Consumer Decisions: Influencing the Food System(s) - Literature review Example

Consumer Decisions: Influencing the Food System(s) Student’s Name: Institutional Affiliation: University: Consumer Decisions: Influencing the Food System(s) The domain of food policy demonstrates sustainability complexity of food consumption. Besides social, economic and ecological food consumption aspects, concerns in public health are factors that are integral in efforts to ensure food sector sustainable development. The purpose of this literature review is to discuss the various consumer decisions that have a role to play in the influence of food systems (Myers & Kent, 2003). Sustainable food policy has been a common topic in many international forums. The literature review looks at the role and impact of consumers within different procurement environments. It further discusses Sustainability of the different food systems from an ecological, social and economic perspective. Existing gaps in the current literature with discussion of future research directions to improve food system sustainability particularly from the consumer perspective concludes the defined objective of this paper. Role and Impact of consumers within different food procurement environments Consumers play an important role within different procurement environments. Their decisions influence the way food is packaged, and arranged in the procurement environment. The role of the manufactures is to produce what consumers want. Food and drink relates largely to what is significant to life and encompasses life expectancy, health, personality, family and lifestyle for the survival of human beings. Food purchasing consequently, is more than an aspect of sustenance; it entails identity and one of the statuses mentioned above. Moreover, drink and food is purchased regularly resulting into formation of habits and routines (Reusswig, 1994). Food consumption is largely influenced by the behaviors of the consumers. As compared to other product types, food consumption is determined by both biological and emotional factors. The biological factors include such things like cravings and hunger. Emotional factors are such things like prestige and comfort eating (Rockström, 2009). When people get into a supermarket driven by hunger they will tend to buy more and shop differently. Physiologically, smelling, or simply viewing food can bring back the memory of a pleasurable experience and can instigate the release of particular hormones which trigger hunger within a person. The process influence the desire for certain foods, and it also translates to people being likely to go for foods that are unhealthy over food that are healthy due to the urgency of satisfying the craving (Horne, 2009). Once food preferences are formed; they are considerably resistant to any kind of change. The role and impact of consumers within different food procurement environments cannot go unnoticed since they shape the marketing decisions of different food processing companies and agricultural cooperatives. Besides, food consumption is to a large extent shaped by social factors, and it is also motivated by factors not involving necessity. Supermarkets, Farmers Markets, Food Cooperatives and On-line shopping avenues are not spared of the influence of the decision making the consumers who determine what should be supplied in the market (Erasmus, Boshoff & Rousseau, 2001). The consumers are driven by convenience and the urge to find a channel that will satisfy the immediate need promptly. This will determine where the consumer will opt to go shopping. Income acts as a constraint on consumer spending (Horne, 2009). Despite having regulations on food safety, producers of food are ready to flaunt regulations in order to bring to the market what the consumer demands. As long as the consumer is not conscious of the unhealthy food, his desire for a particular type of food will usually escalate at the same rate with the amount of consumption. Food attitudes have varying degrees across different cultures. In particular nations, such as Italy, food occupies a dominant place within the life of a family. In more cultures, modern lifestyles have a strong influence on food consumption and behavior. Any motivation for change in food behavior faces a great challenge from the physiological and cultural context influences on food consumption. Food marketers have established that the introduction of new food products into the existing markets are a very challenging task, and calls for consumer awareness and consumer success experience with the new product. Food products are often introduced accompanied by free promotions and large discounts. The use of celebrities to market or advertise food products have a huge influence on the consumer food preference (Mikkelsen et al, 2006). The amount of thought accorded by consumers to a decision to purchase is based on a variety of processing resources, for example, shopping time available, and the availability of distractions. It also determines the level of contentment that people draw from their decisions. When decisions are made hastily, people may not have to think about their choices. This is widely observed in the fast foods scenarios, whereby food availability as opposed to its price, has been an alarming indicator for obesity. People tend to use very limited time on thinking about the purchase of fast foods; this prompts them to make choices on food impulsively. When consumers are deeply overwhelmed with choice, deliberation that is minimal is likely to be experienced in food purchasing decisions. This can translate a consumer making a purchasing decision relying majorly or exclusively on recognition as the only factor despite the inability to recollect ones thoughts clearly (Horne, 2009). The impact of recognition does not only center on purchasing. If people are given exactly the same products to drink or eat, they prefer those carrying