Societal challenges in the agrifood sector. Why a multidisciplinary approach is needed.

Professor Lynn J. Frewer

Food and Society

Newcastle University

Exmaple. Emerging themes in food security

Food security has been defined as the situation “when all people, at all-time have physical and economic access to sufficient and safe

nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active healthy life” (FAO,1996).

What factors influence the food chain, and hence food security?

The grand challenge of food (in)security

• Can only be addressed through

multidisciplinary or transdisciplinary

research

• Research activities need to be

integrated across the natural and

social sciences

• Simultaneously address food safety,

adequate nutrition and

sustainable production.

Drivers of Food (In)security

• Consumer preferences, priorities and perceptions– Increased demand for animal proteins

• Demographic change, (such as urban migration)• Changing human and animal nutritional requirements at different

phases of the lifecycle• Economic drivers related to supply and demand or domestic food

provisioning • Income trends• Climate change• The introduction of new technologies or agri-food practice

……..and their potential interactions

Food Safety

What existing and emerging food safety concerns can be identified globally? And how do these differ

regionally?

– Various Delphi studies have included food safety and agenda setting

– Delphi originates in foresight (1950s)– Various forms , including the Policy Delphi

• Map policy issues and options• Focuses on mapping existing and future resource and policy

needs• No longer used only for forecasting, in particular in a

research mapping or policy context.

Frewer, L. J., Fischer, A. R. H., Wentholt, M. T. A., Marvin, H. J. P., Ooms, B. W., Coles, D., & Rowe, G. (2011). The use of Delphi methodology in agrifood policy development: some lessons learned. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 78(9), 1514-1525.

The Delphi Method

Delphi can be defined as a procedure to:

“obtain the most reliable consensus of opinion of a group of experts … by a series of intensive questionnaires interspersed with controlled opinion feedback”

Dalkey & Helmer (1963, p458)

Examples of Policy Delphi funded by the commission

• EMIDA (emerging infectious animal diseases) Wentholt, M. T. A., Cardoen, S., Imberechts, H., Van Huffel, X., Ooms, B. W., & Frewer, L. J. (2012). Defining European preparedness and research needs regarding emerging infectious animal diseases: Results from a Delphi expert consultation. Preventive veterinary medicine, 103(2), 81-92.

• Connect4Action (integrating consumer research into innovative product design)

Frewer et al, in preparation. The use of Delphi methodology in identifying effective interdisciplinary collaboration in food research.

• GoGlobal (Emerging food risk and associated policy). Wentholt, M. T., Fischer, A. R., Rowe, G., Marvin, H. J., & Frewer, L. J. (2010). Effective identification and management of emerging food risks: Results of an international Delphi survey. Food Control, 21(12), 1731-1738.

• GMO Presto (GMO risk assessment and European research needs- ERANET-in progress)

• PROHEALTH (European policy and antibiotic resistance in animals-in progress)

Driver of food safety risk

Example

Demographic change Population growth, ageing, migration

Economic driving forces

Globalisation of the food web, food prices

Environmental driving forces

Response to and mitigation of climate change, resource scarcity and use efficiency

Technological advances

Use of genetic modification, nanotechnology or synthetic biology in food production

Geopolitical driving forces

Governance, (“hard” versus “soft”), regulatory measures

Societal values animal welfare, fair trade, environmental protection, corporate social responsibility

Malevolent activities Fraud and introduction of counterfeit products, bioterrorism

Increased complexity and size of the supply chain

Inclusion of banned ingredients in different supply chains, through lack of international harmonisation of activities

Resource shortages Energy, land

Food risk representation in the media

Increasing or decreasing societal concern about specific food risks)

Water security Drought, pollution, flooding

Political will Not allocating resources or policy agendas to food safety issues)

GoGlobal

• Most frequently identified global threats

– Microbiological– Chemical– Globalisation – Control and regulation– Mycotoxins– Crime and fraud– Technology (e,g. Nanoparticles)

• Technology is also seen as a solution to mitigate food safety problems…

• Food allergy is infrequently identified as an important food safety issue.

Emerging food risks - Drivers x Hazard?

• World-wide recession– Increase in food fraud? – Domestic storage (foods used longer)– Conflicts between sustainable use and safe use?– Emerging technologies

• Reduce food prices

• Conflict between societal concerns and technical assessments?

Driver- food fraud

Emerging research needs– Understanding the motivations of fraud and identification of vulnerable links in the

food chain • Temporal variation• Regulatory variation• Geographical variation• Variation in Economic motivation (is it worth it..)

Food risk management and food risk communication

• What constitutes best food risk management from a consumer perspective?– Does this differ from expert perceptions?

• Who do consumers trust to inform and manage food risks? • Are there cross-cultural and individual differences in perceptions,

attitudes, and information needs?• What is the optimal strategy to communicate uncertainty and population

level variability?• How should communication of risk and benefit in different impact areas be

conducted e.g. health and environment?

SAFE FOODS Risk Analysis Framework

• Should stakeholders be involved?• Which stakeholders?• Involvement in what way?

