RESUMO
Cultured meat may be a novel food that would overcome the limits of conventional meat production. This paper assesses the willingness to try, buy and pay for cultured meat among a sample of Italian consumers, unveiling the attitudes towards an engineered food on the part of a consumer oriented in favour of the Mediterranean diet. A survey was conducted by submitting a questionnaire to 525 Italian consumers. Consumers showed higher agreement with the statements concerning positive externalities than the intrinsic characteristics of cultured meat, and more than half of the respondents (54%) stated that they would be willing to try cultured meat. The profile for a potential consumer of cultured meat was young, highly educated, somewhat familiar with cultured meat, a meat consumer and willing to reduce meat consumption. However, the survey findings may be biased by the unavailability of the product on the market and the information provided to the respondents focused on the potential benefits of cultured meat.
Assuntos
Comportamento do Consumidor , Preferências Alimentares , Tecnologia de Alimentos/métodos , Carne , Animais , Técnicas de Cultura de Células/métodos , Comportamento de Escolha , Tecnologia de Alimentos/economia , Tecnologia de Alimentos/ética , Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde , Humanos , Itália , Inquéritos e QuestionáriosRESUMO
Cultured meat grown in-vitro from animal cells is being developed as a way of addressing many of the ethical and environmental concerns associated with conventional meat production. As commercialisation of this technology appears increasingly feasible, there is growing interest in the research on consumer acceptance of cultured meat. We present a systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature, and synthesize and analyse the findings of 14 empirical studies. We highlight demographic variations in consumer acceptance, factors influencing acceptance, common consumer objections, perceived benefits, and areas of uncertainty. We conclude by evaluating the most important objections and benefits to consumers, as well as highlighting areas for future research.
Assuntos
Comportamento do Consumidor , Preferências Alimentares , Tecnologia de Alimentos , Produtos da Carne , Músculos/citologia , Animais , Células Cultivadas , Comportamento do Consumidor/economia , Inquéritos sobre Dietas , Rotulagem de Alimentos , Qualidade dos Alimentos , Inocuidade dos Alimentos , Tecnologia de Alimentos/economia , Tecnologia de Alimentos/ética , Tecnologia de Alimentos/tendências , Humanos , Produtos da Carne/efeitos adversos , Produtos da Carne/análise , Produtos da Carne/economia , Indústria de Embalagem de Carne/economia , Indústria de Embalagem de Carne/ética , Indústria de Embalagem de Carne/tendências , Músculos/química , Medição de RiscoRESUMO
Environmental risk assessment is often affected by severe uncertainty. The frequently invoked precautionary principle helps to guide risk assessment and decision-making in the face of scientific uncertainty. In many contexts, however, uncertainties play a role not only in the application of scientific models but also in their development. Building on recent literature in the philosophy of science, this paper argues that precaution should be exercised at the stage when tools for risk assessment are developed as well as when they are used to inform decision-making. The relevance and consequences of this claim are discussed in the context of the threshold of the toxicological concern approach in food toxicology. I conclude that the approach does not meet the standards of an epistemic version of the precautionary principle.
Assuntos
Tomada de Decisões/ética , Tecnologia de Alimentos/normas , Ciência/normas , Toxicologia/normas , Incerteza , Tecnologia de Alimentos/ética , Humanos , Filosofia , Medição de Risco , Ciência/ética , Toxicologia/éticaAssuntos
Competência Clínica , Dietética , Dietética/educação , Dietética/ética , Educação Continuada , Retroalimentação Psicológica , Tecnologia de Alimentos/educação , Tecnologia de Alimentos/ética , Guias como Assunto , Humanos , Relações Interprofissionais , Ciências da Nutrição/educação , Ciências da Nutrição/ética , Nutricionistas/educação , Nutricionistas/ética , Relações Profissional-Paciente , Autoavaliação (Psicologia) , Sociedades Científicas , Estados Unidos , Recursos HumanosRESUMO
Genetically modified (GM) food is discussed as an example of the controversial relation between the intrinsic uncertainty of the scientific approach and the demand of citizen-consumers to use products of science innovation that are known to be safe. On the whole, peer-reviewed studies on GM food safety do not note significant health risks, with a few exceptions, like the most renowned "Pusztai affair" and the recent "Seralini case." These latter studies have been disregarded by the scientific community, based on incorrect experimental designs and statistic analysis. Such contradictory results show the complexity of risk evaluation, and raise concerns in the citizen-consumers against the GM food. A thoughtful consideration by scientific community and decision makers of the moral values that are present in risk evaluation and risk management should be the most trustable answer to citizen-consumers to their claim for clear and definitive answers concerning safety/un-safety of GM food.
