Ethical Traceability and Informed Food Choice

Coff, Christian Eyde; Korthals, Michiel; Barling, David

doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-8524-6_1

Cited by 68 publications

(98 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Traceability, the structured transfer of information in value chains (Coff et al 2008), has emerged as a way of addressing food safety risks, as well as the weak transparency of fisheries sustainability in many parts of the world. Traceability is not the information itself, but rather the system or tool that makes the flow of this information possible and allows for records of production and product movement to be accessible at a future date and at distant places (Donnelly and Olsen 2012).…”

Section: Traceabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The US and the European Union (EU) are particularly focused on promoting traceability as a method of combatting illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (IUU). Here, traceability for regulatory purposes (Coff et al 2008) becomes a means of validating product origin and species for exporting and importing countries with information flowing from value-chain actors to governments or regulators.…”

Section: Traceabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Private governance of ocean resources

Groeneveld¹,

Bush²,

Bailey³

2017

Handbook on the Economics and Management of Sustainable Oceans

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Traceabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Traceabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Private governance of ocean resources

Groeneveld¹,

Bush²,

Bailey³

2017

Handbook on the Economics and Management of Sustainable Oceans

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…I couldn't find specific literature on this issue. But in general, social scientific research indicates that information campaigns mostly don't reach consumers (Coff et al 2008) and points to lack of trust in official reports (Gaskell et al 2011). Stories about the lobbying practices of big food industries also reduce their trustworthiness: when the WHO published its report on the negative consequences of sugar, the sugar industry started an offensive to deny this; when FAO published a report on the detrimental effects of meat, the meat industry denied all the conclusions; when pizza Ethics of Dietary Guidelines: Nutrients, Processes and Meals 417 was described as a ultra-processed food, industry succeeded in establishing pizza as a vegetable (Moss 2013).…”

Section: Guidelines Of Type One Are Not Motivating People To Eat Wellmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…So power strategies play probably a negative role with respect to the reliability of the guidelines and the trustworthiness of the institutions. Another aspect that plays a role is the denigrating tone of most food and nutrition scientists towards the public (Coff et al 2008). Consumers are often treated as (and sometimes even called) ignorant, lazy, hot heads, the weakest link in the food chain and technophobe (Gabriel and Lang 2006;Fresco 2015).…”

Section: Guidelines Of Type One Are Not Motivating People To Eat Wellmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethics of Dietary Guidelines: Nutrients, Processes and Meals

Korthals

2017

J Agric Environ Ethics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dietary guidelines are mostly issued by agrifood departments or agencies of governments, and are the result of power play between interest groups and values. They have considerable influence over food preferences and purchases of consumers. Ethical problems are at stake not only with respect to power strategies and their influence on consumers. In this paper I will consider three different types of guidelines: a nutrient oriented type (like the Dutch or American ones), a process oriented type (Scrinis in Nutritionism: the science and politics of dietary advice, Columbia University Press, New York, 2013) and a meal oriented type (like the Brazilian one). In the nutrient oriented guidelines healthy nutrients and food stuffs are mentioned that excel in containing one or more 'healthy' nutrients. Bio-and nutrition scientists and the producers of nutrients, like the sugar, dairy and animal industry, have a lot of influence in this variant. The nutrient oriented framing of food is focussed on individual health. Individuals are implicitly addressed to take responsibility for their own long term health; they have to acquire surveillance and cognitive skills in interpreting their bio data. They don't need to acquire skills to cook. In the process oriented type, foods and ingredients are categorized according to minimal, refined and reconstituted production processes. Nutrition scientists have the last say here. Consumers do need some food skills to handle fresh products. In the meal oriented guidelines, politicians, social scientists and fresh food producers have prominent responsibilities with respect to the formulation of the guidelines and their application. Buying fresh products, preparing and eating together are the main themes. Food is framed in terms of cooking, and eating and sharing meals. Consumers have to spend time in buying fresh ingredients and cooking; they have to develop food capabilities. (2017( ) 30:413-421 DOI 10.1007 operation, but determined by controversies about framings of food and health, responsibilities and also by integrity and self-confidence of experts. It is striking that biological and nutrition scientists often proclaim to possess the final truth on the healthiness of nutrients, and heap scorn on diet gurus. They don't care that their often incoherent recommendations cause a lot of confusion with consumers and sometimes even lack of trust. I discuss these themes in the paper and will also give some arguments why in the current situation the meal oriented type is ethically more acceptable.Environ Ethics

show abstract

“…This call envisions the development of something like ethical traceability. This notion of ethical traceability was introduced by Coff (2004) and may be defined as "the ability to trace and map ethical aspects of the food chain by means of recorded identifications" (Coff et al 2007). It thus refers to the traceability of ethically relevant product and process characteristics of foods.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Consumer Rights to Informed Choice on the Food Market

Beekman

2007

Ethic Theory Moral Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The discourse about traceability in food chains focused on traceability as means towards the end of managing health risks. This discourse witnessed a call to broaden traceability to accommodate consumer concerns about foods that are not related to health. This call envisions the development of ethical traceability. This paper presents a justification of ethical traceability. The argument is couched in liberal distinctions, since the call for ethical traceability is based on intuitions about consumer rights to informed choice. The paper suggests that two versions of ethical traceability find justification. The first version of ethical traceability entails that governments ensure that all consumers are provided with foods that respect some threshold level of, e.g., animal welfare that is supported by an overlapping consensus. The second version of ethical traceability entails that food producers provide consumers with products, and sufficient information about these products, that are relevant for reasonable, non-superficial values that are not supported by an overlapping consensus. Governments should facilitate this in the sense that consumers are not provided with misinformation about characteristics of foods that are relevant for reasonable, non-superficial values that are not supported by an overlapping consensus.

show abstract

Ethical Traceability and Informed Food Choice

Cited by 68 publications

References 2 publications

Private governance of ocean resources

Private governance of ocean resources

Ethics of Dietary Guidelines: Nutrients, Processes and Meals

Consumer Rights to Informed Choice on the Food Market

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About