IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v31y2011i3p429-439.html

Consumer Responses to Integrated Risk‐Benefit Information Associated with the Consumption of Food

Author

Listed:
  • Heleen van Dijk
  • Arnout R.H. Fischer
  • Lynn J. Frewer

Abstract

The risk analysis of the health impact of foods is increasingly focused on integrated risk‐benefit assessment, which will also need to be communicated to consumers. It therefore becomes important to understand how consumers respond to integrated risk‐benefit information. Quality‐adjusted‐life‐years (QALYs) is one measure that can be used to assess the balance between risks and benefits associated with a particular food. The effectiveness of QALYs for communicating both positive and negative health effects associated with food consumption to consumers was examined, using a 3 × 2 experiment varying information about health changes in terms of QALYs associated with the consumption of fish (n = 325). The effect of this information on consumer perceptions of the usefulness of QALYs for describing health effects, on risk and benefit perceptions, attitudes, and intentions to consume fish was examined. Results demonstrated that consumers perceived QALYs as useful for communicating health effects associated with food consumption. QALYs communicated as a net effect were preferred for food products associated with negative net effects on health, while separate communication of both risks and benefits may be preferred for food products associated with positive or zero net health effects. Information about health changes in terms of QALYs facilitated informed decision making by consumers, as indicated by the impact on risk and benefit perceptions as intended by the information. The impact of this information on actual food consumption choices merits further investigation.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:31:y:2011:i:3:p:429-439
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01505.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01505.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01505.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Barbara A. Knuth & Nancy A. Connelly & Judy Sheeshka & Jacqueline Patterson, 2003. "Weighing Health Benefit and Health Risk Information when Consuming Sport‐Caught Fish," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(6), pages 1185-1197, December.
    2. 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.
    3. Moon, Wanki & Florkowski, Wojciech J. & A. Resurreccion, Anna V. & Paraskova, Pavlina & R. Beuchat, Larry & Jordanov, Jordan & Chinnan, Manjeet S., 1998. "Consumer concerns about nutritional attributes in a transition economy," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 357-369, October.
    4. Wim Verbeke & Filiep Vanhonacker & Lynn J. Frewer & Isabelle Sioen & Stefaan De Henauw & John Van Camp, 2008. "Communicating Risks and Benefits from Fish Consumption: Impact on Belgian Consumers' Perception and Intention to Eat Fish," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(4), pages 951-967, August.
    5. E. Y. Wong & R. A. Ponce & S. Farrow & S. M. Bartell & R. C. Lee & E. M. Faustman, 2003. "Comparative Risk and Policy Analysis in Environmental Health," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(6), pages 1337-1349, December.
    6. Rafael A. Ponce & Scott M. Bartell & Eva Y. Wong & Denise LaFlamme & Clark Carrington & Robert C. Lee & Donald L. Patrick & Elaine M. Faustman & Michael Bolger, 2000. "Use of Quality‐Adjusted Life Year Weights with Dose‐Response Models for Public Health Decisions: A Case Study of the Risks and Benefits of Fish Consumption," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(4), pages 529-542, August.
    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. repec:plo:pone00:0110614 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Christopher A. Davidson & Leigh‐Anne H. Krometis & Suaad S. Al‐Harthi & Jacqueline MacDonald Gibson, 2012. "Foodborne Exposure to Pesticides and Methylmercury in the United Arab Emirates," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(3), pages 381-394, March.
    3. Gülbanu Kaptan & Arnout R.H. Fischer & Lynn J. Frewer, 2018. "Extrapolating understanding of food risk perceptions to emerging food safety cases," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(8), pages 996-1018, 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. Andrew Watterson & David Little & James A. Young & Kathleen Boyd & Ekram Azim & Francis Murray, 2008. "Towards Integration of Environmental and Health Impact Assessments for Wild Capture Fishing and Farmed Fish with Particular Reference to Public Health and Occupational Health Dimensions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-20, December.
