Changes in consumer attitudes, behaviours and purchasing preferences towards different types of food highlight the increased demand for better quality information on safety, quality and provenance of food products and on sustainability of food production processes. These changes offer both new opportunities and risks for food producers who require mechanisms to better understand and respond to changing consumers’ decision-making trends on food. In the area of food safety, investigation of consumer and producer responses during recall incidents provide an opportunity to holistically understand existing information flows and elicit user requirements necessary for the development of more effective consumer food safety applications. This paper reports on a case study conducted with an Australian premium manufacturing company that experienced a food recall in 2014. The investigation confirms that current Australian food recall response mechanisms do not guarantee a closed loop of communication with all purchasers of a recalled product. It also highlights that producers still face difficulties in understanding how best to effectively understand and respond to different types of consumers. It emerges that recovery from a food incident relies on many factors including pre-existing brand reputation, effective information management, control mechanisms and supply chain partner response. From a consumer perspective, it is evident that consumers’ responses are influenced by various factors that require sensitivity around the choice of information modality and information platform adopted to enhance communications during food recall. The paper highlights the need for further research into understanding consumer food safety behaviours post-purchase to improve the development of consumer food safety applications.
Accc. Product and safety recalls australia -dairy and eggs. 2014.
2.
Bamgboje-Ayodele A, Ellis L, Turner P. ICICKM2014-Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Intellectual Capital. Knowledge Management and Organisational Learning: ICICKM. Academic Conferences and Publishing International Limited; 2014. p. 48.
3.
Barker D. Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) -Impacts on Food and Farming. Trade Matters. 2014.
4.
Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology. 2006. p. 77–101.
5.
Chrysochou P, Chryssochoidis G, Kehagia O. Traceability information carriers. the technology backgrounds and consumers’ perceptions of the technological solutions. Appetite. 2009. p. 322–31.
6.
Dpmc. Australia in the asian century. 2012.
7.
Dwivedi Y, Williams M, Lal B, Mustafee N. An analysis of literature on consumer adoption and diffusion of information system/information technology/information and communication technology. International Journal of Electronic Government Research (IJEGR). 2010. p. 58–73.
8.
Ergönül B. Consumer awareness and perception to food safety: a consumer analysis. Food control. 2013. p. 461–71.
9.
Ezzy D. Food Industry Recall Protocol -A guide to conducting a food recall and writing a food. 2013.
10.
Grunert K. 11th International Congress of the European-Association-of-Agricultural-Economists (EAAE). European Review of Agricultural Economics. 2005. p. 369–91.
11.
Heinonen K. Consumer activity in social media: managerial approaches to consumers’ social media behavior. Journal of Consumer Behaviour. 2011. p. 356–64.
12.
Kearney J. Food consumption trends and drivers. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B-biological Sciences. 2010. p. 2793–807.
13.
Kousta M, Mataragas M, Skandamis P, Drosinos E. Prevalence and sources of cheese contamination with pathogens at farm and processing levels. Food Control. 2010. p. 805–15.
14.
Kuttschreuter M, Rutsaert P, Hilverda F, Regan A, Barnett J, Verbeke W. Seeking information about foodrelated risks: the contribution of social media. Food Quality and Preference. 2014. p. 10–8.
15.
Liao PA, Chang HH, Chang CY. Why is the food traceability system unsuccessful in taiwan? empirical evidence from a national survey of fruit and vegetable farmers. Food Policy. 2011. p. 686–93.
16.
Lilavanichakul A, Boecker A. Consumer acceptance of a new traceability technology: a discrete choice application to ontario ginseng. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review. 2013. p. 25–49.
17.
Mayer A, Harrison J. The use of online focus groups to design an online food safety education intervention. Journal of Food Science Education. 2012. p. 47–51.
18.
Murray K, Liang J, Haeubl G. Act 2.0: the next generation of assistive consumer technology research. Internet Research. 2010. p. 232–54.
19.
Reid M, Li E, Bruwer J, Grunert K. Food-related lifestyles in a crosscultural context. Journal of Food Products Marketing. 2001. p. 57–75.
20.
Robertson N. Self-service technology complaint channel choice exploring consumers’ motives. Managing Service Quality. 2012. p. 145–64.
21.
Rogers Y, Preece J, Sharp H. teraction design : beyond human-computer interaction. J. Wiley & Sons; 2011.
22.
Ruiz-Garcia L, Steinberger G, Rothmund M. A model and prototype implementation for tracking and tracing agricultural batch products along the food chain. Food Control. 2010. p. 112–21.
23.
Saltini R, Akkerman R. Testing improvements in the chocolate traceability system: impact on product recalls and production efficiency. Food Control. 2012. p. 221–6.
24.
Solomon M, Polegato R, Zaichkowsky J. Consumer behavior: buying, having, and being. Pearson Prentice Hall; 2009.
25.
Stachowski C. The niche marketing strategy in internationally-oriented small and medium enterprises: a literature review and lessons for new zealand. Small Enterprise Research. 2012. p. 96–112.
26.
Tache J, Carpentier B. Hygiene in the home kitchen: changes in behaviour and impact of key microbiological hazard control measures. Food Control. 2014. p. 392–400.
27.
Thong J, Venkatesh V, Xu X, Hong SJ, Tam K. Consumer acceptance of personal information and communication technology services. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. 2011. p. 613–25.
28.
Van Rijswijk W, Frewer L. Consumer needs and requirements for food and ingredient traceability information. International Journal of Consumer Studies. 2012. p. 282–90.
29.
Verbeke W, Ward R. Consumer interest in information cues denoting quality, traceability and origin: an application of ordered probit models to beef labels. Food Quality and Preference. 2006. p. 453–67.
30.
Voordouw J, Cornelisse-Vermaat J, Pfaff S, Antonides G, Niemietz D, Linardakis M, et al. Preferred information strategies for food allergic consumers. a study in germany, greece, and the netherlands. Food Quality and Preference. 2011. p. 384–90.
31.
Yang K, Forney J. The moderating role of consumer technology anxiety in mobile shopping adoption: differential effects of facilitating conditions and social influences. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research. 2013. p. 334–47.
The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
