Does information on food safety affect consumers' acceptance of new food technologies? The case of irradiated beef in South Korea under a new labelling system and across different information regimes

Abstract

Consumer aversion to new food technologies may be partly explained by the gap between the problem that the technology solves and what consumers actually understand about the food technology. This study assesses how accepting consumers are of food irradiation when exposed to prior information about food safety-related issues. Using a hypothetical discrete choice experiment, this study also explores consumer demand for a new food irradiation labelling system in South Korea under different information on food irradiation (positive, negative, and positive and negative). The results indicate that Korean consumers have a negative perception of irradiated foods and that they fail to link the use of food irradiation as a vehicle to solve food safety issues, even with the new version of the irradiated food label. However, providing consumers with information about food safety-related issues alongside with the benefits implied by the use of food irradiation resulted in more general acceptance of food irradiation. Furthermore, we conclude with a discussion of the relevant implications for policymakers, academics and food industry professionals.

All Plant Breeding Technologies Are Equal, but Some Are More Equal Than Others: The Case of GM and Mutagenesis

“…It could also be argued that university students have greater ability to process complex information compared to the general public, which could have skewed the results. Although, research on similar issues from a variety of countries (e.g., Evans and Cox, 2006;Behrens et al, 2009;Caputo, 2020) suggests that the current results would be replicated in other jurisdictions and samples we caution against making broader generalizations without further replication in other more representative samples.…”

“…However, there are situations in which behavior does not, or cannot, follow such neat "rules" because people may not know that their behavior is in fact inconsistent with their attitudes or simply because behavior, more often than not, is not driven by reason (Kahneman, 2011). In the case of mutagenesis, consumers may have been unknowingly eating plants developed through mutagenetic processes (Caputo, 2020). It thus begs the question what consumers would do when they learn that they may have been eating foods developed through means that they deem dangerous.…”

“…As such, participants relied on the information we provided them, which contained language with connotations to radioactivity, which is likely to be associated with pre-formed concerns around health. Research into consumer attitudes to post-harvest food irradiation (e.g., Evans and Cox, 2006;Behrens et al, 2009;Caputo, 2020) has shown that attitudes to the use of this technology tend to be negative. Although there are important, fundamental differences between radiation induced mutagenesis in plant breeding (use in progenitors) and post-harvest food irradiation (direct usage on produce consumed), this suggests that terminology may frame information in ways that impact the perception of an issue.…”

“…It has been found, for example, that prawns that had been made infertile through radiation induced mutagenesis were perceived negatively and similarly to GM foods in terms of health, natural content, and ecological welfare (Evans and Cox, 2006). Negative attitudes have also been found in relation to other associations between food and irradiation, such as the use of radiation for postharvest shelf-life extension (e.g., Behrens et al, 2009;Caputo, 2020). While consumer attitudes to this direct use of radiation on food products is generally negative, Caputo (2020) found that participants were more positive to food irradiation when they were presented with information that related this technology to food safety, and more favorable still when positive information about the technique was given to them.…”

“…Negative attitudes have also been found in relation to other associations between food and irradiation, such as the use of radiation for postharvest shelf-life extension (e.g., Behrens et al, 2009;Caputo, 2020). While consumer attitudes to this direct use of radiation on food products is generally negative, Caputo (2020) found that participants were more positive to food irradiation when they were presented with information that related this technology to food safety, and more favorable still when positive information about the technique was given to them. This suggests that the way information about food is framed makes a difference to the acceptance of a product.…”