a brand name, and the brand name triggers increased activity in the portion of the brain which is associated with pleasure. Branding does not offer assurance of the food product tasting better to people familiar with the brand, but the brain of those who can recognize the brand are influenced differently. Often an individual’s preference or awareness of a product can occasion brand advertising that is repetitive. This is especially important when there is the existence of slight differentiation between the products. In some circumstances, the foods that consumers are likely to pick from the supermarket shelves may be simply the products that their parents bought when they were growing up. Some habits are reinforced by the context in which someone grows up (Popkin, 2009). Time-constrained and high speed lifestyles experienced in many Western countries has occasioned the emergence of food convenience industry and its active role on the food consumption behavior of the society. Convenience foods are food products, which are beneficial to the consumer in time of stages of meal preparation and consumption: purchasing, planning, preparation, storing, disposal and eating (Stern et al, 1997). This means that a type of product which can be, obtained, stored, served, eaten, or prepared easily, thus demonstrating to be convenient by saving the individual a lot of time. Changing lifestyles and eating patterns determine purchasing decision for some households. In the U.S for instance, food consumption has increased by 16 percent beginning from 1970, going hand in hand with the increase in calorie intake in the country food consumption. The interpretation of the consumer of different option or information is influenced by the manner in which the information is framed or represented. In the food marketing context, different framing dictates whether a product is identified as ‘only 5% fat’ or ‘95% fat free’. This a crucial tool among those marketing food owing to the appeal of products labeled as “free from”. The labeling affects not just the way people shop but how much they go ahead and consume. The calorific difference between a product with one calorie and calorie free is negligible, ‘calorie free’ is much more likely to attract to shoppers. If food is individually wrapped, people tend to eat less, and eat more if food is wrapped in large portions. Food products marketing in stores influence people largely on their shopping patterns. There are seasonal trends in the price of fresh produce but the food price changes over the duration of time in relation to technological developments and variations of weather (Becker, Kals & Frohlich, 2004). This demonstrates that retailers often possess an advantage over consumers, who are devoid of information concerning the true price of food and most of the time have no time to do enough research. Poor understanding of the true value of foods is demonstrated in the dominance of promotional offers applied by huge supermarkets across European nations like “buy-one-get-one free” offers or three-for-two offers (Horne, 2009). In the United Kingdom for instance, the buy-one-get-one-free offer encompasses eighty percent of all promotional activity in the supermarkets. Consumers have come to realize that a majority of goods involving such offers result in buying throw away goods. While such offers are popular in some countries, their impact varies in relation to different cultures. Consumers in Scandinavian countries and Germany, for instance, are more likely than consumers from UK to be motivated by desires to secure quality and consequently treat ‘free’ offers with a lot of caution. Food systems are determined by consumers’ consumption patterns. Sustainable lifestyles call for food products that are sustainable. Sustainability of the different food systems from an ecological, social and economic perspective In this era full of unanticipated change, uncertainty and growing risk, there are many challenges to agricultural policy sustainability and practice in the developing world. Concerns relating to chronic hunger, technology enhanced productivity and malnutrition, increasing land degradation, adverse environmental changes and poverty in agricultural communities is prevalent. These kinds of apprehensions bring to the fore many questions about whether development of agriculture over the past years can contain the complexity of challenges in the 21st century. The agriculture policies in different countries determine the kind of food systems which are to be sustained in the adverse environment. Agri-food systems beg for pathways that define sustainability to the realization of the food need of the people in the world (Menrad & Gabriel, 2009). Call for sustainable agriculture has become universal, as to what has to be done has not been agreed upon. As many parties sign on to the sustainable agriculture project, perceptions concerning what constitutes sustainability in the agriculture sector have continued to multiply. Food production is largely dependable on the advancements that are being made in the agricultural sector. Accumulation of toxics in the soils that end up in food has been a cause of many health problems to unsuspecting consumers who continue to crave for the alluring agricultural food on the shelves. The lifestyle conditions such as, diabetes, heart attack, high blood pressure, and cancer cause the consumers to adjust their eating habits. Convenient eating and fast food store sales has been affected by the by the realization of consumers of the dangers of these lifestyle diseases. Sustainable agriculture through the production of safety food presents an opportunity to consumers. The long-term viability of current production food system is questionable for many reasons. The news media are full of paradoxical presentation of starvation amidst plenty inclusive of hungry children juxtaposed with advertisement of supermarkets. Possible