The Experts below are selected from a list of 30294 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Wim Verbeke - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the nutritional and toxicological value of organic vegetables Consumer Perception versus scientific evidence
British Food Journal, 2009Co-Authors: Christine Hoefkens, Wim Verbeke, Joris Aertsens, Koen Mondelaers, John Van CampAbstract:Purpose – The present study aims to explore and compare Consumer Perception and scientific evidence related to food quality and food safety aspects of organic versus conventional vegetables. Design/methodology/approach – Primary data on Consumer Perception were gathered in 2006‐2007 through a Consumer survey with Flemish adults (n=529) and compared with scientific evidence from literature. Consumers of organic and conventional vegetables were selected by means of a convenience sampling procedure. Subjects were asked to complete a self‐administered questionnaire concerning the Perception of the nutritional and toxicological value of organic relative to conventional vegetables. Data processing and analysis included descriptive analysis (frequency distributions), data reduction (Cronbach's alpha test, factor analysis), bivariate analysis (correlations, t‐test, ANOVA) and multivariate analysis (stepwise multiple regression). Findings – It was found that organic vegetables are perceived as containing less contaminants and more nutrients, and as such, being healthier and safer compared to conventional vegetables. However, not enough evidence is currently available in the literature to support or refute such a Perception, indicating a certain mismatch between Consumer Perception and scientific evidence. The gap between Perception and evidence is larger among older Consumers with children. The Perception is stronger when the consumption frequency is higher, but is independent of gender, place of residence (rural or urban), education and income level. Also non‐users, on average, perceive that organic vegetables have a nutritional and toxicological advantage over conventional vegetables. Research limitations/implications – A non‐probability convenience sampling method was applied which limits generalisation of the findings beyond the sample characteristics. Originality/value – This paper is original in comparing Consumer Perception and scientific facts related to both nutritional and safety aspects of organic versus conventional vegetables.
-
Consumer Perception versus scientific evidence of farmed and wild fish exploratory insights from belgium
Aquaculture International, 2007Co-Authors: Wim Verbeke, Karen Brunso, Isabelle Sioen, Stefaan De Henauw, John Van CampAbstract:The increasing number of marketable fish being supplied from aquaculture is a response to the increasing demand for healthy food and is filling the gap left by depleting natural fish stocks. Little is known about the awareness and Perception of the Consumer in terms of farmed fish versus fish from capture fisheries. The Consumer's subjective point of view is of overriding importance for the production system and product acceptance as well as for future market success. In this paper Consumer Perception in Belgium is explored and compared against scientific evidence of farmed versus wild fish. Primary data were collected through a Consumer survey (April 2003) and focus group discussions (May 2004) with Belgian Consumers. The majority of the Consumer sample reported no perceived differences between farmed versus wild fish. However, mean Perception scores were slightly in favour of wild fish on the attributes taste, health and nutritious value, in particular among Consumers aged 55 years and older. The availability of farmed fish was perceived to be better than that of wild fish, while the Consumer's Perception of safety did not differ between farmed and wild fish. The focus group discussions indicated that Consumers' opinions and beliefs about farmed fish are mainly based on emotion and image transfer from intensive terrestrial livestock production rather than on awareness and factual knowledge of aquaculture.
-
Consumer Perception versus scientific evidence about health benefits and safety risks from fish consumption
Public Health Nutrition, 2005Co-Authors: Wim Verbeke, John Van Camp, Isabelle Sioen, Zuzanna Pieniak, Stefaan De HenauwAbstract:Objective: To investigate the gap between Consumer Perception and scientific evidence related to health benefits and safety risks from fish consumption. Design: Consumer Perceptions from a cross-sectional survey in March 2003 in Belgium were compared with scientific evidence based on a literature review. Method: A quota sampling procedure was used with age as quota control variable. Subjects completed a self-administered questionnaire including health benefit beliefs from fish, fish content and effect beliefs for nutrients and harmful substances. Subjects: Adults (n = 429), who were the main person responsible for food purchasing in the household (284 women; 145 men), aged 18-83 years, from different regional, education, family size and income groups. Results: Fish is predominantly perceived as a healthy food that reduces risk for coronary heart disease, which corroborates scientific evidence. This Perception is stronger among women than among men. In contrast with scientific evidence, 46% of the Consumers believe that fish contains dietary fibre, whereas less than one-third is aware that fish contains omega-3 fatty acids and that this nutrient has a positive impact on human health. The gap between Perception and evidence is larger among Consumers with lower education. In general, Consumers are better aware of the content and effect of harmful substances than of nutrients in fish. Conclusions: Despite conclusive evidence about the content and positive effect of omega-3 fatty acids in fish, related Consumer awareness and beliefs are poor and often wrong. This study exemplifies the need for nutrition education and more effective communication about the health henefits of fish consumption.
