A systematic review of consumer perceptions of food fraud and authenticity: A European perspective

Abstract Background Food fraud results from deliberate criminal intent to adulterate or misrepresent food, food ingredients or packaging, and is motivated by economic gain. Its occurrence has been identified across various supply chains within local, regional and global food systems, including within Europe. Incidents of food fraud may negatively impact on consumer confidence of the food industry and in regulatory mechanisms designed to prevent or mitigate food fraud. A systematic analysis of the impacts of European food fraud incidents on European consumer perceptions and attitudes is presented. Scope and approach Three databases were searched, yielding 15 studies. Thematic analysis of the results yielded six themes “drivers of fraud”, “consumer fraud concerns”, “consumer perceptions and attitudes following a food fraud incident”, “responsibility, accountability and blame” and “consumer behavioural response”, and “supply chain responses”, but not increased food risk perceptions. This may be an artefact of the search language (English) used, the time period of the search (20 years from 1998) and because academic interest in food fraud as a distinct topic of study has been relatively recent, in particular from a risk perception perspective. Key findings and conclusions Understanding consumer perceptions and attitudes towards food fraud, authenticity, and trust will facilitate industry and governmental priorities about food fraud prevention strategies, mitigatory actions and communication about these with the public. However, research is needed which links the perceptions and attitudes of consumers in countries to specific incidents, and to assess the impacts of preventative and mitigatory actions in relation to consumer confidence in affected food supply chains and food supply system more generally.

[1]  Ingrid Moons,et al.  The influence of country-of-origin stereotypes on consumer responses to food safety scandals: The case of the horsemeat adulteration , 2016 .

[2]  V. Braun,et al.  Using thematic analysis in psychology , 2006 .

[3]  J. Spink,et al.  Defining the public health threat of food fraud. , 2011, Journal of food science.

[4]  Ortwin Renn,et al.  The Social Amplification of Risk: A Conceptual Framework , 1988 .

[5]  J. Spencer,et al.  The dynamics of food fraud: The interactions between criminal opportunity and market (dys)functionality in legitimate business , 2017 .

[6]  Pieternel A. Luning,et al.  Food fraud vulnerability and its key factors , 2017 .

[7]  K. Grayson,et al.  Consumer Perceptions of Iconicity and Indexicality and Their Influence on Assessments of Authentic Market Offerings , 2004 .

[8]  L. Frewer,et al.  Food fraud and the perceived integrity of European food imports into China , 2018, PloS one.

[9]  F. Epelbaum,et al.  The role of traceability in restoring consumer trust in food chains , 2011 .

[10]  N. Luhmann Familiarity, Confidence, Trust: Problems and Alternatives , 2000 .

[11]  M. Dean,et al.  Four years post-horsegate: an update of measures and actions put in place following the horsemeat incident of 2013 , 2017, npj Science of Food.

[12]  D. Moher,et al.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. , 2009, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[13]  Yan Zhang,et al.  Amount of information and the willingness of consumers to pay for food traceability in China , 2017 .

[14]  M. Kett,et al.  Human Health , 2012, Springer Series in Applied Biology.

[15]  L. Frewer,et al.  Consumer perceptions of traceability: A cross-national comparison of the associated benefits , 2008 .

[16]  J. Higgins,et al.  Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions , 2010, International Coaching Psychology Review.

[17]  Frans W. A. Brom,et al.  From Trust to Trustworthiness: Why Information is not Enough in the Food Sector , 2006 .

[18]  D. Campbell,et al.  Demand for safety and regional certification of food , 2014 .

[19]  K. McMartin,et al.  Human health assessment for long-term oral ingestion of diethylene glycol. , 2017, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[20]  R. Lion,et al.  Risk/Benefit Communication about Food—A Systematic Review of the Literature , 2016, Critical reviews in food science and nutrition.

[21]  J. Hobbs,et al.  Consumers and trust , 2015 .

[22]  M. Stolze,et al.  Product attributes and consumer attitudes affecting the preferences for infant milk formula in China – A latent class approach , 2019, Food Quality and Preference.

[23]  Bob Doherty,et al.  Insight from the horsemeat scandal: Exploring the consumers' opinion of tweets toward Tesco , 2016, Ind. Manag. Data Syst..

[24]  A. Harden,et al.  Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews , 2008, BMC medical research methodology.

[25]  Áine McConnon,et al.  Consumers' confidence, reflections and response strategies following the horsemeat incident , 2016 .

[26]  F. Hansstein,et al.  Consumer Knowledge and Attitudes towards Food Traceability: A Comparison between the European Union, China and North America , 2014 .

