A Comparison of Foodborne Risks: Public vs. Scientific Perspectives. P. R. D. Williams, J. K. Hammitt, and K. Thompson, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA; G. Gray, Harvard Center for Risk Analysis, Boston, MA
Survey research suggests that the public misperceives the relative risks of different hazards, including those related to food safety. Much of this latter research has centered on qualitative assessments of pesticide risks, with little attention to the magnitude of consumers’ risk judgements in the context of multiple food safety risks. In addition, few studies have attempted to characterize consumers’ perceived risk reduction for organically grown instead of conventionally grown produce. This paper compares public perceptions about a range of foodborne risks, including those from exposure to pesticide residues, microbial pathogens and natural toxins, to what is known about these risks from the science. Specifically, consumers’ subjective risk judgements are elicited using a food safety survey administered to food shoppers in the Boston area, while scientific assessments are based on a review of the published literature. Study results suggest that the public significantly overestimates foodborne risks and are misinformed about food safety issues and agricultural practices. Consumers’ perceptions that risks would be significantly reduced by substituting organic for conventional produce are also not substantiated by the science. Study findings suggest the need for consumer education about a range of food safety issues and better data on foodborne risks in the context of alternative farming methods.
This research was conducted at the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis.
Go to . . .
1999 SRA Table of Contents
1999 SRA Author Index
Main Abstracts Menu Page
RiskWorld Home Page