Food Scares and Trust: A European Study

The complex interactions between the determinants of food purchase under risk are explored using the SPARTA model, based on the theory of planned behaviour, and estimated through a combination of multivariate statistical techniques. The application investigates chicken consumption choices in two scenarios: (a) a 'standard' purchasing situation; and (b) following a hypothetical Salmonella scare. The data are from a nationally representative survey of 2,725 respondents from five European countries: France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. Results show that the effects and interactions of behavioural determinants vary significantly within Europe. Only in the case of a food scare do risk perceptions and trust come into play. The policy priority should be on building and maintaining trust in food and health authorities and research institutions, while food chain actors could mitigate the consequences of a food scare through public trust. No relationship is found between socio-demographic variables and consumer trust in food safety information. Copyright 2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 The Agricultural Economics Society.

[1]  H. Aarts,et al.  Habits as knowledge structures: automaticity in goal-directed behavior. , 2000, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[2]  K. Moore,et al.  Attitudes and intentions towards purchasing GM food , 2002 .

[3]  Icek Ajzen,et al.  From Intentions to Actions: A Theory of Planned Behavior , 1985 .

[4]  I. Ajzen.  The theory of planned behavior , 1991 .

[5]  Stavros P. Kalafatis,et al.  Green marketing and Ajzen’s theory of planned behaviour: a cross‐market examination , 1999 .

[6]  W. Verbeke.  Beliefs, attitude and behaviour towards fresh meat revisited after the Belgian dioxin crisis , 2001 .

[7]  M. Conner,et al.  Efficacy of the Theory of Planned Behaviour: a meta-analytic review. , 2001, The British journal of social psychology.

[8]  Richard Shepherd,et al.  Adolescent food choice: an application of the Theory of Planned Behaviour , 1995 .

[9]  Mark Conner,et al.  Moderating role of attitudinal ambivalence within the theory of planned behaviour. , 2003, The British journal of social psychology.

[10]  M. McEachern,et al.  Integrating the voice of the consumer within the value chain: a focus on value‐based labelling communications in the fresh‐meat sector , 2004 .

[11]  L. Berg.  Trust in food in the age of mad cow disease: a comparative study of consumers' evaluation of food safety in Belgium, Britain and Norway , 2004, Appetite.

[12]  M. Mazzocchi,et al.  Modelling risk perception and trust in food safety information within the theory of planned behaviour , 2007 .

[13]  K. Tentori,et al.  Consumer decision in the context of a food hazard: the effect of commitment , 2009 .

[14]  Alan W. Hodges,et al.  Conservation technology adoption decisions and the theory of planned behavior , 1995 .

[15]  I. Ajzen,et al.  Attitudes toward objects as predictors of sin-gle and multiple behavioral criteria , 1974 .

[16]  A. van Knippenberg,et al.  Habit versus planned behaviour: a field experiment. , 1998, The British journal of social psychology.

[17]  Ruth M.W. Yeung,et al.  Consumer perception of food risk in chicken meat , 2001 .

[18]  Michele Tonglet,et al.  Consumer misbehaviour: an exploratory study of shopliftin , 2002 .

[19]  D. Shaw,et al.  An assessment of ethical obligation and self-identity in ethical consumer decision-making: a structural equation modelling approach , 2002 .

[20]  Johan P Mackenbach,et al.  Educational differences in the intention to stop smoking: explanations based on the Theory of Planned Behaviour. , 2004, European journal of public health.

[21]  Mark Conner,et al.  Application of the theory of planned behaviour to two dietary behaviours: Roles of perceived control and self-efficacy , 2000 .

[22]  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.