Nanotechnology holds potential for food processing and packaging – including developments to fight foodborne pathogens – but will consumers buy into it?
A 2014 report funded by safefood highlights the need for more research and engagement with consumers about the use of nanotechnology in food.
Research for the report, ‘Nanotechnology in the Agri-food industry on the island of Ireland: applications, opportunities and challenges’, was carried out by Queen’s University Belfast and Teagasc.
One of its findings was that consumers are more likely to accept nanotechnology in food or packaging when the benefits they value are apparent.
“There has been much investment into nano for food and packaging, but there are still many unknowns,” says study co-author Dr Maeve Henchion, Head of the Department of Agri-food Business and Spatial Analysis at Teagasc in Ashtown.
“We did the study because we recognised the importance of engaging with consumers when bringing such technology through the commercialisation stage.”
Maeve Henchion
Getting consumers’ views
The report included analysis of face-to-face surveys with consumers to examine how they view the use of nanotechnology inside and outside food. [The surveys were originally carried out as part of a Food Institutional Research Measure (FIRM)–funded study on consumer attitudes to novel foods, including nanotechnology.]
The findings suggest that choices about nanotechnology in food or packaging are influenced by how the consumer sees the benefit, explains Maeve.
“In general, given a choice, a consumer would select a product that was produced traditionally rather than with nanotechnology,” she says. “But if you explain benefits that a nanotech application could offer to the consumer in terms of health, taste or price, some were willing to trade off the perceived negatives of nanotech for the benefits.”
“We want to help consumers make informed decisions,” she says. “The food industry needs to take on board what consumers are worried about and use insights from consumers to build trust and transparency.”
Comments