Michelle Watson, Sue Booth, Stefania Velardo and John Coveney
Globally, around one-third of food produced is wasted and thrown into supermarket bins or dumpsters. As a result, these dumpsters have become opportunistic sources of food…
Abstract
Purpose
Globally, around one-third of food produced is wasted and thrown into supermarket bins or dumpsters. As a result, these dumpsters have become opportunistic sources of food through dumpster diving. The authors' scoping review aimed to document the people that are dumpster diving and why these people engage in this potentially illegal practice.
Design/methodology/approach
A database search spanning 12 years yielded 29 articles for review.
Findings
The authors' analysis uncovered two main themes for why people were dumpster diving: (1) motivations which included political activism against consumerism, materialism and capitalism, a fun and thrilling social activity and to alleviate food insecurity and (2) the benefits derived, such as gaining free food, saving money, sharing food with others and gaining attention from the public and media.
Originality/value
In conclusion, the review was unable to provide definitive information on “who” was dumpster diving; however, this limitation provides a unique opportunity for further research that focusses on the specific demographics of dumpster divers rather than the “why” people are diving.
Details
Keywords
Stefania Velardo, Kristen Stevens, Michelle Watson, Christina Pollard, John Coveney, Jessica Shipman and Sue Booth
Children's food insecurity experiences are largely unrepresented in academic literature. Parents and caregivers cannot always accurately evaluate their children's attitudes or…
Abstract
Purpose
Children's food insecurity experiences are largely unrepresented in academic literature. Parents and caregivers cannot always accurately evaluate their children's attitudes or experiences, and even within the same family unit, children and their parents may report differing views and experiences of family food insecurity. The purpose of this narrative review is to identify studies that include children's voices and their perceptions, understanding, and experience of food insecurity in the household.
Design/methodology/approach
This narrative review aimed to address the following questions: (1) “What research studies of household food insecurity include children's voices?” and (2) “Across these studies, how do children perceive, understand and experience food insecurity in the household?”. A database search was conducted in October 2022. After inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, 16 articles remained for review.
Findings
The findings from this review were organised into three themes: Theme 1: Ways children coped with accessing food or money for food; Theme 2: Food-related strategies children used to avoid hunger; and Theme 3: Children attempt to mask food insecurity.
Research limitations/implications
Future research should further explore the long-term consequences of social pressures and informal economic engagement on children's well-being and social development. By addressing the social determinants of food insecurity, this study can strive to create supportive environments that enable all children to access adequate nutrition and thrive.
Social implications
Overall, the findings of this review demonstrate the significant social pressures that shape children's responses to food insecurity. Results suggest that children's decision-making processes are influenced by the desire to maintain social standing and avoid the negative consequences of being food insecure. As such, this review underscores the need for a comprehensive understanding of the social context in which food insecurity occurs and the impact it has on children's lives. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for developing effective interventions and policies addressing the multifaceted challenges food insecure children face.
Originality/value
This review has highlighted a need for interventions to incorporate trauma-informed strategies to protect children from and respond to the psychologically distressing experiences and impact of living in food insecure households.
Details
Keywords
Julie Henderson, Annabelle M. Wilson, Trevor Webb, Dean McCullum, Samantha B. Meyer, John Coveney and Paul R. Ward
The purpose of this paper is to explore the views of journalists, food regulators and the food industry representatives on the impact of social media on communication about food…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to explore the views of journalists, food regulators and the food industry representatives on the impact of social media on communication about food risk. The authors identify how journalists/media actors use social media in identifying and creating news stories arguing that food regulators need to maintain a social media presence to ensure that accurate information about food safety is disseminated via social media.
Design/methodology/approach
Data were collected through 105 semi-structured interviews.
Findings
While food regulators and representatives of the food industry identify advantages of social media including two-way communication and speed of transmission of information, they maintain concerns about information provided via social media fearing the potential for loss of control of the information and sensationalism. There is evidence, however, that media actors use social media to identify food stories, to find sources, gauge public opinion and to provide a human interest angle.
Practical implications
While there are commonalities between the three groups, concerns with social media reflect professional roles. Food regulators need to be aware of how media actors use social media and maintain a social media presence. Further, they need to monitor other sources to maintain consumer trust.
Originality/value
This paper adds to public debate through comparing the perspectives of the three groups of respondents each that have their own agendas which impact how they interact with and use social media.
Details
Keywords
Emma Tonkin, Annabelle M. Wilson, John Coveney, Julie Henderson, Samantha B. Meyer, Mary Brigid McCarthy, Seamus O’Reilly, Michael Calnan, Aileen McGloin, Edel Kelly and Paul Ward
The purpose of this paper is to compare the perspectives of actors who contribute to trust in the food system in four high income countries which have diverse food incident…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to compare the perspectives of actors who contribute to trust in the food system in four high income countries which have diverse food incident histories: Australia, New Zealand (NZ), the United Kingdom (UK) and the Island of Ireland (IOI), focussing on their communication with the public, and their approach to food system interrelationships.
Design/methodology/approach
Data were collected in two separate studies: the first in Australia, NZ and the UK (Study 1); and the second on the IOI (Study 2). In-depth interviews were conducted with media, food industry and food regulatory actors across the four regions (n=105, Study 1; n=50, Study 2). Analysis focussed on identifying similarities and differences in the perspectives of actors from the four regions regarding the key themes of communication with the public, and relationships between media, industry and regulators.
Findings
While there were many similarities in the way food system actors from the four regions discussed (re)building trust in the context of a food incident, their perceptions differed in a number of critical ways regarding food system actor use of social media, and the attitudes and approaches towards relationships between food system actors.
