|
Consumer demand for food safety cannot be directly measured in the marketplace. Foods are not labeled by food-safety risk, and purchases of foods with different risks cannot be identified. This characteristic of food safety led to the delegation of food safety control to the Federal Government with laws passed in 1890 and 1906.
Government regulation of industry food-safety practices is one way to reduce foodborne illness. Consumers can also act to protect themselves by avoiding high-risk consumption choices and by using good food-handling practices when preparing food at home. These "safer" consumer actions require consumer knowledge and skill, limit food choices (for example, no rare burgers), change product attributes (tougher burgers), take time (washing a new plate for grilled burgers), and cost money (buying a larger refrigerator or freezer). ERS research focuses on both improving estimates of the demand for food safety as well as understanding consumer food safety behavior.
The Value of Reducing Foodborne Risks
The biggest practical problem raised in estimating consumer demand for food safety is the lack of a market for reducing food-safety risks. ERS is trying two approaches to find out how much individuals value lower risk of illness due to foodborne pathogens. Through cooperative research with Harvard University’s Center for Risk Analysis and the University of Wyoming, two Internet surveys have been administered to consumers.
- A contingent valuation survey, conducted in summer 2004, asked respondents about their behavior and what they would be willing to pay for greater food safety. It described symptoms of gastrointestinal illness and then presented respondents with information on duration of symptoms and the likelihood of death. Respondents were asked how much they were willing to pay for foods (chicken, hamburger, and deli meats) with lower risk of foodborne illness. Reducing risks incurred by children was also queried.
- A second survey examined actual food purchases and how purchases changed when information about safety changed. This survey, conducted in summer 2005, provided respondents with information about the likelihood of foodborne illnesses and asked them about the foods they consume and their food safety practices. Analysts will use the respondents' grocery store receipts to link food choices with the food safety information provided. This will allow researchers to estimate individuals' varying mortality risks, willingness to undertake actions to reduce risks, and varying values of life.
Consumer Demand for Food Safety
Some consumers avoid purchasing foods they perceive as unsafe, including some imported foods, and they may choose food products they believe to be safer, such as irradiated meat or organic food. Even after a safety problem with a particular food has been resolved, consumer perceptions about the implicated food product and about the ability of the supplier or exporting country to produce safe food may be slow to change. Such perceptions may have a lasting influence on food demand and global trade.
Some consumers seek compensation for foodborne illness through lawsuits filed under product liability law. ERS research on these consumer actions provides insights into the incentives provided by the market to produce safer food, helps to identify niche market opportunities, helps to identify opportunities to provide consumer choice through labeling, and provides new estimates of consumer valuation of food safety.
Avoiding Foods Perceived as Unsafe
When consumers perceive a food as unsafe, demand for the food can drop. In 1996, the United Kingdom announced that BSE was linked to a new human disease, new variant Creutzfeldt Jakob Disease (nvCJD). This rare, but invariably fatal, human strain causes progressive deterioration of brain tissue and had caused 158 human deaths in the UK as of November 3, 2006. After the 1996 announcement, domestic sales and consumption of beef products in the UK fell by 40 percent. Trade was also heavily affected as the European Union banned imports of live cattle and bovine products from the U.K. In the U.S., however, reaction to domestic BSE was muted. U.S. government announcements in 2003 that one cow imported from Canada was infected with bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE)
affected the sales of some beef products for only two weeks.
Earlier incidents have had more dramatic market impacts. During 1984-89, sales of apples in the New York City-Newark (N.J.) market dropped 30 percent following the release of information during this period that Alar, a growth regulator used in apple production, was a carcinogen. In 1993, the restaurant chain involved in an E. coli O157:H7 outbreak lost an estimated $160 million in the 18 months following the outbreak and did not recover to pre-outbreak revenue levels for another 5 years.
