Suchergebnisse

SIMPLE SUMMARY: The well-being and welfare of animals on farms is a topic of interest to many people. On the island of Ireland, this issue has received increased attention because of political and governance changes, including Brexit and COVID-19. Policy-makers and industry are considering labelling schemes to inform the food consumer about welfare standards on farms. Focus groups and an online survey were carried out with members of the public on the island of Ireland to explore their awareness, perceptions, and attitudes toward farm animal welfare standards on farms in Ireland and Northern Ireland. Most consumers believed farm animal welfare standards were high, although different farming sectors were rated differently: beef and dairy farms were viewed more positively, and pig and poultry farms were viewed less positively. The living conditions of the animal, size and intensity of the farm, national standards and schemes, and visibility all influenced perceptions of welfare standards. The public also expressed a lack of knowledge and information on the topic. In developing new policies and labelling schemes, it is important to be apprised of the current awareness, attitudes, and perceptions that the public has regarding farm animal welfare standards, as identified in the current paper. ABSTRACT: There has been increased public interest and concerns in issues such as farm animal welfare (FAW) on the island of Ireland, stoked in part by political and governance changes, such as Brexit and COVID-19. Front-of-pack food labelling represents a primary information channel for many people. In advance of considering formalised food labelling schemes, specifically relating to FAW, it is important to ensure an up-to-date understanding of current consumer perceptions of FAW. With this aim, the current study utilised a mixed methodology. Nine focus group discussions (n = 41) and an online survey (n = 972) with food consumers in Ireland and Northern Ireland explored perceptions of FAW. Results suggest that overall ...

There has been increased public interest and concerns in issues such as farm animal welfare (FAW) on the island of Ireland, stoked in part by political and governance changes, such as Brexit and COVID-19. Front-of-pack food labelling represents a primary information channel for many people. In advance of considering formalised food labelling schemes, specifically relating to FAW, it is important to ensure an up-to-date understanding of current consumer perceptions of FAW. With this aim, the current study utilised a mixed methodology. Nine focus group discussions (n = 41) and an online survey (n = 972) with food consumers in Ireland and Northern Ireland explored perceptions of FAW. Results suggest that overall perceptions of FAW are high, and consumers perceive FAW to have improved in the last decade. Quantitative (ANOVA) and qualitative results show variations in perception of FAW between sectors. Results from the focus group discussions identified factors underlying consumers' perception of FAW: the living conditions of the animal, size and intensity of the farm, national standards and schemes, and visibility. Information insufficiencies and knowledge gaps were identified. The findings are discussed in relation to policy implications for the role of public engagement, front-of-pack welfare labelling, and quality assurance schemes.

Nutrition and health claims (NHCs) can help individuals make better food choices. While NHCs have been found to influence consumer perceptions and consumption, there has been less focus on how claims influence the nutritional composition of servings. There has also been little attention paid to longer term or compensatory effects of claims on subsequent food selection. This manuscript details two studies considering these matters. Study 1 (n = 60) was a within-subjects experiment to measure the impact of NHCs on food selection and nutritional composition at single meal servings. Participants served from three fake food buffet meal stations (breakfast, hot meal, snacks) with NHCs present or absent. Study 2 (n = 55) was a within-subjects experiment to examine the impact of NHCs on food selection and nutritional composition at a subsequent meal. Participants served from a fake food buffet breakfast with or without NHCs followed by a lunch without NHCs. In study 1, while results varied for different meals, the presence of claims was found to significantly reduce the amount of energy, fat, saturated fat, sugar, carbohydrates, and sodium, and increase the amount of protein in meals that were served. Results for fibre were mixed. In addition, NHCs increased the quantity of food served in the snacks condition. There was no evidence of claims at breakfast impacting the nutritional composition of subsequent lunch servings in study 2. Despite claims potentially increasing serving quantities, the nutritional composition of chosen servings was more encouraging and claims may help individuals to meet recommended nutritional daily guidelines. These findings have wider implications in terms of government policy, food reformulation, and the continuing debate around the use of nutrient profiling regulations for products carrying claims.

Nutrition and health claims (NHCs) can help individuals make better food choices. While NHCs have been found to influence consumer perceptions and consumption, there has been less focus on how claims influence the nutritional composition of servings. There has also been little attention paid to longer term or compensatory effects of claims on subsequent food selection. This manuscript details two studies considering these matters. Study 1 (n = 60) was a within-subjects experiment to measure the impact of NHCs on food selection and nutritional composition at single meal servings. Participants served from three fake food buffet meal stations (breakfast, hot meal, snacks) with NHCs present or absent. Study 2 (n = 55) was a within-subjects experiment to examine the impact of NHCs on food selection and nutritional composition at a subsequent meal. Participants served from a fake food buffet breakfast with or without NHCs followed by a lunch without NHCs. In study 1, while results varied for different meals, the presence of claims was found to significantly reduce the amount of energy, fat, saturated fat, sugar, carbohydrates, and sodium, and increase the amount of protein in meals that were served. Results for fibre were mixed. In addition, NHCs increased the quantity of food served in the snacks condition. There was no evidence of claims at breakfast impacting the nutritional composition of subsequent lunch servings in study 2. Despite claims potentially increasing serving quantities, the nutritional composition of chosen servings was more encouraging and claims may help individuals to meet recommended nutritional daily guidelines. These findings have wider implications in terms of government policy, food reformulation, and the continuing debate around the use of nutrient profiling regulations for products carrying claims.