Consumers in 2020 and the Implications for Consumer Research

Consumers in 2020 and the Implications for Consumer Research

Dr Lynn Frewer

Head, Consumer Science Group

How is the European population changing?How is the European population changing?

• People are getting older (implications for health care)

• Problems with energy balance (eating disorders, obesity, increased cancer rates, type two diabetes)

• Emerging technologies in food production (functional foods, “nutriceuticals”

• Social trends (anti-globalization, demand for tracebility of food and ingredients, different lifestyle patterns and family structures)

• Increase concerns about food safety?

• Public fears about emerging technologies (e. g. human genetics and emerging genetic underclass)

• Increased demands for transparency in risk management practice and public involvement in policy development

Socially excluded groups and food poverty –current trends

Socially excluded groups and food poverty –current trends

OECD (2000) has noted

• 800 million in developing world undernourished

• 34 million in industrialised countries. and economies in transition suffer chronic food shortages

• At risk groups: -Victims of conflict-Migrant workers and families-Marginal populations in urban areas-People in “at risk” social groups (Ethnic minorities, illiterate households, low income households, particularly within vulnerable livelihood systems-Low income families with large family size -Rural poverty

Issue of social exclusion in European populations

Current trends – will these continue?Current trends – will these continue?

• Most people in Europe are “time rich, money poor” – increased demand for convenience?

• Global warming – Climate zones shift northwards. What does this imply re: application of technology to agricultural practices?

• Politicisation of water supplies?

• Dominance of distribution systems by multinationals

Example of emerging consumer responses - Consumer attitudes towards functional foodsExample of emerging consumer responses -

Consumer attitudes towards functional foods

 ASSUMPTION - people will be more accepting of novel foods if there is a concrete and tangible consumer benefit

• Consumers do not necessarily respond in an homogenous way.

• people’s value systems (such as environmental concern associated with processes, or attitudes towards globalisation or the application of human genetics ) define how people relate to the social world and the decisions that they make

• Factors such as health status or appropriate social context also vary

Public perceptions and attitudes:What are the key questions?

Frewer et al, Risk Analysis, 1998

Public perceptions and attitudes:What are the key questions?

Frewer et al, Risk Analysis, 1998

• What is driving consumer perceptions of risk and benefit?

• Who trusts whom to inform and regulate? How does this relate to consumer confidence in the food chain and associated science base?

• Are there cross-cultural and intra-individual differences in perceptions and information needs, as well as perceived nutritional requirements?

• How might the wider public be involved in the debate about risk management and technological development?

Individual differences in acceptance of functional foods

Individual differences in acceptance of functional foods

• Cross-cultural (e.g. Finns more positive than Danes or British)

• Older Americans more positive

• Women more positive than men

• People more accepting of enrichment with a substance already present in the food, rather than the addition of a compound novel to the product.

Risk Perception The psychometric paradigm

Risk Perception The psychometric paradigm

• The psychology of risk perception drives public risk attitudes

e.g. an involuntary risk over which people have no control is more threatening than one people choose to take

• Potentially catastrophic risks concern people most

• Unnatural (technological) risks are more threatening than natural ones

Understanding Consumer ConcernsUnderstanding Consumer Concerns

• Perceptions of benefit may offset perceptions of risk

• Ethical concerns

• “Unnatural” risks more threatening than “natural” risks

• Perceptions of need

• Who benefits (industry or consumers), and in which countries?