U.S. demand for Guatemalan raspberries fell after a 1996 outbreak caused by the foodborne parasite, Cyclospora, which resulted in 1,465 illnesses in the United States and Canada. By July 1996, the U.S. CDC declared Guatemalan raspberries the likely source of the illnesses. After additional outbreaks in 1997, the U.S. FDA issued an import alert for Guatemalan raspberries for the spring 1998 season. Although the Cyclospora problem with Guatemalan raspberries has been resolved, changes in consumer demand and trade continue to persist. Demand for Guatemalan raspberries has been restored to only about one-third of its pre-outbreak levels.
See Effects of Food Safety Perceptions on Food Demand and Global Trade, in Changing Structure of Global Food Consumption and Trade .
Purchasing Foods Marketed as Safer
Consumers may have the opportunity to purchase foods processed with extra steps, such as irradiation, to further reduce the risk of harmful bacteria. ERS researchers found that in a survey by the Foodborne Diseases Active Surveillance Network (FoodNet), half of the respondents were willing to buy irradiated ground beef or chicken, and a fourth were willing to pay a premium for these products, which cost more to produce than comparable nonirradiated products. These findings suggest that the impact of food irradiation on public health will be limited unless consumer preferences change, perhaps in response to
educational messages about the safety and benefits of food irradiation. See Consumer Acceptance of Irradiated Meat and Poultry Products.
ERS research shows that some consumers perceive organic products as a safe and healthy way to avoid potential risks of exposure to pesticide residues in foods. Sales of organic baby food have been steadily increasing, and in 1995 totaled more than $25 million. This was despite a price premium of 21 cents per jar over regular baby food. See "Consumers Pay a Premium for Organic Baby Foods" and Organic Agriculture briefing room.
Foodborne Illness Lawsuits
The U.S. product-liability system was designed to alleviate the economic costs that individuals incur due to defective products, including food products contaminated by microbial pathogens. Under current law, consumers who suffer a foodborne illness can seek monetary compensation for their injuries through the courts. Firms producing defective products are liable for medical and other costs to consumers who become ill. Firms may incur other costs such as legal fees, higher insurance costs, and lost market share and profits.
While the threat of a lawsuit provides an incentive for food manufacturers and retailers to supply safer food, these incentives are limited. The majority of consumers who experience a foodborne illness do not file a legal claim. Even in serious cases of illness, identifying the food associated with the illness is difficult because the incubation period for pathogens may be a few days or even weeks, and samples of the contaminated food may not be available. These information costs and transaction costs drastically reduce the odds of litigation success. Even among lawsuits that are filed, most are dropped or resolved out of public view. See Product Liability and Microbial Foodborne Illness.
Consumer Food Safety Behavior
Consumers’ food choices influence their risk of foodborne illness. By eating well-cooked foods, avoiding cross-contamination in the kitchen, and following other good food-handling practices, consumers can significantly reduce their risk of illness from foodborne pathogens. Consumer food choices are a function of taste, price, variety, convenience, culture, knowledge about risky foods, and other factors. To help consumers make more informed choices about foodborne risks, educational outreach is needed to identify risky food consumption and preparation behaviors, high risk groups, and how to motivate consumers to change their behavior and follow food safety recommendations. ERS research provides guidance for developing and targeting food safety education.
Consumer Practices
Cooking food thoroughly kills pathogens. But cooked food can be recontaminated by coming into contact with raw food or food preparation surfaces, serving utensils, or even the preparer's hands if they were not properly cleaned. Proper refrigeration of cold foods and leftovers is essential to prevent any pathogens in food from multiplying to dangerous levels. National and regional surveys provide insights about how many consumers are following safe preparation and handling practices, and what personal and household characteristics are associated with safe practices.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), in cooperation with USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), conducted a telephone survey of food safety knowledge and behavior, called the Food Safety Survey in 1988, 1993, 1998, 2001, and 2006. In cooperation with ERS, Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University (NCA&TSU) conducted a telephone survey in 1997-98 of food safety attitudes and practices in Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida. This was the first such survey in the Southeast focusing on differences in food safety behavior between African-Americans and other ethnic groups. The survey was based on the 1998 Food Safety Survey by the FDA and FSIS. Thirty percent of the sample respondents were African-American, 64 percent were White, and the remaining 6 percent were of Asian, Hispanic, and Native American ethnic origin.
