Consumer evaluations of food risk management in Russia

Purpose - Consumer perceptions regarding what constitutes best food risk management (FRM) practice may vary as a consequence of cross-cultural differences in consumer perceptions, cultural contexts, and historical differences in governance practices and occurrence of food safety incidents. The purpo...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:British food journal (1966) 2010-01, Vol.112 (9), p.934-948
Hauptverfasser: Popova, Ksenia, Frewer, Lynne J, De Jonge, Janneke, Fischer, Arnout, Van Kleef, Ellen
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 948
container_issue 9
container_start_page 934
container_title British food journal (1966)
container_volume 112
creator Popova, Ksenia
Frewer, Lynne J
De Jonge, Janneke
Fischer, Arnout
Van Kleef, Ellen
description Purpose - Consumer perceptions regarding what constitutes best food risk management (FRM) practice may vary as a consequence of cross-cultural differences in consumer perceptions, cultural contexts, and historical differences in governance practices and occurrence of food safety incidents. The purpose of this paper is to compare the views of Russian consumers with those of consumers in European Union member states.Design methodology approach - A survey previously conducted in five EU member states was replicated using a Russian consumer sample (n=460, SEM analysis). Psychological factors underpinning consumer evaluations of food risk management quality (FRMQ) were identified. A qualitative study (consumer focus group, n=9) allowed for in-depth interpretation of the quantitative results.Findings - Russian consumers hold similar views to consumers in EU member states regarding their perceptions of what constitutes effective FRM practices. However, the perceived honesty of food chain actors was an important determinant of perceived FRMQ only for Russian consumers, who also perceived that they were primarily responsible for their own food-related health protection. EU consumers attributed more responsibility to food chain actors and the authorities.Research limitations implications - The analysis compared Russian consumers with consumers in five different EU member states. The results cannot be extended to compare Russian consumers with the entire EU.Practical implications - An international risk communication policy is likely to be impractical, and should be developed at a national or regional level. Given that Russian consumers take personal responsibility for their own health protection, information needs to be provided to enable them to do so.Originality value - To the authors knowledge, this is the first comparative analysis of the determinants of perceptions of effective FRM held by Russian consumers with consumers from within the EU regulatory area.
doi_str_mv 10.1108/00070701011074327
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_fao_a</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_fao_agris_US201301925499</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2244387501</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c444t-5f9665a2f7c4375ead8c208fe23faf751559f9a838c96bd6ea2ebbc790919383</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkE9P3DAQxa0KpC5LP0BPjbhwacB_Y_tYRZRFWhWJbtu9WbOJvcqSxFs7qeDb41VQD8ABzWH0NL83mnkIfSb4ghCsLjHGMhXBSUnOqPyAZkQKlfM0PUKzwzxPwPojOolxd5BUyhkqSt_HsbMhs_-gHWFoks68y5z3dRaaeJ910MPWdrYfsqbP7sYYGzhFxw7aaD899zlafb9alYt8eXt9U35b5hXnfMiF00UhgDpZcSaFhVpVFCtnKXPgpCBCaKdBMVXpYlMXFqjdbCqpsSaaKTZH59PaffB_RxsH0zWxsm0LvfVjNEooThlnIpFnL8idH0OfbjOKi7RQFTxBZIKq4GMM1pl9aDoIj4Zgc4jRvIoxefLJ08TBPvw3QLg3hUw_Gf6HmuLHYk3K8s78TvyXiXfgDWxTgubXT4oJw0RTwbVOBJ6IlGmAtn7XEV_ftrxCzb527AmWIpbm</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>845790864</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Consumer evaluations of food risk management in Russia</title><source>Emerald Journals</source><creator>Popova, Ksenia ; Frewer, Lynne J ; De Jonge, Janneke ; Fischer, Arnout ; Van Kleef, Ellen</creator><creatorcontrib>Popova, Ksenia ; Frewer, Lynne J ; De Jonge, Janneke ; Fischer, Arnout ; Van Kleef, Ellen</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose - Consumer perceptions regarding what constitutes best food risk management (FRM) practice may vary as a consequence of cross-cultural differences in consumer perceptions, cultural contexts, and historical differences in governance practices and occurrence of food safety incidents. The purpose of this paper is to compare the views of Russian consumers with those of consumers in European Union member states.Design methodology approach - A survey previously conducted in five EU member states was replicated using a Russian consumer sample (n=460, SEM analysis). Psychological factors underpinning consumer evaluations of food risk management quality (FRMQ) were identified. A qualitative study (consumer focus group, n=9) allowed for in-depth interpretation of the quantitative results.Findings - Russian consumers hold similar views to consumers in EU member states regarding their perceptions of what constitutes