[27]  Y. Trope,et al.  Construal Levels and Psychological Distance: Effects on Representation, Prediction, Evaluation, and Behavior. , 2007, Journal of consumer psychology : the official journal of the Society for Consumer Psychology.

[28]  C. Huck,et al.  Food fraud: An exploratory study for measuring consumer perception towards mislabeled food products and influence on self-authentication intentions , 2016 .

[29]  D. Moher,et al.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement , 2009, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[30]  L. Frewer,et al.  Consumer needs and requirements for food and ingredient traceability information , 2012 .

[31]  Alberto Longo,et al.  Food fraud and consumers' choices in the wake of the horsemeat scandal , 2016 .

[32]  Martin J. Liu,et al.  Authenticity Perceptions in the Chinese Marketplace , 2015 .

[33]  Samarthia Thankappan European Food Regulation and Accountability: The Interplay of Influences Shaping the New Regulatory Terrain , 2017 .

[34]  N. Meader,et al.  A checklist designed to aid consistency and reproducibility of GRADE assessments: development and pilot validation , 2014, Systematic Reviews.

[35]  Brian Salter,et al.  Public attitudes, scientific advice and the politics of regulatory policy: The case of BSE , 2002 .

[36]  R Shepherd,et al.  What determines trust in information about food-related risks? Underlying psychological constructs. , 1996, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[37]  Pieternel A. Luning,et al.  Differences in fraud vulnerability in various food supply chains and their tiers , 2018 .

[38]  Michael G Tyshenko,et al.  The Impact of Social Amplification and Attenuation of Risk and the Public Reaction to Mad Cow Disease in Canada , 2009, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[39]  Jeanne X. Kasperson,et al.  Stigma and the Social Amplification of Risk: Toward a Framework of Analysis , 2013 .

[40]  P. Sandøe,et al.  Beyond the knowledge deficit: recent research into lay and expert attitudes to food risks , 2003, Appetite.

[41]  Michele Tarsilla Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions , 2010, Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation.

[42]  A. Mol,et al.  Consumer trust in different food provisioning schemes: evidence from Beijing, China , 2016 .

[43]  J. Simal-Gandara,et al.  Future challenges on the use of blockchain for food traceability analysis , 2018, TrAC Trends in Analytical Chemistry.

[44]  J. Klempír,et al.  Czech mass methanol outbreak 2012: Epidemiology, challenges and clinical features , 2014, Clinical toxicology.

[45]  L. Frewer,et al.  A Systematic Review of Public Attitudes, Perceptions and Behaviours Towards Production Diseases Associated with Farm Animal Welfare , 2016 .

[46]  M. Dean,et al.  Exploring consumer purchase intentions towards traceable minced beef and beef steak using the theory of planned behavior , 2018, Food Control.

[47]  L. Devaney Good governance? Perceptions of accountability, transparency and effectiveness in Irish food risk governance , 2016 .

[48]  E. Tsakiridou,et al.  Valuing Consumer Perceptions of Olive Oil Authenticity , 2018 .

[49]  A. Lobb,et al.  Consumer trust, risk and food safety: A review , 2005 .

[50]  A. Strauss,et al.  The Discovery of Grounded Theory , 1967 .

[51]  F. Lyon,et al.  Market institutions, trust and norms: exploring moral economies in Nigerian food systems. , 2009 .

[52]  J. Barnett,et al.  Conceptualising responsibility in the aftermath of the horsemeat adulteration incident: an online study with Irish and UK consumers , 2015 .

[53]  J. Premanandh Horse meat scandal – A wake-up call for regulatory authorities , 2013 .

[54]  J. Simal-Gándara,et al.  Tackling Fraudsters with Global Strategies to Expose Fraud in the Food Chain. , 2019, Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety.

[55]  Susan Miles,et al.  The Media and Genetically Modified Foods: Evidence in Support of Social Amplification of Risk , 2002, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[56]  Reint Jan Renes,et al.  Monitoring consumer confidence in food safety: an exploratory study , 2004 .

[57]  Francesca Colantuoni,et al.  Willingness to Pay for Traceable Meat Attributes: A Meta-analysis , 2010 .

[58]  Robert Home,et al.  Chinese consumer's attitudes, perceptions and behavioural responses towards food fraud , 2019, Food Control.

[59]  Y. Man,et al.  Halal authenticity issues in meat and meat products. , 2012, Meat science.

[60]  Safwat Altal Modeling information asymmetry mitigation through food traceability systems using partial least squares , 2012 .

[61]  Salih Mustafa Salih,et al.  Authenticity and Quality of Muscle Foods: Assessing Consumer Trust and Fraud Detection Approaches , 2017 .