The role of a German multi-stakeholder standard for livestock products derived from non-GMO feed
Venus, Thomas J. ; Drabik, Dusan ; Wesseler, Justus - \ 2018
Food Policy 78 (2018). - ISSN 0306-9192 - p. 58 - 67.
Certification - Credence good - Food labeling - Genetically modified organisms - Multi-stakeholder - Process attribute - Voluntary private standard
In Germany, products derived from livestock who were fed GMO are not required to be labeled as GMO. However, non-GMO labeling requires compliance with the national public non-GMO production standard, including a confirmation that no GM feed was used. In addition to the national standard, firms can adopt a private collaborative certification standard set by a multi-stakeholder organization. Using a survey of German dairies, we show that firms with more suppliers were more likely to adopt the multi-stakeholder standard or to stay conventional if their perceived risk of reputation loss and liability issues for non-GMO production were higher. Firms with lower perceived risks were more likely to comply only with the public standard for non-GMO labeling (i.e., not adopt the private standard). We discuss how potential incongruent interests of the various stakeholders that set the private production and certification standard may have incentivized firms to adopt the non-GMO standard in the initial phase after the introduction of the labeling option.
Top-down expectation effects of food labels on motivation
Wegman, Joost ; Loon, Ilke van; Smeets, Paul A.M. ; Cools, Roshan ; Aarts, Esther - \ 2018
NeuroImage 173 (2018). - ISSN 1053-8119 - p. 13 - 24.
Beliefs - fMRI - Food labeling - Implicit bias - Insula - Motivation
Labels on food packages inform our beliefs, shaping our expectations of food properties, such as its expected taste and healthiness. These beliefs can influence the processing of caloric rewards beyond objective sensory properties and have the potential to impact decision making. However, no studies, within or beyond the food domain, have assessed how written information, such as food labels, affect implicit motivation to obtain rewards, even though choices in daily life might be strongly driven by implicit motivational biases. We investigated how written information affects implicit motivation to obtain caloric rewards in healthy young adults. We used food labels (high- and low-calorie), associated with an identical fruit-flavored sugar-sweetened beverage, to study motivation for caloric rewards during fMRI. In a joystick task, hungry participants (N = 31) were instructed to make fast approach or avoid movements to earn the cued beverages. Behaviorally, we found a general approach bias, which was stronger for the beverage that was most preferred during a subsequent choice test, i.e., the one labeled as low-calorie. This behavioral effect was accompanied by increased BOLD signal in the sensorimotor cortex during the response phase of the task for the preferred, low-calorie beverage compared with the non-preferred, high-calorie beverage. During the anticipation phase, the non-preferred, high-calorie beverage label elicited stronger fMRI signal in the right ventral anterior insula, a region associated with aversion and taste intensity, than the preferred, low-calorie label. Together, these data suggest that high-calorie labeling can increase avoidance of beverages and reduce neural activity in brain regions associated with motor control. In conclusion, we show effects of food labeling on fMRI responses during anticipation and subsequent motivated action and on behavior, in the absence of objective taste differences, demonstrating the influence of written information on implicit biases. These findings contribute to our understanding of implicit biases in real-life eating behavior.
Consumers' valuation of sustainability labels on meat
Loo, Ellen J. Van; Caputo, Vincenzina ; Nayga, Rodolfo M. ; Verbeke, Wim - \ 2014
Food Policy 49 (2014)P1. - ISSN 0306-9192 - p. 137 - 150.
Animal welfare - Carbon footprint - Choice experiment - Food labeling - Free range - Organic food - Sustainable food - Willingness to pay (WTP)
There are various sustainability certifications and claims for food products that focus on environmental or ethical benefits. These claims empower consumers to make informed purchasing decisions that take environmental and ethical considerations into account. This paper compares consumers' preferences for four types of sustainability claims related to organic meat, free range, animal welfare and carbon footprint. Using a choice experiment on a chicken breast product, our results show that nine in every ten Belgian consumers favor free range claims, which are also valued the most highly, attracting premiums ranging from 43% to 93%. Our study also shows that a vast majority of consumers (87%) would welcome the introduction of an EU level animal welfare label. The carbon footprint labels and the organic labels are less appealing to consumers, who have lower willingness to pay for these labels. Belgian consumers prefer the national Belgian organic food logo, certified by a private organization, to the newly-introduced EU organic food logo.