IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jscscx/v7y2018i7p107-d154465.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Food Safety in China: The Structure and Substantive Foci of an Emerging Field of Social Science Research

Author

Listed:
  • Harley D. Dickinson

    (Department of Sociology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5A5, Canada)

  • Willa Liu

    (Centre for Women Studies in Education, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 1V6, Canada)

  • Paul J. Graham

    (Library Services, Yorkville University, Fredericton, NB E3C 2R9, Canada)

  • Wei Chen

    (Department of Sociology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5A5, Canada)

Abstract

This paper is the first to describe the structure and content of the English language social science literature on food safety in China. To do this research we systematically searched Web of Science and Scopus, the most comprehensive indexes, using the terms “Food Safety” AND “China” OR “Chinese”. To focus our search results, we used the index features available on Web of Science and Scopus, and limited results to the English language, peer-reviewed journal articles, social sciences, and published in the period of 2009 to 2015. This resulted in 272 selected journal articles, with a final data set of 185 articles for review. A food safety system model we developed was used to classify and present the findings derived from content analysis of abstracts, titles, and keywords. Our findings show that the research reviewed is unevenly distributed across the components of the food safety system model. The greatest proportions of the literature reviewed focused on consumers, primary and secondary producers and products, and government legislators and regulators, respectively. Smaller proportions focused on food wholesalers, retailers, researchers, educators, and the media. Few of the articles reviewed used a model of the food safety system. None identified an explicit knowledge transfer strategy.

Suggested Citation

  • Harley D. Dickinson & Willa Liu & Paul J. Graham & Wei Chen, 2018. "Food Safety in China: The Structure and Substantive Foci of an Emerging Field of Social Science Research," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-14, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:7:y:2018:i:7:p:107-:d:154465
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/7/7/107/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/7/7/107/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James Hartley & Lucy Betts, 2009. "Common weaknesses in traditional abstracts in the social sciences," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 60(10), pages 2010-2018, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. James Hartley & Guillaume Cabanac, 2017. "Thirteen Ways to Write an Abstract," Publications, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-7, May.
    2. Ligorio, Lorenzo & Venturelli, Andrea & Caputo, Fabio, 2022. "Tracing the boundaries between sustainable cities and cities for sustainable development. An LDA analysis of management studies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    3. Lutz Bornmann & Markus Wolf & Hans-Dieter Daniel, 2012. "Closed versus open reviewing of journal manuscripts: how far do comments differ in language use?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(3), pages 843-856, June.

    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:jscscx:v:7:y:2018:i:7:p:107-:d:154465. 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.