- The researchers found that married individuals were more likely to practice safe handling of food. More women than men practiced safe handling of food. African-American respondents reported using practices to prevent cross-contamination in higher percentages than other ethnic groups. Education, age, and income levels were not of statistical significance in determining the respondents' food handling practices.
- Education, age, and income were also not significantly associated with safe refrigeration and cooling practices. As household size increased, consumers tended to practice less safe refrigeration and cooling of food. African-Americans were less likely than other ethnic groups to report using safe refrigerating practices.
- Consumers who had experienced foodborne illness reported significantly higher levels of perceived safety risks associated with food consumption and handling. Ethnicity also influenced risk perception, with African-Americans and other ethnic groups being more likely to perceive a greater level of risk associated with food consumption and handling. Risk perception was significantly lower for consumers with higher levels of education. Demographic factors, illness experience, risk perceptions, and awareness of foodborne illness pathogens were not significantly associated with respondents' knowledge of safe handling practices.
The results suggest that African-Americans in the Southeast are receptive to food safety messages: they perceived higher levels of risk than did other ethnic groups, and reported using practices to prevent cross-contamination in greater percentages than other ethnic groups. However, they reported safe refrigerating and cooling practices in lower numbers than other ethnic groups. Safe refrigerating and cooling—prompt refrigeration of cold foods and leftovers—is essential in preventing any pathogens that may be present in the food from multiplying to dangerous levels. Thus, providing targeted messages to African-Americans to encourage safe cooling could help reduce foodborne illness in the region.
High-Risk Consumers
Individuals who are more vulnerable to foodborne illness represent one potential target for food safety education. These consumers may also represent a niche market for foods produced with extra protection, such as irradiated foods. For many pathogens, infection rates are highest among children under 10 and adults over 65. Children are at higher risk because of their lower body weights and undeveloped immune systems (See Children and Microbial Foodborne Illness). Pregnant women who develop foodborne illness may pass the infection on to their fetuses, perhaps resulting in miscarriage, congenital illness, or chronic neurological complications.
Some consumers are less able to fight off foodborne illness because of a weakened immune system, resulting from a gradual decline with age, HIV infection, immunosuppressant medication following organ transplant, and radiation or chemotherapy for cancer or other illness (See Tracking Foodborne Pathogens from Farm to Table: Data Needs to Evaluate Control Options).
Motivating Consumers
ERS research shows that consumers who perceive higher risks of contracting foodborne illness are more likely to follow food safety recommendations, such as cooking hamburgers thoroughly. Consumers who say they read safe handling labels on meat and poultry also report that they follow food safety recommendations in greater numbers than other consumers. But further research is needed to determine whether these consumers were already concerned about foodborne illness and thus more aware of food safety information from labels and other sources (See Ralston, Katherine L. and C.T. Jordan Lin. 2001. "Safe Handling Labels on Meat and Poultry: A Case Study in Information Policy," Consumer Interests Annual, vol. 47, pp. 1-8).
ERS research on consumer tradeoffs in food-safety decisions focuses on the example of hamburger preferences at home and in restaurants. Using the 1996 Hamburger Preparation Quiz, conducted by the Market Research Corporation of America, ERS found that 10 percent of consumers had switched from cooking hamburgers rare or medium-rare 5 years previously to cooking them medium-well or well-done in 1996. This led to a decrease in the percentage of consumers cooking hamburgers rare or medium-rare from 24 percent in 1991 to 20 percent in 1996. Almost three-fourths of the respondents who switched from less well-done to more well-done explained they had made the change because of the possibility of becoming ill. Yet, not all consumers changed their behavior.
To explore these changes further, ERS used the Hamburger Preparation Quiz to study the relationship between consumers' hamburger cooking and ordering choices and their motivation to avoid the risk of foodborne illness from unsafely cooked hamburger. Risk-avoiding respondents ordered or cooked their hamburgers more. However, respondents who highly valued tender, juicy hamburgers were less likely to eat hamburgers cooked well-done (See Awareness of Risks Changing How Hamburgers Are Cooked).
|