adverse environmental influence of agriculture and escalating incidence of food-borne illness also demand the attention. There is a recurrence of the farm crisis with regularity. Conventional farming systems will vary from farm to farm and from nation to nation. Nevertheless, they share many characteristics that include rapid technological innovation, management technology, large capital investment, large scale-scale firms, extensive use of fertilizers, pesticides, and eternal use of energy inputs; high dependency on agribusiness and high labor efficiency (Mattick, 2009). For food systems to be sustainable there should be an objective re-evaluation of the means of food production that currently exist in the world. Potential health hazards are reflected in sub-therapeutic utilization of antibiotics in the animal production, and nitrate and pesticide contamination of water and food. Workers in the firm are poisoned in the fields, residues are toxic are found on foods, and some animal and human diseases have developed resistance to antibiotics currently used. Equitable and sustainable food production cannot be established when most consumers have very little connection to the natural processes that produce their food (Mont, 2008). Declining farmland ownership and rural life have led to decrease in food production in many developed countries, prompting over-reliance on importation. World population growth has put more pressure on food production. The rate of increase of the population is particularly high in countries that are developing (Thaler & Sunstein, 2008). In such countries, population factor, coupled with rapid industrialization, political instability, poverty, debt burden, and large food imports, make long-term food security uniquely urgent. The challenge of dealing with and defining problems associated with current food production system is inherently laden with emotion and controversy. Many people in communities that are agricultural oriented see sustainable agriculture as a personal criticism. They see it as an insult to what they have been practicing as being unsustainable (Frondel, Horbach & Rennings, 2008). A system that is economically sustainable should be able to produce services and goods on a continuous basis, to keep up with manageable levels of government and external debt, and keep away sectoral imbalances that are extreme and may damage industrial or agricultural production. A system that is environmentally sustainable should maintain a resource base that is stable, avoiding any over-exploitation of renewable resource system or environmental sink functions, and depletion of non-renewable resources to the level at which investment is made in substitutes that are adequate (Lodziak, 2002). This encompasses such things like biodiversity maintenance, stability in the atmosphere, and other ecosystems functions not ordinarily categorized as economic resources. Systems that are socially sustainable should achieve fairness in opportunity and distribution, provision of social services which include education and health, gender equity, political accountability and participation. The three elements of sustainability bring about many imminent complications to the definition of economic development. The goals that are implied or expressed tend to be multidimensional, raising concerns on how to balance objectives and the manner which to judge failure or success (Lorek, Spangenberg & Oman, 2008). By 2050, it has been forecast that changing diets in countries that are emerging, and growth in global population are to mount more pressure on the demand for food to about 70% as an average of a range of scenarios that have been looked at. At the same time, fossils hydrocarbon depletion will increase the demand for industrial materials and bio-fuels, which on the other hand, may compete with food for biomass (Mikkelsen et al, 2006). Depletion of natural resources is ongoing, and climate change is a direct consequence of increased industrial activity. Considerations in sustainable development still have a deficiency in representation in the process of policy making during discussing for a solution. How best to create an iterative and systematic method within the process of policy making for ensuring that consumption of resources and pressures exerted on the environment do not increase at a degree which will eventually result in environmental and human catastrophes remains the unanswered question (Mikkelsen et al, 2006). Concerns relating to mounting negative social and ecological consequences of economic development in industry triggered the civil and environmental rights movements that were witnessed in the 1960s. The environmental was being polluted, and natural resources degraded, there were alarming inequities among those bearing the costs, and those benefitting from economic growth that was relentless (Thompson, 2011). New public policies were formed in 1960s and 1970s to address the issues which were bombarding the society. In 1980, the society retreated into denial following public, and ecological public policy constraints began to limit economic growth. In the recent times, questions regarding sustainability arose in regard to depletion of fossil energy, global climatic change, resource related wars and growing economic inequity. Humanity sustainability becomes a critical issue due to the adverse factors. Frondel, Horbach and Rennings (2008), argue that Sustainable development has come up to challenge economic growth as a guiding model or paradigm for future human advancement. Development that is sustainable is the kind of development which meets the current needs without compromising future opportunities. Sustainable development has to have to reflect the process of living, biological systems. Living plants have the ability to capture and store energy from the sun in order to off-set the energy lost through the environment. Human being harness solar energy by