IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perceived Risks of Conventional and Organic Produce: Pesticides, Pathogens, and Natural Toxins


  • Pamela R. D. Williams
  • James K. Hammitt


Public risk perceptions and demand for safer food are important factors shaping agricultural production practices in the United States. Despite documented food safety concerns, little attempt has been made to elicit consumers' subjective risk judgments for a range of food safety hazards or to identify factors most predictive of perceived food safety risks. In this study, over 700 conventional and organic fresh produce buyers in the Boston area were surveyed for their perceived food safety risks. Survey results showed that consumers perceived relatively high risks associated with the consumption and production of conventionally grown produce compared with other public health hazards. For example, conventional and organic food buyers estimated the median annual fatality rate due to pesticide residues on conventionally grown food to be about 50 per million and 200 per million, respectively, which is similar in magnitude to the annual mortality risk from motor vehicle accidents in the United States. Over 90% of survey respondents also perceived a reduction in pesticide residue risk associated with substituting organically grown produce for conventionally grown produce, and nearly 50% perceived a risk reduction due to natural toxins and microbial pathogens. Multiple regression analyses indicate that only a few factors are consistently predictive of higher risk perceptions, including feelings of distrust toward regulatory agencies and the safety of the food supply. A variety of factors were found to be significant predictors of specific categories of food hazards, suggesting that consumers may view food safety risks as dissimilar from one another. Based on study findings, it is recommended that future agricultural policies and risk communication efforts utilize a comparative risk approach that targets a range of food safety hazards.

Suggested Citation

  • Pamela R. D. Williams & James K. Hammitt, 2001. "Perceived Risks of Conventional and Organic Produce: Pesticides, Pathogens, and Natural Toxins," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(2), pages 319-330, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:21:y:2001:i:2:p:319-330
    DOI: 10.1111/0272-4332.212114

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no


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

    Cited by:

    1. Batte, Marvin T. & Hooker, Neal H. & Haab, Timothy C. & Beaverson, Jeremy, 2007. "Putting their money where their mouths are: Consumer willingness to pay for multi-ingredient, processed organic food products," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 145-159, April.
    2. Fournier, Anne J., 2018. "Direct-selling farming and urban externalities: What impact on product quality and market size?," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 97-111.
    3. Xuhui Wang & Frida Pacho & Jia Liu & Redempta Kajungiro, 2019. "Factors Influencing Organic Food Purchase Intention in Developing Countries and the Moderating Role of Knowledge," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 11(1), pages 1-18, January.
    4. Raza, Syed Ali & Shah, Nida & Nisar, Wasay, 2019. "Consumer Buying Behavior of Organic Food with Respect to Health and Safety Concerns among Adolescents," MPRA Paper 93570, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Dakpo, K.H. & Vincent, M. & Boussemart, J.-P., 2018. "Spatial aggregation of land uses allocation and pesticide efficiency at landscape level A Multi-ware production approach," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277258, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Eric Giraud-Héraud & Maria Aguiar Fontes & Alexandra Seabra Pinto, 2014. "Crise sanitaires de l'alimentation et analyses comportementales," Working Papers hal-00949126, HAL.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:wly:riskan:v:21:y:2001:i:2:p:319-330. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley Content Delivery). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.