-
Consumer Perception and choice of minimally processed vegetables and packaged fruits
Food Quality and Preference, 2004Co-Authors: Peter Ragaert, Wim Verbeke, Frank Devlieghere, Johan DebevereAbstract:Sales of minimally processed vegetables and packaged fruits are rapidly increasing thanks to their image of convenience and healthiness. In this paper, Consumer Perception and choice of these packaged produce was investigated through implementing a Consumer survey in Belgium. The first part of the survey consisted of face-to-face interviews (n=294) at the point of sales with people buying minimally processed vegetables and packaged fruits. The second part of the survey was self-administered by Consumers at home after consumption (n=237). The likelihood of buying minimally processed vegetables tends to be higher among better-educated Consumers and among Consumers with young children. Search attributes emerge in terms of importance during the purchasing stage, while experience attributes gain importance after consuming the product. The most important motivation for purchasing minimally processed vegetables relates to convenience and speed, especially for Consumers who buy this product during weekends. Although health and nutritional value scored relatively low in terms of importance during the purchasing and consumption stages of minimally processed vegetables, Consumers with a high awareness of the relationship between food and health attach significantly more importance to these credence attributes. # 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
-
Consumer Perception of traceability in the meat chain
German Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2001Co-Authors: Xavier Gellynck, Wim VerbekeAbstract:Despite growing interest in meat traceability systems, very little research has been done on Consumer needs and Perception of traceability. This gap is partly filled by the present study of Consumer Perception of meat traceability in Belgium, based on cross-sectional data collected in June 2001. Respondents are segmented, based on their subjective Perception of meat quality, and differences in the perceived need for traceability systems between the various segments are investigated. Functional traceability attributes, such as organizational efficiency, chain monitoring and individual responsibility, are important to all Consumers. Extensions with respect to process attributes, such as production methods, are less relevant to the general population, being only of interest to specific market segments, i.e. Consumers with a more negative Perception of meat quality and lower consumption levels. In conclusion, it is recommended that public policy focuses on the level of functional traceability attributes, whereas extensions with respect to process attributes are left to private initiatives, which focus on specific market segments.
Stefaan De Henauw - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Consumer Perception versus scientific evidence of farmed and wild fish exploratory insights from belgium
Aquaculture International, 2007Co-Authors: Wim Verbeke, Karen Brunso, Isabelle Sioen, Stefaan De Henauw, John Van CampAbstract:The increasing number of marketable fish being supplied from aquaculture is a response to the increasing demand for healthy food and is filling the gap left by depleting natural fish stocks. Little is known about the awareness and Perception of the Consumer in terms of farmed fish versus fish from capture fisheries. The Consumer's subjective point of view is of overriding importance for the production system and product acceptance as well as for future market success. In this paper Consumer Perception in Belgium is explored and compared against scientific evidence of farmed versus wild fish. Primary data were collected through a Consumer survey (April 2003) and focus group discussions (May 2004) with Belgian Consumers. The majority of the Consumer sample reported no perceived differences between farmed versus wild fish. However, mean Perception scores were slightly in favour of wild fish on the attributes taste, health and nutritious value, in particular among Consumers aged 55 years and older. The availability of farmed fish was perceived to be better than that of wild fish, while the Consumer's Perception of safety did not differ between farmed and wild fish. The focus group discussions indicated that Consumers' opinions and beliefs about farmed fish are mainly based on emotion and image transfer from intensive terrestrial livestock production rather than on awareness and factual knowledge of aquaculture.