    2. Géraldine Boué & Enda Cummins & Sandrine Guillou & Jean‐Philippe Antignac & Bruno Le Bizec & Jeanne‐Marie Membré, 2017. "Development and Application of a Probabilistic Risk–Benefit Assessment Model for Infant Feeding Integrating Microbiological, Nutritional, and Chemical Components," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(12), pages 2360-2388, December.
    3. Marie-Eve Laporte & Géraldine Michel & Sophie Rieunier, 2017. "Towards a better understanding of eating behaviour through the concept of Perception of Nutritional Risk," Post-Print halshs-02923251, HAL.
    4. 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.
    5. Barbara A. Knuth & Nancy A. Connelly & Judy Sheeshka & Jacqueline Patterson, 2003. "Weighing Health Benefit and Health Risk Information when Consuming Sport‐Caught Fish," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(6), pages 1185-1197, December.
    6. 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).
    7. Rimal, Arbindra & Fletcher, Stanley M., 2002. "Snack Peanuts Purchase Pattern: Effects Of Nutritional Considerations And Household Characteristics," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 34(01), pages 1-15, April.
    8. Adam D. DeWeese & Neil E. Kmiecik & Esteban D. Chiriboga & Jeffery A. Foran, 2009. "Efficacy of Risk‐Based, Culturally Sensitive Ogaa (Walleye) Consumption Advice for Anishinaabe Tribal Members in the Great Lakes Region," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(5), pages 729-742, May.
    9. Erik Nord & Jose Luis Pinto & Jeff Richardson & Paul Menzel & Peter Ubel, 1999. "Incorporating societal concerns for fairness in numerical valuations of health programmes," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(1), pages 25-39, February.
    10. Gülbanu Kaptan & Arnout R.H. Fischer & Lynn J. Frewer, 2018. "Extrapolating understanding of food risk perceptions to emerging food safety cases," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(8), pages 996-1018, August.
    11. Younes Hamed & Faten Khelifi & Besser Houda & Amina Ben Sâad & Kaouther Ncibi & Riheb Hadji & Achraf Melki & Amor Hamad, 2023. "Phosphate mining pollution in southern Tunisia: environmental, epidemiological, and socioeconomic investigation," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(11), pages 13619-13636, November.
    12. 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.
    13. Jeffrey K. Wickliffe & Bridget Simon‐Friedt & Jessi L. Howard & Ericka Frahm & Buffy Meyer & Mark J. Wilson & Deepa Pangeni & Edward B. Overton, 2018. "Consumption of Fish and Shrimp from Southeast Louisiana Poses No Unacceptable Lifetime Cancer Risks Attributable to High‐Priority Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(9), pages 1944-1961, September.
    14. Scarlett Tannous & Terje Aven & Myriam Merad, 2025. "A core multi-criteria framework for assessing the performance of policies related to risk: a case study on risk policy for high risk sites," Post-Print hal-05252430, HAL.
    15. Haab, Timothy C. & Whitehead, John C. & Parsons, George R. & Price, Jammie, 2010. "Effects of information about invasive species on risk perception and seafood demand by gender and race," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 586-599, November.
    16. Francesco Bimbo & Rosaria Viscecchia & Biagia De Devitiis & Antonio Seccia & Rocco Roma & Annalisa De Boni, 2022. "How Do Italian Consumers Value Sustainable Certifications on Fish?—An Explorative Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-14, March.
    17. Carmen Keller & Michael Siegrist & Vivianne Visschers, 2009. "Effect of Risk Ladder Format on Risk Perception in High‐ and Low‐Numerate Individuals," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(9), pages 1255-1264, September.
    18. Olga Untilov & Stéphane Ganassali, 2020. "Product‐harm science communication: The halo effect and its moderators," Post-Print hal-02957579, HAL.
    19. Wim Verbeke & Filiep Vanhonacker & Lynn J. Frewer & Isabelle Sioen & Stefaan De Henauw & John Van Camp, 2008. "Communicating Risks and Benefits from Fish Consumption: Impact on Belgian Consumers' Perception and Intention to Eat Fish," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(4), pages 951-967, August.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:riskan:v:31:y:2011:i:3:p:429-439. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.