Public understanding of food risks in four European countries: A qualitative study

30Citations
Citations of this article
54Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: In the wake of the 'bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) crisis' there was renewed interest in how those responsible for public health could take account of public views, both to 'democratize' policy making and to increase the likelihood of information about health risks resonating with public concerns. This study explored how members of the public in four European countries (Finland, Germany, Italy and the UK) understood food risks in general, and risks arising from BSE in particular. The aims were to identify the sources of knowledge used and trusted by the public and to explore how public views could be accessed for public health information policy. Methods: Thirty-six focus group interviews were held using a common protocol across the four countries, including people from four lifecycle stages. Results: The study demonstrated the utility of using focus groups as a relatively efficient method for accessing public views, and the feasibility of cross-national qualitative research on public views. We found that public views of food risks are neither irrational nor naïve, but that they do need to be interpreted in the context of everyday food purchasing decisions, in which particular food risks are unlikely to have the same salience as they do for experts. Conclusions: Focus groups are a feasible method for accessing public knowledge on public health risks to inform information strategies. © The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association. All rights reserved.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Green, J. M., Draper, A. K., Dowler, E. A., Fele, G., Hagenhoff, V., Rusanen, M., & Rusanen, T. (2005). Public understanding of food risks in four European countries: A qualitative study. European Journal of Public Health, 15(5), 523–527. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/cki016

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free