4.7 Article

Consumer, anxieties about food grain safety in China

Journal

FOOD CONTROL
Volume 73, Issue -, Pages 1256-1264

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2016.10.045

Keywords

Food grain; Food safety; Consumer anxiety; Semi-structured interviews; China

Funding

  1. Major Project of the National Social Science Fund of China (NSSF) [12ZD052]
  2. Philosophy and Social Science Fund Project of Hunan Province (PSSF) in China [13YBA143]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

China has a long history of eating staple plant foods which are mainly derived from food grains, especially rice and wheat. Food grain safety has been a worrying challenge on health and nutrition grounds in China, although evidence clearly suggests that expanding agricultural production is linked to reducing undernourishment. The focus of this study is to investigate consumers' anxieties about food grain safety in China. The nature and extent of consumer anxieties about grain safety, the cause of these anxieties, and possible ways to relieve anxiety are empirically analyzed. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews with 142 grain consumers in 29 provinces of China, in both rural and urban areas, during 2016. The results show that consumers are worried about the production and processing safety of food grains and genetically modified cereals and that the causes of anxiety are varied. Anxiety is amplified by social media reports of food scandals, polluted ecological environments, the high incidence of food related chronic diseases and cancer, concerns about food system governance and lack of knowledge and ability to identify grain quality. Consumers seek to relieve their anxiety by identifying grain quality themselves, choosing foreign grains and paying close attention to reports about unsafe food. These findings have important implications for future programs aimed at improving consumer confidence about grain safety. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available