Teknologirådet

Activities:

Citizens' food policy

- a short summary

Consumers need more and better information on foods if they are to influence the market in the direction they want. Public food policy must ensure that attention is focused on food safety, quality, the environment and animal ethics.
These are some of the results revealed in the danish Board of Technology comprehensive interview survey on the population's wishes for the food policy of the future.
A majority of consumers are conscious of their responsibility to influence the development of the food market. Consumers' key to fulfilling this responsibility lies in better information, such as more complete declarations of contents and special eco-labels. Information must be available on all the ingredients in products, as well as on the environmental load and ethical conditions associated with their production.
Most consumers are prepared to pay higher prices if that means greater food safety and quality for money. Many consumers are also ready to pay more for environment-friendly production and animal welfare. Consumers are willing to make allowances for the industry's situation, but not at the cost of food safety. Food technology must be used cautiously, and, in some instances, consumers favour prohibitions.

Proposals for food policy measures
The objective of the Board of Technology survey was to come up with some proposals for food policy measures and study consumer attitudes to such measures. In addition, the Board wants to determine the costs, which consumers are willing to pay to ensure the desired development - and avoid an unwanted one.
The survey presented eight different food policy measures to the respondents, measures based on an overall objective of healthy and environmentally-sound foods. Several probable consequences were listed for each of the different measures, which the consumers were asked to rate as either advantageous or disadvantageous. Additionally, consumers were to state their opinion as to the extent of the advantage or disadvantage. For each of the eight measures, consumers were asked to state their attitude to the implementation of each measure - positive, negative or neutral. The replies appear from the figure.

Complete product information
All information on food production and content must be readily accessible to consumers. Product information must cover all ingredients and state volumes. The information must also contain production date, country of origin, the environmental load and ethical considerations.
9 out of 10 consumers assess this food policy positively. Only 1 per cent oppose it whereas 8 per cent are undecided.
Consumers assess this measure as offering many advantages. The chief advantage is that it becomes easier for people with food allergies to avoid the substances they are allergic to.
Consumers also see some disadvantages to the measure. For example, more data might make it more difficult to obtain an overview of the products on offer, and complete product information may entail more difficulties and higher costs to the industry.

Label to ensure that consumers can select "safe food".
A label for "safe food" is introducedThe label tells the consumers that everything possible has been done to ensure that the food being sold contains no pathogenic bacteria.
84 per cent of consumers favour this political measure. 2 per cent oppose it, while 14 per cent are undecided.

A label to enable consumers to select high quality
A new, state-controlled label to set the standard for high-quality foods.
Use of the label must be voluntary. The quality requirements must be high and the control efficient. The label must show that the food meets high requirements as to raw material quality and processing.
8 out of 10 consumers are in favour of implementing this measure. 3 per cent are against and 17 per cent are undecided.

Dietary advice on healthier food habits
Doctors should be able to refer patients to dieticians as a supplement to medical treatment. An effort should be made to improve the population's food habits through dietary advice.
75% per cent of consumers are in favour of this food policy option. 3 per cent are against, whereas 23 per cent are undecided. The respondents believe that a major advantage of the measure is that targeted dietary advice can reduce the need for medical treatment. Most believe it to be an advantage that the measure may not only impact on specific patients, but may also give patients' families healthier food habits.

Prohibition against use of colourants
Use of colourants in foods must be prohibited.
66% of consumers are in favour of implementing a prohibition against the use of colourants in all foods. 8 per cent are against, whereas 26 per cent are undecided. Most of the respondents believe that the biggest advantage of implementing a prohibition would be that the question of whether colourants are harmful would be decided in favour of consumers' health. The most significant disadvantage is believed to be that a prohibition cannot cover imported foods.

The government must guarantee "safe food"
The government must make sure that food containing too many bacteria is not sold in Denmark.
Producers marketing foods that fail to meet the established threshold values must be taken to court and penalised with fines and claims for damages.
59 per cent of the respondents are in favour of this political measure. 12 per cent are against, whereas 29 per cent are undecided.

Eco-purchasing in public procurement
The public sector must purchase organically produced foods.
All public institutions, enterprises and catering kitchens must gradually transfer to organically produced foods.
About 50 per cent of consumers support this measure. 11 per cent are against, whereas 38 per cent are undecided. 3 out of 4 believe it would be an advantage if eco-purchasing in the public sector significantly increased the total demand for organically produced foods. Whereas 4 out of 5 would find it disadvantageous if the transfer to organically produced foods entailed an increase in public expenditure.