• Include health impacts of both

risks and benefits?• Assess as well, economic, social,

environmental, ethical impacts?• Transform risk communication,

to focus on needs and wishes of

the public and thereby improve

transparency?

Nutrigenomics and individualised dietary advice Will consumers accept personalised nutrition?

……….the study of how different foods affect someone's health by the way they react with that person's genes, for example by making them more or less likely to get heart disease or other illnesses.

Nutrigenomics

• The study of – How different foods may interact with specific genes to increase

the risk of common chronic diseases such as type 2 diabetes, obesity, heart disease, stroke and certain cancers

– How common chemicals in the diet affect health by altering the expression of genes and the structure of an individual's genome.

– Assumes that the influence of diet on health depends on an individual's genetic makeup.

Innovations (and implementation possibilities)

• DNA testing and food profiling • Personalised ICT based “coaching” to get people to eat specific

foods…• Specific food products for people with specific gene types

Survey study-perceived risks, benefits attitudes associated with personalised nutrition, and intention to adopt it

• 9381 participants from different EU member states were surveyed regarding their attitudes towards, and intention to adopt, personalised nutrition.

– Germany– Greece– Ireland– Poland – Portugal– Spain – the Netherlands, – the UK – Norway

Items used

• The Health Locus of Control Scale

– Internal health locus of control– Health commitment

• Risk and benefit perception “benefit”

• The Nutrition Self-efficacy Scale

• Perceived efficacy of control and regulation

SEM – adoption of intention to adopt Personalised nutrition

Health commitment

Perceived efficacy control and regulation

Internal health locus of control

Benefit perception

Attitude towards PN

Risk perception

Self efficacy

+0.252*0.648*

-0.097*+0.095*

+0.065

+0.043*

+0.123*

+0.111*

Intention to adopt PN

Poinhos, van der Lans, Rankin, Fischer, Bunting, Kuznesof, Stewart-Knox and Frewer, in preparation

Key results and next steps

• Benefit perception is the most important determinant of both attitude towards, and adoption of, personalised nutrition.

• Perceived self-efficacy (i.e. Is Personalised nutrition achievable?) also predicts attitude and adoption of personalised nutrition

• Proof of principal study– Participants recruited into personalised nutrition trials I the same countries (N=

approximately 700)– Compare attitudes of the general population with those engaged in personalised

nutrition trial

Sustainable agrifood production

• The Browse project– The EU sets rules for the sustainable use of pesticides to reduce the risks and

impacts of pesticide use on people's health and the environment – Includes understanding exposure in different stakeholder groups in order to fine

tune communication – Operators’, Workers’, Residents’ and Bystanders’ risk perceptions, knowledge

and attitudes associated with passive and occupational exposure to pesticides

– Data collected in Greece, Italy and the UK

Preliminary findings

• Risk perceptions are found to significantly influence the likelihood of adopting PPE for operators and workers

• Residents and bystanders do not adopt protective measures• The likelihood of residents and bystanders engaging in self-protective

behaviour is not significantly influenced by perceptions that personal health is being affected by pesticides

• Current analysis..assess the association between risk perceptions and pesticide exposure data (obtained through modelling)

Barriers to transdisciplinary research (1)the “jargon of authenticity”

• Unnecessary use of technical terminology inhibits clarity and communication

• Recognised problem communicating science to policy makers

• Also makes communication problematic between disciplines– e.g. influence diagram, logic map, conceptual model, systematic map – often

used interchangeably and may refer to the same thing or not depending on usage

• Solutions: plain language summaries, definitions, development of generic norms

Sutherland et al. (2013) Nature 503; 335-337.

Disciplinary norms

• Methodologies and approaches can be radically different and not understood by “subject experts” in different disciplines

– E.g. The use of small sample sizes in qualitative research (social science focus groups or ethnographic studies) is questioned by natural scientists.

• Solutions– Communication through Workshops– Discipline hopping fellowships– Development of empirical interdisciplinary evidence-base to support

methodologies

Barriers to transdiciplinarity- discipliary siloes

• Transdisciplinary research often fails because the links between the different disciplines remain conceptual and implicit rather than explicit

– between qualitative and quantitative disciplines – Between experimental and non-experimental evidence within disciplines

• They may also lack explicit linkage to the policy decision problems

Solution: Bayesian networks have been proposed to facilitate coherent linkage between elements of complex decision problems

Stewart et al. (2013) Research Synthesis Methods. DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1087

Other barriers to transdisciplinary research

• Impact factors of journals which publish results are low• Lack of career structure for academics who engage in interdisciplinary

research• Reserch funding may be difficult to obtain (particularly from prestigious,

monodisciplinary research councils)

Conclusions

• Addressing global societal challenges requires trans disciplinary research – e,g, interactions between socio-economic and biophysical drivers in relation to

food security

• Experience of research synthesis in different disciplines (notably medicine, social sciences and ecology) indicates that there are some real challenges to integration between the natural and social sciences

• Changes to academic career structure and reserch funding is needed

Overcoming these challenges should be an urgent priority for applied scientists, methodologists and the policy community.

Thank youAny questions or

comments?