Originality/value
This paper outlines opportunities for the regions studied to learn from each other when looking for practical strategies to maximise consumer trust in the food system, particularly relating to the use of social media and attitudes towards role definition in industry–regulator relationships.
Details
Keywords
Emma Tonkin, Julie Henderson, Samantha B. Meyer, John Coveney, Paul R. Ward, Dean McCullum, Trevor Webb and Annabelle M. Wilson
Consumers’ trust in food systems is essential to their functioning and to consumers’ well-being. However, the literature exploring how food safety incidents impact consumer trust…
Abstract
Purpose
Consumers’ trust in food systems is essential to their functioning and to consumers’ well-being. However, the literature exploring how food safety incidents impact consumer trust is theoretically underdeveloped. This study explores the relationship between consumers’ expectations of the food system and its actors (regulators, food industry and the media) and how these influence trust-related judgements that consumers make during a food safety incident.
Design/methodology/approach
In this study, two groups of purposefully sampled Australian participants (n = 15) spent one day engaged in qualitative public deliberation to discuss unfolding food incident scenarios. Group discussion was audio recorded and transcribed for the analysis. Facilitated group discussion included participants' expected behaviour in response to the scenario and their perceptions of actors' actions described within the scenario, particularly their trust responses (an increase, decrease or no change in their trust in the food system) and justification for these.
Findings
The findings of the study indicated that food incident features and unique consumer characteristics, particularly their expectations of the food system, interacted to form each participant's individual trust response to the scenario. Consumer expectations were delineated into “fundamental” and “anticipatory” expectations. Whether fundamental and anticipatory expectations were in alignment was central to the trust response. Experiences with the food system and its actors during business as usual contributed to forming anticipatory expectations.
Originality/value
To ensure that food incidents do not undermine consumer trust in food systems, food system actors must not only demonstrate competent management of the incident but also prioritise trustworthiness during business as usual to ensure that anticipatory expectations held by consumers are positive.
Details
Keywords
Emma Tonkin, Annabelle M Wilson, John Coveney, Trevor Webb and Samantha B Meyer
Distrust of conventional food supply systems impacts consumer food choice. This in turn has implications for consumer nutrition outcomes and acceptance of expert advice regarding…
Abstract
Purpose
Distrust of conventional food supply systems impacts consumer food choice. This in turn has implications for consumer nutrition outcomes and acceptance of expert advice regarding food and health. The research exploring consumer trust is found across a broad range of research streams, and is not cohesive in topic or approach. The purpose of this paper is to synthesise the disparate literature exploring the interaction between food labelling and consumer trust to determine what is known, and gaps in knowledge regarding food labelling and consumer trust.
Design/methodology/approach
A systematic search of trust and food labelling literature was conducted, with study results synthesised and integrated. Studies were then critically analysed for the conceptualisation of the consumer, the label, and their interaction with a framework developed using social theories of trust.
Findings
In total, 27 studies were identified. It was found that not only is the current literature predominantly atheoretical, but the conceptualisation of labelling has been limited.
Research limitations/implications
Further empirical research is needed to enable a more comprehensive understanding of the role food labelling plays in influencing consumer trust in food systems.
Originality/value
This research develops a conceptualisation of the dual roles food labelling may play in influencing consumer trust in food systems. It distinguishes between trust in food labelling itself, and the trust consumers develop in the food supply system through food labelling. The novel theoretical model and synthesis provide a foundation upon which future research may be conducted.
Details
Keywords
Annabelle M Wilson, Samantha B Meyer, Trevor Webb, Julie Henderson, John Coveney, Dean McCullum and Paul R. Ward
The purpose of this paper is to report how food regulators communicate with consumers about food safety and how they believe consumers understand their role in relation to food…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to report how food regulators communicate with consumers about food safety and how they believe consumers understand their role in relation to food safety. The implications of this on the role of food regulators are considered.
Design/methodology/approach
In total, 42 food regulators from Australia, New Zealand and the UK participated in a semi-structured interview about their response to food incidents and issues of food regulation more generally. Data were analysed thematically.
Findings
Food regulators have a key role in communicating information to consumers about food safety and food incidents. This is done in two main ways: proactive and reactive communication. The majority of regulators said that consumers do not have a good understanding of what food regulation involves and there were varied views on whether or not this is important.
Practical implications
Both reactive and proactive communication with consumers are important, however there are clear benefits in food regulators communicating proactively with consumers, including a greater understanding of the regulators’ role. Regulators should be supported to communicate proactively where possible.
Originality/value
There is a lack of information about how food regulators communicate with consumers about food safety and how food regulators perceive consumers to understand food regulation. It is this gap that forms the basis of this paper.
Details
Keywords
This chapter takes the ‘wakefulness promoting’ drug modafinil as an exemplarity case in the sociology of pharmaceutical enhancement. The chapter draws on empirical data collected…
Abstract
This chapter takes the ‘wakefulness promoting’ drug modafinil as an exemplarity case in the sociology of pharmaceutical enhancement. The chapter draws on empirical data collected through 25 interviews with prospective users of modafinil, focusing on two of the ways in which prospective users of modafinil imagined how the drug might be used in their specific social domains: the use of modafinil as a safety tool in the workplace and its use as a study aid by university students. The data presented in this chapter suggests that although a therapy-enhancement dichotomy is a useful heuristic; it could also be limiting to uphold as it may direct attention away from other ways in which uses for new technologies can be positioned, negotiated, realised and resisted by (potential) users in the context of their daily lives.