effective FRM practices. However, the perceived honesty of food chain actors was an important determinant of perceived FRMQ only for Russian consumers, who also perceived that they were primarily responsible for their own food-related health protection. EU consumers attributed more responsibility to food chain actors and the authorities.Research limitations implications - The analysis compared Russian consumers with consumers in five different EU member states. The results cannot be extended to compare Russian consumers with the entire EU.Practical implications - An international risk communication policy is likely to be impractical, and should be developed at a national or regional level. Given that Russian consumers take personal responsibility for their own health protection, information needs to be provided to enable them to do so.Originality value - To the authors knowledge, this is the first comparative analysis of the determinants of perceptions of effective FRM held by Russian consumers with consumers from within the EU regulatory area.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0007-070X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1758-4108</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1108/00070701011074327</identifier><identifier>CODEN: BFOJA9</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Bradford: Emerald Group Publishing Limited</publisher><subject>attitudes and opinions ; Communication ; consumer attitudes ; Consumer behavior ; Consumer behaviour ; Consumer protection ; consumer surveys ; Consumers ; cross cultural studies ; cultural differences ; Decision making ; European Union ; Focus groups ; food industry ; Food safety ; Perceptions ; perceptions (cognitive) ; psychosocial factors ; qualitative analysis ; Qualitative research ; quantitative analysis ; Risk assessment ; Risk intelligence ; Risk management ; Russia ; Safety standards ; Statistical analysis</subject><ispartof>British food journal (1966), 2010-01, Vol.112 (9), p.934-948</ispartof><rights>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</rights><rights>Copyright Emerald Group Publishing Limited 2010</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c444t-5f9665a2f7c4375ead8c208fe23faf751559f9a838c96bd6ea2ebbc790919383</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c444t-5f9665a2f7c4375ead8c208fe23faf751559f9a838c96bd6ea2ebbc790919383</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/00070701011074327/full/pdf$$EPDF$$P50$$Gemerald$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/00070701011074327/full/html$$EHTML$$P50$$Gemerald$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,961,11614,27901,27902,52661,52664</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Popova, Ksenia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Frewer, Lynne J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Jonge, Janneke</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fischer, Arnout</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Van Kleef, Ellen</creatorcontrib><title>Consumer evaluations of food risk management in Russia</title><title>British food journal (1966)</title><description>Purpose - Consumer perceptions regarding what constitutes best food risk management (FRM) practice may vary as a consequence of cross-cultural differences in consumer perceptions, cultural contexts, and historical differences in governance practices and occurrence of food safety incidents. The purpose of this paper is to compare the views of Russian consumers with those of consumers in European Union member states.Design methodology approach - A survey previously conducted in five EU member states was replicated using a Russian consumer sample (n=460, SEM analysis). Psychological factors underpinning consumer evaluations of food risk management quality (FRMQ) were identified. A qualitative study (consumer focus group, n=9) allowed for in-depth interpretation of the quantitative results.Findings - Russian consumers hold similar views to consumers in EU member states regarding their perceptions of what constitutes effective FRM practices. However, the perceived honesty of food chain actors was an important determinant of perceived FRMQ only for Russian consumers, who also perceived that they were primarily responsible for their own food-related health protection. EU consumers attributed more responsibility to food chain actors and the authorities.Research limitations implications - The analysis compared Russian consumers with consumers in five different EU member states. The results cannot be extended to compare Russian consumers with the entire EU.Practical implications - An international risk communication policy is likely to be impractical, and should be developed at a national or regional level. Given that Russian consumers take personal responsibility for their own health protection, information needs to be provided to enable them to do so.Originality value - To the authors knowledge, this is the first comparative analysis of the determinants of perceptions of effective FRM held by Russian consumers with consumers from within the EU regulatory area.