Environment taxes, green prices
The price of foods must reflect the environmental costs of their production and transport. Environmental taxes must be increased gradually on, e.g., energy and water, fertilisers and pesticides. The environmental tax share of prices must appear clearly from the product.
40 per cent of consumers are in favour of political measures involving environmental taxes. 23 per cent are against, whereas 37 per cent are undecided. More than 90 per cent believe that it would be a great advantage if this measure could help make food production more environment-friendly and if it meant that environmentally soundly produced foods cost less.
But roughly the same percentage see major disadvantages if the measure means that companies with high energy and transport consumption will encounter competitive problems. They also believe that environmental taxes may involve a social imbalance, since some foods would be more expensive and because the consumer pays for the environmental load of the foods.

Possible actions
Complete product information would mean that existing regulations on product labelling would have to be sharpened.
Even though Danish foods are internationally seen as having a high food safety standard, assessments indicate that consumers would like to be more certain that foods will not make them ill. Even though higher safety entails higher costs. The survey does not state the level of food safety desired by consumers, nor does it test their actual knowledge of food safety.
If a label for safe food is introduced, the survey indicates that a possible procedure would be to involve consumers, producers and retailers in the work of establishing the requirements which producers will have to meet. In this connection, it becomes important to clarify which level of safety is both feasible and acceptable to consumers.
The introduction of a high-quality label would mean that the authorities would have to enhance the current work on quality-labels for foods. In addition, consumers' reactions to the existing labels should be monitored.
The assessments of a measure on colourants indicate that consumers are sceptical of expert opinions that deny the risks associated with the use of permissible colourants. This is why the food authorities should consider how political decisions should generally deal with this dilemma, i.e. that in several aspects consumers and experts have diverging definitions of risks and how society should handle them.
In view of the outcome of this survey, we recommend that users of public food provisions should be deeply involved in the discussions of how, to which extent and at which pace ecological food is desired.
If politicians want to change today's tax policy and allow environmental taxes to play a more important role, we recommend the launch of a broad public debate aimed at clarifying the objective and effect of the regulations.

On the survey method
The survey was conducted as a special, enhanced interview survey in January 1998 in cooperation with the survey institute ACNielsen AIM A/S. A representative sample of the population, almost 500 respondents, participated. The respondents filled in two forms elucidating their attitudes and behaviour in the food area and their assessment of eight different food policy measures and their impacts. The replies were processed on the basis of both personal and written contact with the respondents.
In this survey, the Board of Technology elected to use a special, enhanced questionnaire called "Choice Questionnaire". The respondents must not only state their attitudes to different food policy measures, they must also decide on possible consequences and rate them as advantages or disadvantages. This procedure highlights any inconsistencies - for example between a wish for greater environmental consideration, on the one hand, and requirements to product prices, on the other.
The survey underlines consumer attitudes to food policy means and objectives, on the basis of consumers' own perception of concepts such as risk, safety and quality. Thus, this survey cannot elucidate the exact content of quality or the exact level of food safety desired by consumers. But it can indicate whether consumers are satisfied or dissatisfied with such aspects, as they perceive them.
The contents of the questionnaire are designed on the basis of interviews with the food policy spokespersons of the Danish parliament, food experts and stakeholders in the food area. The different measures stated in the questionnaire and the arguments for what impacts they might have were formulated to reflect different attitudes in the food policy debate.
The Board of Technology carried out the project in cooperation with a planning group. The group provided advice and guidance throughout the project planning and implementation, but the Board of Technology holds the sole responsibility for interpreting and presenting the results.

Members of the planning group were:
- Communication manager and editor Poul Dines, Samvirke, the Cooperative Retail and Wholesale Society of Denmark
- Head of section, M.Sc. Bent Egebjerg Mikkelsen, Veterinary and Food Service
- Assistant professor, M.Sc. Lotte Holm, Inst. for Human Nutrition, Royal and Veterinary Agricultural University
- Environment consultant, M.Sc. Carsten Elert, Danish Food and Allied Workers Union
- Head of Research, M.Sc. Henrik Dahl, ACNielsen-AIM A/S
- President, M.Sc. Jørgen Højmark Jensen, Food Control of Copenhagen
- Assistant professor, M.Sc. Michael Søegaard Jørgensen, Technical University of Denmark
- Research and Food Manager, M.Sc. Anette Toft, Agricultural Council of Denmark

The Board of Technology project is described in the report "Borgernes madpolitik" (available in Danish), prepared by project manager Ida-Elisabeth Andersen and Trine Iversen. The report presents and interprets the main results of the survey while also comparing them with the Food Policy Statement. In chapter 2, the paragraphs on each political measure are completed with a list of possible actions to be taken, if authorities want to follow the results of this study. The report contents and the complete data material from the survey are available at - and may be copied from - the Board of Technology homepage at www.tekno.dk

Last update: 13-08-2001

Back

Printer friendly version

Show all Activities