Search results

In the last few decades, the obesity rate has increased along with the increasing of away-from-home food consumption at restaurants (Wei & Miao, 2013), especially the food consumption at quick-service restaurants (QSRs). Previous research stated that the main factors that influence the customers’ food selection are found. Price and quality of food are the most significant things that mostly concerned customers when they are in decision-making process. There is a controversial argument between several studies that identified calorie labelling on menu influences consumers on food choice, while others said vice versa. However, several studies argued that calorie information does not have as much impact on customers’ food purchasing as other factors such as food’s quality, ranges of food, price of food, restaurant’s atmosphere, and speed of food service (Carey & Genevive, 1995). The aim of this chapter is to examine the importance of representing calorie information on menu and its effects on customer decision-making especially at QSRs. Therefore, the following questions have been addressed in this chapter:

What are the factors that influence consumer choice at QSRs?

Does calorie labelling on menus impact customer purchasing at QSRs?

This chapter starts with the introduction of the topic and reviewing previous research on menu labelling and calorie information at QSRs. This chapter aims to provide a better understanding of customer decision-making when ordering a food with regard to calorie information on the menu and the customer preference.

Using a Constrained Choice Theory framework, this paper will identify variation in choosing the constraint-reflective priorities of budget, taste, or health by sociodemographic group, familial status, and weight category. Identifying which groups experience unique constraints will allow for customized healthy eating programs to address barriers specific to each group.

Data are derived from a paper survey of families with children in Lexington, KY and analyzed using logistic regression.

The results of this study confirm that some sociodemographic groups are more likely to choose priorities that reflect contextual constraints in their lives than others. In particular, having a higher income reduces likelihood of prioritizing budget and increases chances of prioritizing taste. Being married or cohabitating is correlated with choosing health, but having more children reduces the likelihood of prioritizing health. Being obese correlates with increased likelihood of prioritizing budget. Membership in each of these categories reflects constraints on which foods are purchased for the home.

Families are encouraged to improve their diets by eating at home, but families face many constraints when choosing healthy foods at the grocery store. Understanding the constraints experienced by various groups when shopping for food will lead to health policy that more fully addresses barriers to healthy eating for groups with disproportionately high incidence of diet-related disease.

This paper extends Constrained Choice Theory by applying it to a new aspect of health, purchasing groceries, and also by examining a wider variety of sociodemographic groups than previous research.

Over the past decade, there has been a significant increase in interest about fraud in food supply chain. Victims of food fraud and counterfeiting can be different actors in the supply chain: distributors, retailers and, most importantly, customers. Victims of food fraud face not only economic losses, but also health and safety risks when handling or consuming fraudulent products. The aim of this paper is to present the situation regarding counterfeiting and fraud in the food supply chain from a theoretical and practical point of view. The attitudes and opinions of consumers, experts in the field and retailers on the occurrence of food fraud and counterfeiting were explored. The results of an online survey of 326 consumers in Croatia showed that their awareness of food fraud is low. Most of them are only partially familiar with food fraud or do not know anything about this issue. The respondents are most familiar with mislabelling of organic products, meat packaging date fraud, and misuse of geographical indications (PDO/PGI). Consumers have low trust in all organisations that should protect them from food fraud (e.g. Croatian national institutions and authorities). A survey with eight food experts (olive oil, wine, milk and dairy products, honey, strong alcoholic beverages) found that they very rarely encounter food fraud in their work, usually two or more times a year. Retailers are aware of the existence of food fraud, but still do not take measures beyond the usual level in their quality assurance systems. To raise awareness of food fraud, education of all stakeholders by relevant institutions is needed.

Purpose – Despite the existence of hundreds of studies and several review articles on consumer preferences for genetically modified (GM) food, it remains difficult to ascertain the current state of knowledge on the topic. The purpose of this chapter is to distill some of the key findings from the body of research on consumer preferences for GM food.

Approach – In reviewing key pieces of literature, including two meta-analyses, the chapter identifies four key unresolved questions and includes discussions on how the questions might be resolved.

Findings – The chapter identifies four questions in need of additional thought and research. The questions relate to (1) why the market for GM-free food is so small in the United States despite the large estimated willingness-to-pay premiums for GM-free food, (2) why consumers remain so uninformed about biotechnology despite their seemingly high levels of aversion, (3) why economists have generally ignored the information-content of GM food policies, and (4) why it is so difficult to determine why U.S. and European consumers have seemingly reacted so differently to GM foods.

Value – This chapter should be useful to those interested in learning about the current state of knowledge on consumer preferences for GM food, and to those seeking to identify areas in need of additional research.

Purpose – This chapter examines the need, and possibilities, for social science research that is grounded in the life sciences.

Design/methodology/approach – The chapter starts with the observation that the social sciences have been tied far too closely to models and concepts in the physical sciences, which has both limited and distorted research findings. The predominant models used in much of social science cannot meet the challenges we face. Examining issues in political science in particular, the author demonstrates the value of a biopolitical perspective for political science research and policy analysis relevant to the challenges we face.

