Consumers' perception of novel foods and the impact of heuristics and biases: A systematic review.

According to the definition adopted in the European Union, novel foods are foods that were not consumed to a significant degree within the Union before May 15, 1997. This includes cultivated meat and insects. Novel foods are meant to play a critical role in the transition towards sustainable food systems. However, their success depends on whether and to what extent they will be incorporated into the diets at the population level. This review investigates consumers' perception of novel food products by narratively synthesising results on the influence of heuristics and biases triggered by emotions, personality traits, and socio-cultural factors. Empirical studies conducted in Western countries and published in English after 1997 were eligible, which led to 182 studies being included. Notably, most included studies focused on insects and cultivated meat. Disgust and fear are shown to be the main emotions driving rejection of novel foods, together with food neophobia and specific cultural norms common across countries included in the scope of the review. Familiarity with novel foods and curiosity both led to higher acceptance. Despite being investigated directly in a minority of studies, heuristics and related biases mostly fell under the "affect," the "natural-is-better," and the "trust" heuristics. The review also discusses to what extent consumers' perception reflects in the regulatory framework applicable to novel foods in the European Union, how it influences the regulation of insects and cultivated meat and which lessons can be drawn for the future of the regulatory framework.

Europe's Farm to Fork Strategy and Its Commitment to Biotechnology and Organic Farming: Conflicting or Complementary Goals?

The European Commission's Farm to Fork (F2F) strategy, under the European Green Deal, acknowledges that innovative techniques, including biotechnology, may play a role in increasing sustainability. At the same time, organic farming will be promoted, and at least 25% of the EU's agricultural land shall be under organic farming by 2030. How can both biotechnology and organic farming be developed and promoted simultaneously to contribute to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)? We illustrate that achieving the SDGs benefits from the inclusion of recent innovations in biotechnology in organic farming. This requires a change in the law. Otherwise, the planned increase of organic production in the F2F strategy may result in less sustainable, not more sustainable, food systems.

Maximum vs minimum harmonization: what to expect from the institutional and legal battles in the EU on gene editing technologies.

New plant-breeding technologies (NPBTs), including gene editing, are widely used and drive the development of new crops. However, these new technologies are disputed, creating uncertainty in how their application for agricultural and food uses will be regulated. While in North America regulatory systems respond with a differentiated approach to NPBTs, the Court of Justice of the European Union (EU) has in effect made most if not all NPBT subject to the same regulatory regime as genetically modified organisms (GMOs). This paper discusses from a law and economics point of view different options that are available for the EU's multi-level legal order. Using an ex-ante regulation versus ex-post liability framework allows the economic implications of different options to be addressed. The results show that under current conditions, some options are more expensive than others. The least costly option encompasses regulating new crops derived from NPBTs similar to those used in 'conventional' breeding. The current regulatory situation in the EU, namely making the use of NPBTs subject to the same conditions as GMOs, is the most costly option. © 2019 The Authors. Pest Management Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.