Developing consumer-focused risk communication strategies related to food terrorism

Abstract

An essential component of food defence, consumer-focused risk communication strategies related to food terrorism (FT) threats should reflect an in-depth understanding of consumers' perceptions, priorities, and information needs related to those threats. To support development of communication strategies, we used a mental models approach to risk communication method to design, conduct and analyse 50 semi-structured telephone interviews with US adults. Interviewees generally lacked well-defined mental models specific to FT, and, instead, drew on their perceptions of terrorism in general, accidental contamination, product recalls, and emergency preparedness. Assessments of their personal threat of FT were 46 S. Eggers et al.influenced by their beliefs about the nature of terrorism, their confidence in government and the food system to prevent and respond to terrorism threats, and their personal control over food choices. These qualitative research results support guidance for developing and implementing consumer-focused FT risk communications strategies.

Food defense KPI in the business processes of the food supply chain

“…Food terrorism aimed at food supply chains could have extreme economic and psychological consequences, for example the loss of human lives, economic problems and negative impacts on consumers' trust (Onyango et al 2005). The deliberate contamination of the food supply chain could have a devastating impact in public health and in the global economy (DHHS, 2005;Stinson, et al, 2008;Degeneffe, et al, 2009;Alpas and Cirakoglu, 2010;Eggers, et al, 2011;Veiga, 2011;FDA, 2012;McEntire and Boateng, 2012;Parker, 2013;Barras and Greub, 2014;Mitenius et al, 2014). Brummer (2003) considers the following consequences: (i) physical consequences: inedible food and/or insufficient food, with direct results could include significant morbidity and mortality or the indirect results of hunger and inadequate nutrition of the affected populations; (ii) psychological consequences: these problems could be present in the behavior of the consumers, which could include the perception of an unsafe and vulnerable food supply chain; (iii) political consequences, that could include civil discord and diminished confidence in the government; (iv) an economic impact that could be of variable duration with the confidence of the consumer lost and the market image of the companies involved.…”

A Management System for Preventing Intentional Food Contamination Based on Risk Analysis

“…These attacks directed towards the food sector could have extreme consequences in civil populations, affecting their physical and psychological health, causing distrust concerning the safety of the affected food group (Peters, 2003;Onyango, et al, 2005;Stinson, et al, 2008;Degeneffe, et al, 2009;Alpas & Cirakoglu, 2010;Eggers, et al, 2011;Alpas, et al, 2012;FDA, 2012;Parker, 2013; Barras and Greub, 2014). Deliberate contamination of food supply could have a devastating impact in public health and the global economy (Boyle, 2005;DHSS, 2005;Qing et al, 2008;Veiga, 2011;McEntire and Boateng, 2012;Mitenius et al, 2014).…”