14 pages., via online journal., Consumers in industrialized countries are nowadays much more interested in information about the production methods and components of the food products that they eat, than they had been 50 years ago. Some production methods are perceived as less “natural” (i.e. conventional agriculture) while some food components are seen as “unhealthy” and “unfamiliar” (i.e. artificial additives). This phenomenon, often referred to as the “clean label” trend, has driven the food industry to communicate whether a certain ingredient or additive is not present or if the food has been produced using a more “natural” production method (i.e. organic agriculture). However, so far there is no common and objective definition of clean label. This review paper aims to fill the gap via three main objectives, which are to a) develop and suggest a definition that integrates various understandings of clean label into one single definition, b) identify the factors that drive consumers' choices through a review of recent studies on consumer perception of various food categories understood as clean label with the focus on organic, natural and ‘free from’ artificial additives/ingredients food products and c) discuss implications of the consumer demand for clean label food products for food manufacturers as well as policy makers. We suggest to define clean label, both in a broad sense, where consumers evaluate the cleanliness of product by assumption and through inference looking at the front-of-pack label and in a strict sense, where consumers evaluate the cleanliness of product by inspection and through inference looking at the back-of-pack label. Results show that while ‘health’ is a major consumer motive, a broad diversity of drivers influence the clean label trend with particular relevance of intrinsic or extrinsic product characteristics and socio-cultural factors. However, ‘free from’ artificial additives/ingredients food products tend to differ from organic and natural products. Food manufacturers should take the diversity of these drivers into account in developing new products and communication about the latter. For policy makers, it is important to work towards a more homogenous understanding and application of the term of clean label and identify a uniform definition or regulation for ‘free from’ artificial additives/ingredients food products, as well as work towards decreasing consumer misconceptions. Finally, multiple future research avenues are discussed.
7 pages., via online journal., Pesticide use and pesticide residues in foods have been the subject of controversial public discussions and media coverage in Germany. Against this background, a better understanding of public risk perceptions is needed to promote efficient public health communication. To this end, this study captures the German public's perception of pesticide residues in foods. A representative sample of the population aged 14 years and older (n = 1,004) was surveyed via computer-assisted telephone interviewing on their attitudes and knowledge with regard to pesticide residues. Based on questions regarding their typical consumer behavior, respondents were classified into conventional and organic consumers to identify differences as well as similarities between these two consumer types. As assessed with an open-ended question, both organic and conventional consumers viewed pesticides, chemicals, and toxins as the greatest threats to food quality and safety. Evaluating the risks and benefits of pesticide use, more than two-thirds of organic consumers (70%) rated the risks as greater than the benefits, compared with just over one-half of conventional consumers (53%). Concern about the detection of pesticide residues in the food chain and bodily fluids was significantly higher among organic compared with conventional consumers. Only a minority of respondents was aware that legal limits for pesticide residues (referred to as maximum residue levels) exist, with 69% of organic and 61% of conventional consumers believing that the presence of pesticide residues in foods is generally not permitted. A lack of awareness of maximum residue levels was associated with heightened levels of concern about pesticide residues. Finally, general exposure to media reporting on pesticide residues was associated with more frequent knowledge of legal limits for pesticide residues, whereas actively seeking information on pesticide residues was not. The possible mechanisms underlying these findings are discussed.