Assuntos
Inocuidade dos Alimentos , Tecnologia de Alimentos/ética , Alimentos Geneticamente Modificados , Confiança , Qualidade de Produtos para o Consumidor , Humanos , Medição de Risco , Gestão de RiscosAssuntos
Agricultura/organização & administração , Criação de Animais Domésticos/organização & administração , Contaminação de Alimentos/prevenção & controle , Tecnologia de Alimentos/organização & administração , Doenças Transmitidas por Alimentos/prevenção & controle , Agricultura/ética , Criação de Animais Domésticos/ética , Bem-Estar do Animal , Animais , Doenças Transmissíveis Emergentes/epidemiologia , Doenças Transmissíveis Emergentes/etiologia , Doenças Transmissíveis Emergentes/prevenção & controle , Ovos/microbiologia , Indústria Alimentícia/ética , Indústria Alimentícia/organização & administração , Inspeção de Alimentos , Tecnologia de Alimentos/ética , Doenças Transmitidas por Alimentos/epidemiologia , Doenças Transmitidas por Alimentos/etiologia , Abrigo para Animais , Humanos , Aves Domésticas , Doenças das Aves Domésticas/epidemiologia , Doenças das Aves Domésticas/etiologia , Doenças das Aves Domésticas/prevenção & controle , Gestão da Segurança , Intoxicação Alimentar por Salmonella/epidemiologia , Intoxicação Alimentar por Salmonella/prevenção & controle , Intoxicação Alimentar por Salmonella/veterinária , Estados Unidos/epidemiologiaRESUMO
The implementation of traceability in the food supply chain has reinforced adoption of technologies with the ability to track forward and trace back product-related information. Based on the premise that these technologies can be used as a means to provide product-related information to consumers, this paper explores the perceived benefits and drawbacks of such technologies. The aim is to identify factors that influence consumers' perceptions of such technologies, and furthermore to advise the agri-food business on issues that they should consider prior to the implementation of such technologies in their production lines. For the purposes of the study, a focus group study was conducted across 12 European countries, while a set of four different technologies used as a means to provide traceability information to consumers was the focal point of the discussions in each focus group. Results show that the amount of and confidence in the information provided, perceived levels of convenience, impact on product quality and safety, impact on consumers' health and the environment, and potential consequences on ethical and privacy liberties constitute important factors influencing consumers' perceptions of technologies that provide traceability.
Assuntos
Comportamento do Consumidor , Processamento Eletrônico de Dados , Tecnologia de Alimentos/métodos , Gestão da Informação/métodos , Adolescente , Adulto , Animais , Processamento Eletrônico de Dados/ética , Europa (Continente) , Feminino , Peixes , Grupos Focais , Rotulagem de Alimentos , Abastecimento de Alimentos/instrumentação , Tecnologia de Alimentos/ética , Frutas , Humanos , Gestão da Informação/ética , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Percepção , Privacidade , Recall e Retirada de Produto , Dispositivo de Identificação por Radiofrequência/ética , SegurançaRESUMO
This article explores the legal meanings of biopiracy concept, linked to subjects such as intellectual property rights on genetic resources, bioprospecting contracts, right to food, and food security. It overcomes the critical function of biopiracy concept related to world-wide extended tendencies: privatization and technification. Likewise, protectionism shows the opportunity that biopiracy concept represents for the enrichment of the legal interpretation related to the bioethical statue of biotech developments.
Assuntos
Engenharia Genética/legislação & jurisprudência , Propriedade Intelectual , Propriedade/legislação & jurisprudência , Roubo/legislação & jurisprudência , Agricultura/métodos , Animais , Difusão de Inovações , Tecnologia de Alimentos/ética , Tecnologia de Alimentos/legislação & jurisprudência , Engenharia Genética/ética , Humanos , Propriedade/ética , Privatização/ética , Privatização/legislação & jurisprudência , Roubo/éticaRESUMO
The range of social and ethical concerns that have been raised in connection with food and agricultural biotechnology is exceedingly broad. Many of these deal with risks and possible outcomes that are not unique to crops or animals developed using recombinant DNA. Food safety, animal welfare, socio-economic and environmental impacts, as well as shifts in power relations or access to technology raise concerns that might be generalized to many technologies. These aspects of the controversy over biotechnology are analyzed below as elements of general technological ethics, and key norms or values pertinent to each of these categories are specified in some detail. However, a number of special concerns unique to the use of rDNA in manipulating plant and animal genomes have been raised, and these are reviewed as well. The chapter concludes by reviewing two broad policy strategies for responding to the issues, one involving labels and consumer consent, the other applying the precautionary principle.