food safety, Consumer concerns about food safety span the issues of pesticide and herbicide residues on agricultural products, additives and preservatives used in food processing, and antibiotics and hormones used in livestock feed. Apprehension about food safety seems to be on the rise. Yet, consumer information has not kept pace. California's Proposition 65, passed in November 1986, requires food labels to note toxic chemicals and is one example of how consumers are seeking to ameliorate this situation. It may be time to permit individual consumers to decide how much toxins they want to consume, i.e., permit the marketing of food products containing a range of toxins so long as the foods are labeled to indicate the level of "health hazard" associated with the toxins the food contains. The "health hazard" displayed on food labels might be calculated like statisticians determine the health hazards associated with automobiles. (original)
Specht, Kathrin (author), Zoll, Felix (author), Schumann, Henrike (author), Bela, Julia (author), Kachel, Julia (author), and Robischon, Marcel (author)
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2019
Published:
International
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 99 Document Number: D10870
Via online. 27 pages., Global challenges such as climate change, increasing urbanization and a lack of transparency of food chains, have led to the development of innovative urban food production approaches, such as rooftop greenhouses, vertical farms, indoor farms, aquaponics as well as production sites for edible insects or micro-algae. Those approaches are still at an early stage of development and partly unknown among the public. The aim of our study was to identify the perception of sustainability, social acceptability and ethical aspects of these new approaches and products in urban food production. We conducted 19 qualitative expert interviews and applied qualitative content analysis. Our results revealed that major perceived benefits are educational effects, revaluation of city districts, efficient resource use, exploitation of new protein sources or strengthening of local economies. Major perceived conflicts concern negative side-effects, legal constraints or high investment costs. The extracted acceptance factors deal significantly with the “unknown”. A lack of understanding of the new approaches, uncertainty about their benefits, concerns about health risks, a lack of familiarity with the food products, and ethical doubts about animal welfare represent possible barriers. We conclude that adaptation of the unsuitable regulatory framework, which discourages investors, is an important first step to foster dissemination of the urban food production approaches.