</description><subject>attitudes and opinions</subject><subject>Communication</subject><subject>consumer attitudes</subject><subject>Consumer behavior</subject><subject>Consumer behaviour</subject><subject>Consumer protection</subject><subject>consumer surveys</subject><subject>Consumers</subject><subject>cross cultural studies</subject><subject>cultural differences</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>European Union</subject><subject>Focus groups</subject><subject>food industry</subject><subject>Food safety</subject><subject>Perceptions</subject><subject>perceptions (cognitive)</subject><subject>psychosocial factors</subject><subject>qualitative analysis</subject><subject>Qualitative research</subject><subject>quantitative analysis</subject><subject>Risk assessment</subject><subject>Risk intelligence</subject><subject>Risk management</subject><subject>Russia</subject><subject>Safety standards</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><issn>0007-070X</issn><issn>1758-4108</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkE9P3DAQxa0KpC5LP0BPjbhwacB_Y_tYRZRFWhWJbtu9WbOJvcqSxFs7qeDb41VQD8ABzWH0NL83mnkIfSb4ghCsLjHGMhXBSUnOqPyAZkQKlfM0PUKzwzxPwPojOolxd5BUyhkqSt_HsbMhs_-gHWFoks68y5z3dRaaeJ910MPWdrYfsqbP7sYYGzhFxw7aaD899zlafb9alYt8eXt9U35b5hXnfMiF00UhgDpZcSaFhVpVFCtnKXPgpCBCaKdBMVXpYlMXFqjdbCqpsSaaKTZH59PaffB_RxsH0zWxsm0LvfVjNEooThlnIpFnL8idH0OfbjOKi7RQFTxBZIKq4GMM1pl9aDoIj4Zgc4jRvIoxefLJ08TBPvw3QLg3hUw_Gf6HmuLHYk3K8s78TvyXiXfgDWxTgubXT4oJw0RTwbVOBJ6IlGmAtn7XEV_ftrxCzb527AmWIpbm</recordid><startdate>20100101</startdate><enddate>20100101</enddate><creator>Popova, Ksenia</creator><creator>Frewer, Lynne J</creator><creator>De Jonge, Janneke</creator><creator>Fischer, Arnout</creator><creator>Van Kleef, Ellen</creator><general>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0U~</scope><scope>1-H</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QF</scope><scope>7QQ</scope><scope>7QR</scope><scope>7RQ</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>7SE</scope><scope>7SP</scope><scope>7SR</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TA</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7U5</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8BQ</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AXJJW</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F28</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>H8G</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.0</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0Q</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7U1</scope><scope>7U2</scope><scope>7U6</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20100101</creationdate><title>Consumer evaluations of food risk management in Russia</title><author>Popova, Ksenia ; Frewer, Lynne J ; De Jonge, Janneke ; Fischer, Arnout ; Van Kleef, Ellen</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c444t-5f9665a2f7c4375ead8c208fe23faf751559f9a838c96bd6ea2ebbc790919383</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>attitudes and opinions</topic><topic>Communication</topic><topic>consumer attitudes</topic><topic>Consumer behavior</topic><topic>Consumer behaviour</topic><topic>Consumer protection</topic><topic>consumer surveys</topic><topic>Consumers</topic><topic>cross cultural studies</topic><topic>cultural differences</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>European Union</topic><topic>Focus groups</topic><topic>food industry</topic><topic>Food safety</topic><topic>Perceptions</topic><topic>perceptions (cognitive)</topic><topic>psychosocial factors</topic><topic>qualitative analysis</topic><topic>Qualitative research</topic><topic>quantitative analysis</topic><topic>Risk assessment</topic><topic>Risk intelligence</topic><topic>Risk management</topic><topic>Russia</topic><topic>Safety standards</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Popova, Ksenia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Frewer, Lynne J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Jonge, Janneke</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fischer, Arnout</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Van Kleef, Ellen</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Global News &amp; ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>Trade PRO</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Aluminium Industry Abstracts</collection><collection>Ceramic Abstracts</collection><collection>Chemoreception Abstracts</collection><collection>Career and Technical Education (ProQuest Database)</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Corrosion Abstracts</collection><collection>Electronics &amp; Communications Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineered Materials Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Materials Business File</collection><collection>Mechanical &amp; Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Solid State and Superconductivity