the use of falling water, windmills, and photovoltaic cells. Hamm and Gronefeld (2004), explains that all living things have a natural tendency and capacity for regeneration and renewal. Sustainable community-based food production not only link people and purpose with the place but also offers a metaphor for community development that is sustainable. Farmers who are sustainable make use of green plants to store and capture solar energy and regenerate organic matter and the soil’s natural productivity. They make use of intercropping, crop rotation, managed grazing, integrated livestock and crop systems to manage pests and observe maintenance of soil’s natural fertility. As they oversee the building of organic matter in the soil, they are storing solar energy in the soil and sequestering carbon. Farmers who are sustainable share a sense of moral and ethical commitment to protecting and preserving the natural resources of the earth and society’s human resource. Farms which are sustainable have the capacity to be productive, while regenerating and renewing resources for the future. Community based food systems that are sustainable link sustainable farmers with members of the local communities who are like minded (Heller & Keoleian, 2002). Minimally processed or raw foods marketed to local customers preserve much of the fossil energy use, and pollution of the environment linked to packaging, food processing, storage, and transportation (Grunert, Wills & Fernández-Celemín, 2010). Farmers markets and community inclined agriculture associations offer opportunities to bring community members and local farmers together via their common interest in sustainable food production. Thermodynamic science of energy applies to both sustainable and industrial systems of economic development. Healthy and productive economic systems are diverse, holistic, and usually interdependent. In Productive human communities which are healthy relationships are based on kindness and trust (Becker, Kals & Frohlich, 2004). Creating local food systems that are sustainable rely on arts as well as sciences. The prevailing industrial food system demonstrate not only an obsolete scientific worldview but also a view of humanity of what profound feelings, powerful imaginations, and excellent mastery of expression think are most significant in the cultures in which they dwell (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005). Gaps in the current literature and future research directions to improve food system sustainability Sustainability within various food systems can only be attained if there is a collective effort to implement sustainable development in the methods of food production and consumptions. Extensive research has been done on the problem that threatens the existence of man and the eco-system in the present time. However, these studies have failed to demonstrate the best way to combat the problem of climate change and the effects of depletion of natural resources. Many of the studies carried out have discussed the problems of food systems in detail giving graphic representation of the food situation in the developing world (Sustainable Development Commission, 2008). The same studies have fallen short of coming up with sustainable ways of addressing the food problem that faces the world. The changing lifestyles of the customers possess another challenge to the manufactures of food and whom their main interest is to gain from every situation regardless of the implication of their decisions to the future of the world (Owen, Seaman & Prince, 2007). Marketing activities are targeting to lure more customers to spend their hard earned cash on impulsive buying of unhealthy foods. Cases of obesity and cancer can be attributed to the changing lifestyles of consumers in regard to patterns of eating and preference for certain foods. Flashy lifestyles of the celebrities depicted on advertisements in various food environments mislead consumers to think that the advertisements are the true reflection of the lifestyle of the celebrities. This has been reinforced with the belief of lifestyles being symbols of success within the society (Grunert, Wills & Fernández-Celemín, 2010). According Rehfeld, Rennings and Ziegler (2007), the existing literature on sustainable development lacks adequate empirical evidence on the way of dealing with future challenges as far as food production and consumption is concerned. Most literatures discuss the challenges of unhealthy lifestyles and inadequate environmental friendly food production methods without giving enough emphasis on the role of consumers in overcoming the challenges that faces food systems (Helland & Kastenholz, 2008). There is a new trend of encouraging intake of food supplements as opposed to regular and consistent exercising. Habitual unhealthy practices like alcohol intake and eating too much junk food has a role to play in the changing tactics of production advertising that encourages convenience eating as opposed to cooking healthy foods in their homes. High speed lifestyles encourage the consumption of processed foods and neglects feeding on raw or well prepared meals within a clean environment (Sustainable Development Commission, 2009). To improve food systems, the consumers have to be aware of the consequences of their purchasing decisions and demand for quality production of food meant for home consumption. As the various stakeholders organize international forums to discuss the challenges facing food systems, the consumers’ representation should not be overlooked. In an effort to gather empirical evidence on the improvement of food systems consumers should be accorded a bog role to play in such circumstances. Legislation on consumer protection should be enhanced globally, and high fines imposed on defaulters who fail to observe these regulations and therefore risking the lives of consumers through misrepresentation of information. The food