feinblatt-Mélèze, Eve, 2010. "Functional food, uncertainty and consumers' choices: A lab experiment with enriched yoghurts for lowering cholesterol," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 419-428, October.
- Jayson L. Lusk & Brian C. Briggeman, 2009. "Food Values," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(1), pages 184-196.
- Flynn, Terry N. & Louviere, Jordan J. & Peters, Tim J. & Coast, Joanna, 2007. "Best-worst scaling: What it can do for health care research and how to do it," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 171-189, January.
- Mario Mazzocchi & Alexandra Lobb & W. Bruce Traill & Alessio Cavicchi, 2008. "Food Scares and Trust: A European Study," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 2-24, 02.
- Pat Auger & Timothy Devinney & Jordan Louviere, 2007. "Using Bestâ€“Worst Scaling Methodology to Investigate Consumer Ethical Beliefs Across Countries," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 70(3), pages 299-326, February.
- Jordan Louviere & Terry Flynn, 2010. "Using Best-Worst Scaling Choice Experiments to Measure Public Perceptions and Preferences for Healthcare Reform in Australia," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, vol. 3(4), pages 275-283, December.
- Brownstone, David & Train, Kenneth, 1998.
"Forecasting new product penetration with flexible substitution patterns,"
Journal of Econometrics,
Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 109-129, November.
- Brownstone, David & Train, Kenneth, 1999. "Forecasting new product penetration with flexible substitution patterns," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt3tb6j874, University of California Transportation Center.
- Brownstone, David & Train, Kenneth, 1999. "Forecasting new product penetration with flexible substitution patterns," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt1j6814b3, University of California Transportation Center.
- Jayson L. Lusk & Jutta Roosen & John A. Fox, 2003. "Demand for Beef from Cattle Administered Growth Hormones or Fed Genetically Modified Corn: A Comparison of Consumers in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(1), pages 16-29.
- Lusk, Jayson L. & Roosen, Jutta & Fox, John A., 2001. "Demand For Beef From Cattle Administered Growth Hormones Or Fed Genetically Modified Corn: A Comparison Of Consumers In France, Germany, The United Kingdom, And The United States," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20684, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
- Loureiro, Maria L. & Umberger, Wendy J., 2007. "A choice experiment model for beef: What US consumer responses tell us about relative preferences for food safety, country-of-origin labeling and traceability," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 496-514, August.
- Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
- Henson, Spencer & Caswell, Julie, 1999. "Food safety regulation: an overview of contemporary issues," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 589-603, December.
- Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, September.
- Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, September.
- Kenneth Train, 2003. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Online economics textbooks, SUNY-Oswego, Department of Economics, number emetr2.
- 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.
- Wiktor Adamowicz & Peter Boxall & Michael Williams & Jordan Louviere, 1998. "Stated Preference Approaches for Measuring Passive Use Values: Choice Experiments and Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(1), pages 64-75.
- 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.
- Garcia Martinez, Marian & Fearne, Andrew & Caswell, Julie A. & Henson, Spencer, 2007. "Co-regulation as a possible model for food safety governance: Opportunities for public-private partnerships," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 299-314, June.
- David Revelt & Kenneth Train, 1998. "Mixed Logit With Repeated Choices: Households' Choices Of Appliance Efficiency Level," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(4), pages 647-657, November. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)