-
Consumer Perception versus scientific evidence about health benefits and safety risks from fish consumption
Public Health Nutrition, 2005Co-Authors: Wim Verbeke, John Van Camp, Isabelle Sioen, Zuzanna Pieniak, Stefaan De HenauwAbstract:Objective: To investigate the gap between Consumer Perception and scientific evidence related to health benefits and safety risks from fish consumption. Design: Consumer Perceptions from a cross-sectional survey in March 2003 in Belgium were compared with scientific evidence based on a literature review. Method: A quota sampling procedure was used with age as quota control variable. Subjects completed a self-administered questionnaire including health benefit beliefs from fish, fish content and effect beliefs for nutrients and harmful substances. Subjects: Adults (n = 429), who were the main person responsible for food purchasing in the household (284 women; 145 men), aged 18-83 years, from different regional, education, family size and income groups. Results: Fish is predominantly perceived as a healthy food that reduces risk for coronary heart disease, which corroborates scientific evidence. This Perception is stronger among women than among men. In contrast with scientific evidence, 46% of the Consumers believe that fish contains dietary fibre, whereas less than one-third is aware that fish contains omega-3 fatty acids and that this nutrient has a positive impact on human health. The gap between Perception and evidence is larger among Consumers with lower education. In general, Consumers are better aware of the content and effect of harmful substances than of nutrients in fish. Conclusions: Despite conclusive evidence about the content and positive effect of omega-3 fatty acids in fish, related Consumer awareness and beliefs are poor and often wrong. This study exemplifies the need for nutrition education and more effective communication about the health henefits of fish consumption.
R V Alvensleben - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
food quality and safety Consumer Perception and public health concern
Food Control, 2005Co-Authors: A Rohr, K Luddecke, Stephan Drusch, M J Muller, R V AlvenslebenAbstract:Food safety has become an important food quality attribute within the last decade. In 2002, we conducted a Consumer survey with 449 subjects in Kiel to determine actual Consumer Perceptions to food quality and safety. We compared these data with our former Consumer surveys in Kiel. Over the past decade food quality is perceived to have improved. Regarding to food related health risks, the feeling of uncertainty appears to have decreased. With respect to the willingness to pay for food safety, two segments of Consumers emerged, i.e. price-sensitive and safety-sensitive Consumers. Food manufacturers have gained credibility from 1997 to 2002 although still on a low level. They should communicate actively their food safety initiatives as part of their ethical and social responsibility.
John Van Camp - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the nutritional and toxicological value of organic vegetables Consumer Perception versus scientific evidence
British Food Journal, 2009Co-Authors: Christine Hoefkens, Wim Verbeke, Joris Aertsens, Koen Mondelaers, John Van CampAbstract:Purpose – The present study aims to explore and compare Consumer Perception and scientific evidence related to food quality and food safety aspects of organic versus conventional vegetables. Design/methodology/approach – Primary data on Consumer Perception were gathered in 2006‐2007 through a Consumer survey with Flemish adults (n=529) and compared with scientific evidence from literature. Consumers of organic and conventional vegetables were selected by means of a convenience sampling procedure. Subjects were asked to complete a self‐administered questionnaire concerning the Perception of the nutritional and toxicological value of organic relative to conventional vegetables. Data processing and analysis included descriptive analysis (frequency distributions), data reduction (Cronbach's alpha test, factor analysis), bivariate analysis (correlations, t‐test, ANOVA) and multivariate analysis (stepwise multiple regression). Findings – It was found that organic vegetables are perceived as containing less contaminants and more nutrients, and as such, being healthier and safer compared to conventional vegetables. However, not enough evidence is currently available in the literature to support or refute such a Perception, indicating a certain mismatch between Consumer Perception and scientific evidence. The gap between Perception and evidence is larger among older Consumers with children. The Perception is stronger when the consumption frequency is higher, but is independent of gender, place of residence (rural or urban), education and income level. Also non‐users, on average, perceive that organic vegetables have a nutritional and toxicological advantage over conventional vegetables. Research limitations/implications – A non‐probability convenience sampling method was applied which limits generalisation of the findings beyond the sample characteristics. Originality/value – This paper is original in comparing Consumer Perception and scientific facts related to both nutritional and safety aspects of organic versus conventional vegetables.
