IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/ualbpr/264423.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Trust, Fairness and Acceptance of Food Technologies

Author

Listed:
  • Goddard, Ellen
  • Muringai, Violet

Abstract

Trust and perceptions of fairness in markets have been shown to be important in consumer behavior in different contexts. However, there have not been many studies relating the concept of fairness is supply chains to food purchasing behavior. In this study, we explore the relationships between trust, fairness and perception of quality of food produced from three food technologies. The technologies are as follows: (i) bread fortified with omega-3 fatty acids using nanotechnology (ii) pork chops from pigs selectively bred for disease resistance using genomic selection (iii) baby spinach treated with essential oils to reduce concentrations of E. coli O157:H7. Data are from a small exploratory project conducted in 2015 at the University of Alberta, Canada, where 31 non-academic staff participated in stated preference experiments and completed a survey questionnaire. Stated preference data are analysed using conditional logit regressions. Different potential explanatory fairness variables are created using questions from previous studies. From the results, both the constructs associated with trust and with fairness in supply chains have explanatory power. Although there are some variations in results (depending on the type of questions used to measure fairness), fairness positively influences trust in the food supply chain. Future studies might need to consider including perceptions of fairness in supply chains in the analysis of consumer acceptance of novel technologies.

Suggested Citation

  • Goddard, Ellen & Muringai, Violet, 2017. "Trust, Fairness and Acceptance of Food Technologies," Project Report Series 264423, University of Alberta, Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:ualbpr:264423
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.264423
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/264423/files/PR-17-02.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/264423/files/PR-17-02.pdf?subformat=pdfa
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.264423?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. Glynn T. Tonsor & Ted C. Schroeder & Joost M. E. Pennings, 2009. "Factors Impacting Food Safety Risk Perceptions," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(3), pages 625-644, September.
    2. Michael Siegrist & Melanie Connor & Carmen Keller, 2012. "Trust, Confidence, Procedural Fairness, Outcome Fairness, Moral Conviction, and the Acceptance of GM Field Experiments," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(8), pages 1394-1403, August.
    3. Timothy C. Earle, 2010. "Trust in Risk Management: A Model‐Based Review of Empirical Research," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(4), pages 541-574, April.
    4. Roosen, J. & Bieberstein, A. & Blanchemanche, S. & Goddard, E. & Marette, S. & Vandermoere, F., 2015. "Trust and willingness to pay for nanotechnology food," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 75-83.
    5. Michel Setbon & Jocelyn Raude & Claude Fischler & Antoine Flahault, 2005. "Risk Perception of the “Mad Cow Disease” in France: Determinants and Consequences," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(4), pages 813-826, August.
    6. Janssen, Meike & Hamm, Ulrich, 2014. "Governmental and private certification labels for organic food: Consumer attitudes and preferences in Germany," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P2), pages 437-448.
    7. Chang, Jae Bong & Lusk, Jayson L., 2009. "Fairness and food choice," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 483-491, December.
    8. Martin, William C. & Ponder, Nicole & Lueg, Jason E., 2009. "Price fairness perceptions and customer loyalty in a retail context," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 62(6), pages 588-593, June.
    9. James Flynn & Paul Slovic & C. K. Mertz, 1994. "Gender, Race, and Perception of Environmental Health Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(6), pages 1101-1108, December.
    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. Violet Muringai & Ellen Goddard, 2018. "Trust and consumer risk perceptions regarding BSE and chronic wasting disease," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(2), pages 240-265, March.
    2. Muringai, Violet & Goddard, Ellen W., "undated". "Trust, Fairness and Consumer Acceptance of the Use of Genomics for Feed Efficiency in Cattle," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 261226, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Yang Yang & Jill E. Hobbs, 2020. "Food values and heterogeneous consumer responses to nanotechnology," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 68(3), pages 289-313, September.
    4. Hobbs, Jill E. & Goddard, Ellen, 2015. "Consumers and trust," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 71-74.
    5. Agata Malak-Rawlikowska & Edward Majewski & Adam Wąs & Svein Ole Borgen & Peter Csillag & Michele Donati & Richard Freeman & Viet Hoàng & Jean-Loup Lecoeur & Maria Cecilia Mancini & An Nguyen & Monia , 2019. "Measuring the Economic, Environmental, and Social Sustainability of Short Food Supply Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-23, July.
    6. Schulz, Lee L. & Schroeder, Ted C. & White, Katharine L., 2012. "Value of Beef Steak Branding: Hedonic Analysis of Retail Scanner Data," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 41(2), pages 1-14, August.
    7. Samia Ayyub & Xuhui Wang & Muhammad Asif & Rana Muhammad Ayyub, 2018. "Antecedents of Trust in Organic Foods: The Mediating Role of Food Related Personality Traits," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-17, October.
    8. Akinwehinmi, Oluwagbenga & Ogundari, Kolawole & Amos, Taiwo, 2021. "Consumers' Food Control Risk Perception and Preference for Government-Controlled Safety Certification in Emerging Food Markets," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315312, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. 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.
    10. Johanna Pfeiffer & Andreas Gabriel & Markus Gandorfer, 2021. "Understanding the public attitudinal acceptance of digital farming technologies: a nationwide survey in Germany," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(1), pages 107-128, February.
    11. Liuyang Yao & Qian Zhang & Kin Keung Lai & Xianyu Cao, 2020. "Explaining Local Residents’ Attitudes toward Shale Gas Exploitation: The Mediating Roles of Risk and Benefit Perceptions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-13, October.
    12. Nahui Zhen & Jon Barnett & Michael Webber, 2020. "Is Trust Always a Precondition for Effective Water Resource Management?," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 34(4), pages 1423-1436, March.
    13. Hallikainen, Heli & Luongo, Milena & Dhir, Amandeep & Laukkanen, Tommi, 2022. "Consequences of personalized product recommendations and price promotions in online grocery shopping," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    14. Rita Saleh & Angela Bearth & Michael Siegrist, 2019. "“Chemophobia” Today: Consumers’ Knowledge and Perceptions of Chemicals," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(12), pages 2668-2682, December.
    15. Schaefers, Tobias & Leban, Marina & Vogt, Florian, 2022. "On-demand features: Consumer reactions to tangibility and pricing structure," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 751-761.
    16. Costa-Font, Montserrat & Asquini, Martina, 2023. "The impact of perceived COVID-19 risks, food waste generation and food purchase control on the food security status during the pandemic," 97th Annual Conference, March 27-29, 2023, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 334511, Agricultural Economics Society - AES.
    17. Bernard, Kévin & Bonein, Aurélie & Bougherara, Douadia, 2020. "Consumer inequality aversion and risk preferences in community supported agriculture," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    18. Zeynep Altinay & Eric Rittmeyer & Lauren L. Morris & Margaret A. Reams, 2021. "Public risk salience of sea level rise in Louisiana, United States," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 11(4), pages 523-536, December.
    19. Stephan Verroen & Jan M. Gutteling & Peter W. De Vries, 2013. "Enhancing Self‐Protective Behavior: Efficacy Beliefs and Peer Feedback in Risk Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(7), pages 1252-1264, July.
    20. Cuffaro, Nadia & Di Giacinto, Marina, 2015. "Credence goods, consumers’ trust in regulation and high quality exports," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 4(2), pages 1-19, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:ualbpr:264423. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/drualca.html .

    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.