systems are interdependent, and one action in one has serious implication in the other, consequently, solutions to problems must be sought collectively in order to address sustainable challenges in a manner that is comprehensive, feasible and acceptable (Rehfeld, Rennings & Ziegler, 2007). Agricultural production should be encouraged, and use of whole meals as opposed to processed foods should be at the center of every food policy campaign. The challenge of sustainable food production cannot be resolved without the inclusion of the affected consumers. Their buying decisions influence the marketing and processing foods in the market. Farmers should be to pursue sustainable agricultural practices that put into consideration environmental conservation methods. Governments should be at the forefront in spearheading sustainable development. References Becker, R., Kals, E., & Frohlich, P. (2004). Meat consumption and commitments on meat policy: Combining individual and public health. Journal of Health Psychology 9 (2), 143-155. Erasmus, A. C., Boshoff, E. & Rousseau, G. G. (2001). Consumer decision-making models within the discipline of consumer science: a critical approach. Journal of Family Ecology and Consumer Sciences, 29(3), 82-90. Frondel, M., Horbach, J., & Rennings, K. (2008). What triggers environmental management and innovation? – Empirical evidence for Germany. Ecological Economics, 66(1), 153-160. Grunert, K. G., Wills, J. M. & Fernández-Celemín, L. (2010). Nutrition knowledge, and use and understanding of nutrition information on food labels among consumers in the UK. Appetite 55 (4), 177-189 Hamm, U. & Gronefeld, F. (2004). The European market for organic food: revised and updated analysis. Aberystwyth: University of Wales. Helland, A., Kastenholz, H. (2008). Development of nanotechnology in light of sustainability. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16 (6): 885-888 Heller, M. C. & Keoleian G. A. (2002). Assessing the sustainability of the US food system: a life cycle perspective. Agricultural Systems, 76 (3), 1007–1041. Horne, R.E. (2009). Limits to labels: The role of eco-labels in the assessment of product sustainability and routes to sustainable consumption. International Journal of Consumer Studies 33(2), 175-18. Horne, R. E. (2009). Limits to labels: The role of eco-labels in the assessment of product sustainability and routes to sustainable consumption. International Journal of Consumer Studies 33(2), 175-182. Mikkelsen, B., Kristensen, N. H. & Nielsen, T. (2006). Innovation processes in large-scale public foodservice-case findings from the implementation of organic foods in a Danish County. Journal of Foodservice Business Research, 8(2), 87-105. Lorek, S., Spangenberg, J. & Oman, I. (2008). Sustainable consumption policies effectiveness evaluation (SCOPE2): Conclusion. Overath/Vienna: Sustainable Europe Research Institute (SERI). Lodziak, C. (2002). The Myth of Consumerism. London: Pluto Press. Mattick, J. S. (2009). Deconstructing the Dogma. A New View of the Evolution and Genetic Programming of Complex Organisms. Annals of the New York: Academy of Sciences 1178, 29-4. Menrad, K., & Gabriel, A. (2009). Costs and benefits of segregation and traceability between GM and non-GM supply chains of final food products. Co-Extra International Conference – Programme and Abstracts, Paris, p. 30-3 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. (2005). Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Biodiversity Synthesis. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute. Mikkelsen, B., Kristensen, N. H. & Nielsen, T. (2006). Innovation processes in large-scale public foodservice-case findings from the implementation of organic foods in a Danish County. Journal of Foodservice Business Research, 8(2), 87-10. Mont, O. (2008). Sustainable consumption policies effectiveness evaluation (SCOPE2) – Analysis of identified gaps. Lund: International Institute of Industrial Ecological Economics. Myers, N., & Kent, J. (2003). New consumers: The influence of affluence on the environment. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sciences USA, 100 (8): 4963-496. Popkin, B. M. (2009). Global nutrition dynamics: the world is shifting rapidly toward a diet linked with non-communicable diseases. Am. J. Clin. Nutr, 84 (5): 289-298. Owen, L., Seaman, H. & Prince, S. (2007). Public understanding of sustainable consumption of food: A report to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. London: Opinion Leader. Rehfeld, K. M., Rennings, K. & Ziegler, A. (2007). Integrated product policy and environmental product innovations: An empirical analysis. Ecological Economics 61(1), 91-100. Reusswig, F. (1994). Lifestyles and Ecology. The Differentiated Ecology of Modern Societies— With Special Regard to the Energy Sector. Frankfurt: IKO. Rockström, J. (2009). Planetary boundaries: exploring the safe operating space for humanity. Ecology and Society 14(2), 3. Stacey, R. D. (2001) Complex responsive processes in organizations: learning and knowledge creation. Complexity and emergence in organizations. London: Routledge. Stern, P.C., Dietz, T., Ruttan, V.W., Socolow, R. H. & Sweeney, J. L. (1997). Environmentally Significant Consumption. Research Directions. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press. Sustainable Development Commission (SDC). (2009). Setting the table. Advice to government on priority elements of sustainable diets. London: UK SD Sustainable Development Commission (SDC). (2008). Green healthy and fair. Report for the Sustainable Development Commission. London: UK SDC Thaler, R.H., & Sunstein, C.R. (2008). Nudge – Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Thompson, C. J. (2011). Understanding consumption as political and moral practice. Journal of Consumer Culture, 11 (4) 139-144. Wilk, R. (2006). Fast food / slow food - the cultural economy of the global food system. Lanham: Altamira Press. Read More