-
Consumer Perception versus scientific evidence of farmed and wild fish exploratory insights from belgium
Aquaculture International, 2007Co-Authors: Wim Verbeke, Karen Brunso, Isabelle Sioen, Stefaan De Henauw, John Van CampAbstract:The increasing number of marketable fish being supplied from aquaculture is a response to the increasing demand for healthy food and is filling the gap left by depleting natural fish stocks. Little is known about the awareness and Perception of the Consumer in terms of farmed fish versus fish from capture fisheries. The Consumer's subjective point of view is of overriding importance for the production system and product acceptance as well as for future market success. In this paper Consumer Perception in Belgium is explored and compared against scientific evidence of farmed versus wild fish. Primary data were collected through a Consumer survey (April 2003) and focus group discussions (May 2004) with Belgian Consumers. The majority of the Consumer sample reported no perceived differences between farmed versus wild fish. However, mean Perception scores were slightly in favour of wild fish on the attributes taste, health and nutritious value, in particular among Consumers aged 55 years and older. The availability of farmed fish was perceived to be better than that of wild fish, while the Consumer's Perception of safety did not differ between farmed and wild fish. The focus group discussions indicated that Consumers' opinions and beliefs about farmed fish are mainly based on emotion and image transfer from intensive terrestrial livestock production rather than on awareness and factual knowledge of aquaculture.
-
Consumer Perception versus scientific evidence about health benefits and safety risks from fish consumption
Public Health Nutrition, 2005Co-Authors: Wim Verbeke, John Van Camp, Isabelle Sioen, Zuzanna Pieniak, Stefaan De HenauwAbstract:Objective: To investigate the gap between Consumer Perception and scientific evidence related to health benefits and safety risks from fish consumption. Design: Consumer Perceptions from a cross-sectional survey in March 2003 in Belgium were compared with scientific evidence based on a literature review. Method: A quota sampling procedure was used with age as quota control variable. Subjects completed a self-administered questionnaire including health benefit beliefs from fish, fish content and effect beliefs for nutrients and harmful substances. Subjects: Adults (n = 429), who were the main person responsible for food purchasing in the household (284 women; 145 men), aged 18-83 years, from different regional, education, family size and income groups. Results: Fish is predominantly perceived as a healthy food that reduces risk for coronary heart disease, which corroborates scientific evidence. This Perception is stronger among women than among men. In contrast with scientific evidence, 46% of the Consumers believe that fish contains dietary fibre, whereas less than one-third is aware that fish contains omega-3 fatty acids and that this nutrient has a positive impact on human health. The gap between Perception and evidence is larger among Consumers with lower education. In general, Consumers are better aware of the content and effect of harmful substances than of nutrients in fish. Conclusions: Despite conclusive evidence about the content and positive effect of omega-3 fatty acids in fish, related Consumer awareness and beliefs are poor and often wrong. This study exemplifies the need for nutrition education and more effective communication about the health henefits of fish consumption.
A Rohr - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
food quality and safety Consumer Perception and public health concern
Food Control, 2005Co-Authors: A Rohr, K Luddecke, Stephan Drusch, M J Muller, R V AlvenslebenAbstract:Food safety has become an important food quality attribute within the last decade. In 2002, we conducted a Consumer survey with 449 subjects in Kiel to determine actual Consumer Perceptions to food quality and safety. We compared these data with our former Consumer surveys in Kiel. Over the past decade food quality is perceived to have improved. Regarding to food related health risks, the feeling of uncertainty appears to have decreased. With respect to the willingness to pay for food safety, two segments of Consumers emerged, i.e. price-sensitive and safety-sensitive Consumers. Food manufacturers have gained credibility from 1997 to 2002 although still on a low level. They should communicate actively their food safety initiatives as part of their ethical and social responsibility.