• Control and choice

• Technical risk estimates alone should not form the basis of communication efforts

Also consider:

-Ethical issues / balanced information

-Regulatory transparency

Barriers to healthy eatingBarriers to healthy eating

• enormous literature on what constitutes a healthy diet

• extensive literature on why this is not being adopted by consumers, who on the whole continue to eat unhealthily

• this may compromise the successful marketing of some functional food products, where consumers are required to make long term dietary changes to improve their health

Barriers to dietary change Barriers to dietary change

• 85% of individuals believe that they consume a healthy diet

• ASSUMPTION An individual is “at risk” from a particular illness, and will automatically make food choice decisions to offset the risk NOT FOUNDED IN REALITY

• sensory properties (cf fruits and vegetables)

• people are reluctant to make dietary changes that may result in long-term prevention of ill-health, or even improve their current health status, particularly when time periods of greater than 20 years in the future

PERCEIVED CONTROL

Fatalism Loss of control IndependenceHedonistic responsesSelf-determination

Control of food supply•transport•budget•access

Perceptionof sourceAmountConflictComplex

Personal relevance Processing (ELM)Trust in Information Abilities

INFORMATIONCHARACTERISTICS

EGOCENTRIC SYSTEMS

Past ExperiencesFamily, FriendsCulture, Values

Norms

Risk Perception, Diet and Cancer

Optimistic bias Optimistic bias

Optimistic bias occurs when people perceive that they are at less risk from a particular hazard than other people

- personal experience of an adverse event

- comparison with targets with whom people have personal contact

- compare self with specific individuals as opposed to “non-individuated” others

- stereotype salience.

Ego-centric and fatalistic belief systems Ego-centric and fatalistic belief systems

People who believe that their health is outside of their control, or under the control of “powerful others” ( “Health Locus of Control”), are unlikely to engage in preventative measures

Emerging issues associated with applications of human genome

Emerging issues associated with applications of human genome

• Privacy - to what extent should human genetic data bases be anonymised

• personal economic consequences (will people who are identified as being “at risk” from particular diseases be uninsurable, unemployable and unable to raise the finance to buy property

• individuals who lack a genetic predisposition to develop a disease may use this genetic information to reinforce “optimistic biases” about their risks through environmental exposure or food choices.

• people who do have a genetic predisposition may develop a fatalistic response - they are genetically predetermined to experience the illness

Public Participation Methods

• ‘Public Participation’ in decision making and policy formation is seen as increasingly important

• Several methods have been developed to involve the public, such as public hearings, citizen juries, consensus conferences, advisory committees, focus groups

• Problem: Nobody understands the most effective or appropriate type of consultation method to use

The Nine evaluation CriteriaThe Nine evaluation Criteria• Representativeness

Of a broad public not just interest groups

• Independence Participants not dependent on sponsors

• Early involvement Early enough to count in decision making

• InfluenceExercise must have an impact on policy

• Transparency Open to public scrutiny, with an audit trail

• Resource accessibility Sufficient time, money and access to expertise

• Task definition Define scope of exercise at the outset

• Structured Decision-Making

• An organised framework - assess alternatives/ formulate decisions

ConclusionsConclusions

Multidisciplinary research (geneticists with social scientists) -New theoretical approaches to information delivery

Problems associated with risk perception and communication to vulnerable individuals

Drivers Research Response

Development of nutriceuticals targeted towards individuals with particular genetic predispositions

Increased emphasis on preventative medicine relative to treatment – “medical nutrition therapy”

ConclusionsConclusions

Drivers Research Response

Evaluating public consultation and policy impact early in technology development

Declining public confidence in science and its applications

Integrated models of consumer choice (multidisciplinary neurophysiology, attitudes, sensory properties, values)

Predicting what consumers want to eat

Understanding barriers to dietary change / acceptance of novel products (multidisciplinary)

Problems associated with population changeage, obesity etc.

Drivers Research Response

Integrating social research (e.g. ethnographic methodologies and attitude analysis) with physiological approaches - novel theoretical development and integration

Understanding hedonistic responses to food choices

(neuropsychological, social and cultural factors)

Transdisciplinary policy research (health research, psychology, economics)

Problems associated with social inclusion and health inequalities / input into food policies

ConclusionsConclusions

The future of Consumer ResearchThe future of Consumer Research

• Isolated disciplinary approaches will not provide full understanding of consumer choice decisions

• Transdisciplinary research (from physiology to ethnography)

• Multi-institutional (skills must be drawn from many different institutions in different European member States)

• New networks and “virtual” institutions