Stigmatisation within the Northern Ireland Food Supply Chain and the Management of Communication

1. Stigmatisation within the Northern Ireland Food Supply Chain and the Management of Communication Michelle Potts Department of Agriculture and Food Science Queens University Belfast, Northern Ireland

2. Introduction to Study This research project began by investigating the concept of stigma and how this affects the agric-food sector in Northern Ireland through the channels of communication used to inform consumers about food risk issues.

3. Stigmatisation • Stigmatisation is concerned with understanding why the public view certain places, products and technology as dangerous and in a negative manner.

4. Literature Reviewed Many areas have been reviewed and included in the study. • Stigmatisation • Decision making • Risk – risk perception, behaviour & management • Social amplification • Consumer behaviour • Trust

5. Aim of Study • To provide insight into the previously neglected role of stigma and its relationship to the management of communication on risk within the Northern Ireland food supply chain and determine mechanisms that will improve trust between consumers and those related with the agric-food industry in Northern Ireland.

6. Research Questions • Examine perception and behaviour toward food risk related issues • Consumers • Experts • Explore why certain foods are avoided by consumers. • Identify the processes leading to avoidance. • Determine levels of risk aversion and stigmatisation.

7. Study Design • Quantitative component: • Baseline Surveys • Consumers • Experts (undergraduate and postgraduate food qualifications)

8. Assessed knowledge of food related issues over last two decades Examined: Recency of issue Nature of risk Public profile

9. Study Design • Qualitative component: • Focus Group • Expert (food education specialists, food technologists) • To identify areas of food stigmatisation and determine a scale of risk aversion • One-to-one Interviews

10. Preliminary Quantitative Results • Baseline Survey • Examined 38 food related incidents from the last two decades. • Conducted mid-May to mid-June 2006 • Findings: • 56% Consumer, 44% Expert • 55% male, 45% female • Ages ranging from 20 to 60 years • 63% lived in rural areas of Northern Ireland

11. 32% had food qualifications 23% had various levels of food hygiene certificates 8% reported experiencing a food related incident in last 2 years Of those, 82% were micro related incidents. Overall, 14% follow a specific diet 64% follow diet associated with positive health 19% have a food intolerance 16% follow a meat aversion diet

12. Avian Bird Flu • 94% recalled avian bird flu • 28% recalled further information after prompting • Recency of Issue: • 10% made reference to it being a recent issue • Nature of Risk: • Responses identified: • Confusion regarding safety of chicken consumption • Fear of the unknown • Fear of it entering Northern Ireland

13. 11% linked the food related issue with human concerns, e.g. fear entering food chain and human death. 24 responses directly linked the issue with chicken Within the chicken descriptions, 15 references were made to avian bird flu. Public Profile: 15% made reference to communication of information on avian bird flu, e.g. media coverage and news reports.

14. Bacteria • 49% recalled this issue • An additional 14% recalled further information after prompting • Various references were made to product advertising and informational campaigns (4%), personal and kitchen hygiene (9%).

15. Most descriptions linked bacteria with food poisoning (3%), salmonella (5%) and E. coli (7%). Analysis of E.coli descriptions identified 24% of all references were linked to bacteria. Analysis of salmonella’s descriptions highlighted 9% of overall references were linked to bacteria.

16. BSE • 98% of respondents recalled BSE • 75% provided a description of the issue • A further 22% recalled further information after prompting • 19% of respondents made reference to CJD • Within CJD, 68% of descriptions made links to BSE

17. In BSE, media was referred to by 10% of respondents 3% made reference to BSE happening within the last decade

18. Summary of Preliminary Quantitative Results • Knowledge of food related issues appear to be dependent on influences such as experience, perception and level of exposure to communication. • People may recall issues but not remember a great deal about them. • Some issues examined were identified as areas of concern for food industry professionals but not for consumers, e.g. GM • Is this based on a perception there is a lack of immediate human consequence?

19. Preliminary Qualitative Results • Focus Group • Expert group of food education and food industry professionals. • Number of statements identified which describe the process of stigmatisation. • Participants gave direction as to issues to be used as discussion points in the one-to-one interviews.

20. Focus Group Findings • Various areas were identified for further exploration: • Level of avoidance • Trust of food or food related item • Communication • Experience • Quest for knowledge

21. Preliminary Qualitative Results • One-on-one Interviews • 6 preliminary interviews were conducted • 3 with consumers, 3 with experts • Avoidance foods / issues identified: • Meat (quality of meat, method of production) • Trans fatty acids • Food additives

22. Communication Issues: Participants reported giving a high level of attention to informational updates after initial exposure to a food related issue. Most respondents reported actively seeking food related information but further exploration identified they tend to wait until the information reaches them.

23. Most respondents were quite satisfied with how information is presented to food consumers Although, they would prefer it to be more timely, more understandable and more condensed.

24. Satisfactory exposure to information was found mainly through the media, Health promotion agency and Food standards agency. Unsatisfactory exposure to information was reported through supermarkets, government, internet and friends.

25. Food standards agency and Health promotion agency were attributed with high levels of trust for sources of information. Friends and supermarkets were associated with low trust in sources of food related information.

26. Summary of Preliminary One-on-one Interview Findings • Foods and food products are avoided due to knowledge, negative experience and personal perception. • Consumers want to receive information on food related issues which is timely, more understandable and more condensed. • Consumers trust certain informational sources because they feel they should. • Lack of trust permeates into the food supply chain.

27. In Conclusion • It is apparent people say they behave in a certain way regarding food and food risk issues, but Is this all just talk? To be continued..... Thank you!

28. Acknowledgements • Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, Northern Ireland for funding this research. • Supervisor • Dr Roy Nelson