Findings – Studies about human issues should be based on research that considers humans as part of the evolving biological world. Key biopolicy research areas illustrate the value and flexibility of life science models and data. Political science can and should provide important insights to our understanding of socio-political issues and options, but to succeed the discipline must abandon mechanistic models of human nature and motivation and return to an understanding based in the life sciences.

Practical implications (if applicable) – The discussion analyzes the overall strengths and weaknesses of the proposal to adopt a biopolicy approach, and concludes that obstacles, though real, can be overcome. There are opportunities for substantial contributions to social science.

Social implications (if applicable) – Failure to integrate political science with a life sciences perspective will mean a continuation of disciplinary work that is largely irrelevant or inadequate to emerging issues and problems.

Original/value of chapter – The value of this chapter is to highlight the need for a reexamination of the mechanistic models as well as the disciplinary boundaries that control most social science, and political science in particular. It examines widely recognized issues and challenges facing Western societies (and global communities) to illustrate that a life sciences perspective is essential to both analysis and policy options. It is an important consideration for academics (teachers and students) policy researchers, and policy makers as well.

The Bureau of Economics in the Federal Trade Commission has a three-part role in the Agency and the strength of its functions changed over time depending on the preferences and ideology of the FTC’s leaders, developments in the field of economics, and the tenor of the times. The over-riding current role is to provide well considered, unbiased economic advice regarding antitrust and consumer protection law enforcement cases to the legal staff and the Commission. The second role, which long ago was primary, is to provide reports on investigations of various industries to the public and public officials. This role was more recently called research or “policy R&D”. A third role is to advocate for competition and markets both domestically and internationally. As a practical matter, the provision of economic advice to the FTC and to the legal staff has required that the economists wear “two hats,” helping the legal staff investigate cases and provide evidence to support law enforcement cases while also providing advice to the legal bureaus and to the Commission on which cases to pursue (thus providing “a second set of eyes” to evaluate cases). There is sometimes a tension in those functions because building a case is not the same as evaluating a case. Economists and the Bureau of Economics have provided such services to the FTC for over 100 years proving that a sub-organization can survive while playing roles that sometimes conflict. Such a life is not, however, always easy or fun.

Since the 1980s UK government enthusiasm for market reforms has reconfigured the nature and scope of public services. Initially the marketisation of public services changed how public services were provided, increasingly market reforms and pro business policies have also modified the formation and understanding of public policy problematics and how they ought to be resolved. This is particularly noticeable when markets work imperfectly or even fail. UK governments have shown their reluctance to employ regulatory instruments to change the behaviour of companies preferring instead to make use of softer interventions, by focusing on providing advice for consumers and urging individuals to act responsibly. The dilemmas of this approach are explored by discussing the UK's former Labour government's (1997–2010) response to the increase in the incidence of obesity and related health complications.

Purpose – The chapter provides a comprehensive review of trade-related regulations of genetically modified (GM) food, identifies their main effects, and analyzes the main motivations behind their support.

Methodology/approach – The analysis is substantiated by (a) results from the literature on GM food regulations and (b) comparative statics results from a simplified three-country partial equilibrium welfare and political economic model.

Findings – The analysis shows that in a non-GM producing country, trade-related regulations will benefit producers, but not necessarily consumers. Producers' support is found to be instrumental to push for a ban, for information requirements on shipments, or for mandatory labeling of GM food products. Outside pressure groups will play the role of swing voters in cases where consumers and producers do not agree.

Research limitations/implications – The analytical model is based on simplifying assumptions on the groups and market effects of each regulation. Future research is needed to empirically validate some of the main results.

Originality/value of the chapter – The goal of the chapter is to inform economic and policy researchers on the effects of GM food trade-related regulations. The chapter provides an updated comprehensive overview of the key trade regulations of GM food. It uses a unique model to derive the main welfare effects of GM food regulations. By comparing the effects of GM food regulations in different types of countries for different pressure groups, the findings provide new insights in this area.

In this chapter, we draw on health lifestyle, human capital, and health commodity theories to examine the effects of educational attainment on a wide range of individual dietary behaviors and dietary lifestyles.

Using data from the 2005-2006 iteration of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (n = 2,135), we employ negative binomial regression and binary logistic regression to model three dietary lifestyle indices and thirteen healthy dietary behaviors.

We find that having a college degree or higher is associated with seven of the thirteen healthy dietary behaviors, including greater attention to nutrition information (general nutrition, serving size, calories, and total fat) and consumption of vegetables, protein, and dairy products. For the most part, education is unrelated to the inspection of cholesterol and sodium information and consumption of fruits/grains/sweets, and daily caloric intake. We observe that having a college degree is associated with healthier dietary lifestyles, the contemporaneous practice of multiple healthy dietary behaviors (label checking and eating behaviors). Remarkably, household income and the poverty-to-income ratio are unrelated to dietary lifestyles and have virtually no impact on the magnitude of the association between education and dietary lifestyles.

Our findings are consistent with predictions derived from health lifestyle and human capital theories. We find no support for health commodity theory, the idea that people who are advantaged in terms of education live healthier lifestyles because they tend to have the financial resources to purchase the elements of a healthy lifestyle.