The development and implementation of effective systems to identify vulnerabilities in food chains to chemical and microbiological contaminants must take account of consumer priorities and preferences. The present investigation attempted to understand consumer perceptions associated with chemical and microbiological contaminants in four specific food chains (drinking water, farmed salmon, chicken and milk powder). To this end, ten focus group discussions were held in five different countries (Poland, Ireland, the Netherlands, France and Brazil). Consumers expressed higher concerns about chemical, as compared with microbial, contaminants. Chemical contaminants were more strongly associated with the potential for severe consequences, long-term effects and lack of personal control. Traceability was considered by consumers as a useful tool that offers the potential to improve consumer confidence in food safety. 1 The term food chain refers to all stages involved in the production, distribution and consumption of a food product. Food chains consist of different food chain actors, such as producers and retailers, that each have a particular input into the food chain.

No abstract

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -The research presented in this paper aims at understanding the views of European food risk management experts on food traceability implementation, implementation of the general food law, and the advantages the system can offer for effective risk mitigation. Design/methodology/approach -Delphi methodology was applied to understand experts' views on the efficiency of existing traceability systems in Europe following the implementation of the General Food Law. An internet survey was administered in two rounds, in order to elicit expert views on changes needed to current traceability practices, if traceability systems are to contribute to improved food safety. Findings -Traceability was considered to be an effective safety-and quality-monitoring system with potential to improve safety within food chains, as well as increasing consumer confidence in food safety and consumer protection. However, the results underlined the need for further improvements, particularly regarding the definition of food chain traceability, enforcement of regulations, and harmonisation of practice. Research limitations/implications -Expert opinion regarding food traceability and its implementation was confined to Europe and the impact of European legislation. Further research at a global level is needed, given the need to trace food and food ingredients across the regional boundaries imposed by European legislation, the increased globalisation of food chains, and the need for pan-global harmonisation of food traceability legislation. Originality/value -The results provide important insights into the advantages and shortcomings of the present European traceability approach enshrined in the European General Food Law.

No abstract

a b s t r a c tEvidence of a decline in public trust associated with food risk governance over recent years has called into question the appropriateness of the current dominant risk analysis framework. Within the EU-funded SAFE FOODS project a novel risk analysis framework has been developed that attempts to address potential shortcomings by increasing stakeholder (including consumer) input, improving transparency, and formally incorporating benefit and non-health aspects into the analysis. To assess the viability of this novel framework, the views of food risk experts from the EU and beyond were sought using a distributed online questionnaire process called Delphi. In this paper the main results of this survey are described, revealing varying levels of support for the key innovations of the novel framework. Implications of our results for the new and old frameworks, for the future of risk analysis, and for the policy community more widely, are discussed.