“A food scare is the response to a food incident (real or perceived) that causes a sudden disruption to the food supply chain and to food consumption patterns,” suggested experts from three UK research institutes in their paper for the British Food Journal.
The new definition takes into account that it’s the response of consumers in their purchasing decisions that elevates a food incident to a food scare, they noted. As in the case of the horsemeat scandal, medical risk is not a necessary component of a food scare.
Scares aren’t simplistic
The researchers, from the University of Surrey, ADAS UK and the National Foundation for Educational Research, devised their new definition as part of a project to categorise food scares. Such categorisations tend to be useful in developing strategies for reducing the frequency and severity of scares.
However, after reviewing more than 85 previous studies, the researchers discovered that a single, comprehensive and usable categorisation of food scares doesn’t exist. What there was they deemed “too simplistic” given the complexity of food chains.
After teasing out common themes and disparities from past research, five categories of food scares emerged: information; deception; technology; contaminant; microbiology (see ‘Scare specification’ below). They used these to develop their new categorisation system.
The novel approach allows a food scare to be classified according to both its physical manifestation (that is, chemical, biological or physical contamination) and the origin (wilful deception and/or transparency and awareness issues).
“The explicit inclusion of ‘wilful deception’ enables us to distinguish food scares which have resulted from intentional contamination, such as the horsemeat scandal, and contrast it with unintentional contamination, where contamination can occur accidentally or without prior knowledge or understanding of the hazard,” they explained.
Deception and cause
Inclusion of the cause of contamination is “particularly important” for food businesses given the method through which contamination occurs is “key in determining the way in which the risk and management of a food scare is handled, and for devising food scare prevention strategies”.
The researchers claimed that, by highlighting where and how the nature of different types of food scares overlap, their categorisation will enable risk management teams to address categories of food scares in a systematic way. “The salient feature of the new categorisation is that it distinguishes between scares caused by wilful deception, and those that are caused by transparency and awareness issues,” added Dr Elizabeth Whitworth from RSK ADAS.
The researchers said their system could be used for developing strategies to reduce both the number of food scares and the associated economic, social and environmental impacts.
Reference
Source: British Food Journal
Published at: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/BFJ-06-2016-0263
Title: “Food scares: a comprehensive categorisation”
Authors: Elizabeth Whitworth, Angela Druckman, Amy Woodward
Scare specification