Abstracts</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>METADEX</collection><collection>ProQuest Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Asian &amp; European Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ANTE: Abstracts in New Technology &amp; Engineering</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>Copper Technical Reference Library</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Standard</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts – Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM global</collection><collection>Agriculture Science Database</collection><collection>European Business Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>One Business (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Risk Abstracts</collection><collection>Safety Science and Risk</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><jtitle>British food journal (1966)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Popova, Ksenia</au><au>Frewer, Lynne J</au><au>De Jonge, Janneke</au><au>Fischer, Arnout</au><au>Van Kleef, Ellen</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Consumer evaluations of food risk management in Russia</atitle><jtitle>British food journal (1966)</jtitle><date>2010-01-01</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>112</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>934</spage><epage>948</epage><pages>934-948</pages><issn>0007-070X</issn><eissn>1758-4108</eissn><coden>BFOJA9</coden><abstract>Purpose - Consumer perceptions regarding what constitutes best food risk management (FRM) practice may vary as a consequence of cross-cultural differences in consumer perceptions, cultural contexts, and historical differences in governance practices and occurrence of food safety incidents. The purpose of this paper is to compare the views of Russian consumers with those of consumers in European Union member states.Design methodology approach - A survey previously conducted in five EU member states was replicated using a Russian consumer sample (n=460, SEM analysis). Psychological factors underpinning consumer evaluations of food risk management quality (FRMQ) were identified. A qualitative study (consumer focus group, n=9) allowed for in-depth interpretation of the quantitative results.Findings - Russian consumers hold similar views to consumers in EU member states regarding their perceptions of what constitutes effective FRM practices. However, the perceived honesty of food chain actors was an important determinant of perceived FRMQ only for Russian consumers, who also perceived that they were primarily responsible for their own food-related health protection. EU consumers attributed more responsibility to food chain actors and the authorities.Research limitations implications - The analysis compared Russian consumers with consumers in five different EU member states. The results cannot be extended to compare Russian consumers with the entire EU.Practical implications - An international risk communication policy is likely to be impractical, and should be developed at a national or regional level. Given that Russian consumers take personal responsibility for their own health protection, information needs to be provided to enable them to do so.Originality value - To the authors knowledge, this is the first comparative analysis of the determinants of perceptions of effective FRM held by Russian consumers with consumers from within the EU regulatory area.</abstract><cop>Bradford</cop><pub>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</pub><doi>10.1108/00070701011074327</doi><tpages>15</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0007-070X
ispartof British food journal (1966), 2010-01, Vol.112 (9), p.934-948
issn 0007-070X
1758-4108
language eng
recordid cdi_fao_agris_US201301925499
source Emerald Journals
subjects attitudes and opinions
Communication
consumer attitudes
Consumer behavior
Consumer behaviour
Consumer protection
consumer surveys
Consumers
cross cultural studies
cultural differences
Decision making
European Union
Focus groups
food industry
Food safety
Perceptions
perceptions (cognitive)
psychosocial factors
qualitative analysis
Qualitative research
quantitative analysis
Risk assessment
Risk intelligence
Risk management
Russia
Safety standards
Statistical analysis
title Consumer evaluations of food risk management in Russia
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-12T06%3A20%3A21IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_fao_a&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Consumer%20evaluations%20of%20food%20risk%20management%20in%20Russia&rft.jtitle=British%20food%20journal%20(1966)&rft.au=Popova,%20Ksenia&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.volume=112&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=934&rft.epage=948&rft.pages=934-948&rft.issn=0007-070X&rft.eissn=1758-4108&rft.coden=BFOJA9&rft_id=info:doi/10.1108/00070701011074327&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_fao_a%3E2244387501%3C/proquest_fao_a%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=845790864&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true