Policy development for novel foods: Issues and challenges for functional food

Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics

Volumn 50, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 527-539

  Veeman, Michele ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0038054738     PISSN: 00083976     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-7976.2002.tb00353.x     Document Type: Review

References (25)

1. Akerlof, George. 1970. The market for lemons: Qualitative uncertainty and the market mechanism. Quarterly Journal of Economics 84: 488-500.
2. Australia New Zealand Food Authority. 2002. Invitation for public submissions, and Initial assessment report on proposal P235 review of food-type dietary supplements 10/02, 26 June. Available at: www.anzfa.gov.au (downloaded July 2002).
3. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. 2001. Functional foods and nutraceuticals. Available at: www.agr.can (modified 14 December 2001, downloaded May 2002).
4. Bech Larson, Tino, Klaus G. Grunert and Jacob B. Poulson. 2001. The acceptance of functional foods in Denmark, Finland and the United States. Working Paper 73. Denmark: The Aarhus School of Business, MAPP Center, April.
5. Byrne, David. 2002. Message from Commissioner Byrne to EU citizens on Food Supplements. Available at: www.europa.eu.int/comm/food (downloaded 5 April 2002).
6. Center for Science in the Public Interest. 1999. Functional foods: Public health boom or 21st century quackery? An international comparison of international regulatory requirements and marketing trends. CSPI Reports International. Available at: www.cspinet.org (downloaded April 2002).
7. Darby, M. and E. Karni. 1973. Free competition and the optimum amount of fraud. Journal of Law and Economics 16: 67-88.
8. Health Canada. 1998. Nutraceuticals/functional foods and health claims on foods. Policy Paper. Ottawa, ON: Health Canada, Health Protection Branch, Food Directorate, Therapeutic Products Program, 2 November. Available at: http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hpb-dgps/therapeut/zfiles/english/ffn/nutr a_pol_e.pdf.
9. Health Canada. 1999. U.S. generic health claims in Canada: Background and implementation issues in the Canadian context. Discussion Paper. Ottawa, ON: Health Canada, Health Protection Branch, June.
10. Health Canada. 2000. Consultation document on generic health claims. Available at: www.hc.gc.ca/food-aliment (downloaded June 2001).
11. Health Canada. 2001. Proposed regulatory framework for natural health products. Phase II NHPD Consultation. March. Available at: www.hc-sc.gc.ca/onhp/phase2 (downloaded May 2002).
12. Health Canada. 2002. Natural health products regulations: Draft. JUS601727. Ottawa, ON: Health Canada, Office of Natural Health Products, 10 January. Available at: www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hpb/onhp (downloaded May 2002).
13. Heaseman, Michael and Julian Mellentin. 2001. The Functional Food Revolution: Healthy People, Healthy Profits? London: Earthscan Publications.
14. House of Commons. Standing Committee on Health. 1998. Report of the Committee on Natural Health Products: A New Vision. Ottawa, ON: Government of Canada. Available at: www.parl.gc.ca (downloaded May 2002).
15. National Research Council. Institute of Medicine. 2002. For comment: Proposed framework for evaluating the safety of dietary supplements. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
16. Leland, Hayne E. 1979. Quacks, lemons and licensing: A theory of minimum quality standards. Journal of Political Economy 87 (6): 1328-46.
17. Maclean's Magazine. 2001. Overcoming depression. 12 November, pages 34-42.
18. Nelson, Phillip. 1970. Advertising as information. Journal of Political Economy 78: 311-29.
19. National Institute of Nutrition. 2000. Consumer awareness of and attitudes to functional foods. May. Available at: www.aceis.agr.ca/food/nff/cffr/ffnconen.html (downloaded June 2002).
20. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 1996. Consumer Product Safety Standards and Conformity Assessment: Issues in a Global Marketplace. Paris: OECD.
21. Poulson, Jacob B. 1999. Danish consumers' attitudes towards functional foods. Working Paper 62. Denmark: The Aarhus School of Business, MAPP Center, February.
22. Statistics Canada. 2001. The health divide: How the sexes differ. Health Reports 12 (3).
23. University of California at Berkeley. 2001. The [United States] claims game: The consumer loses. University of California Berkeley Wellness Letter, April. Available at: www.aceis.agr.ca (downloaded May 2002).
24. United States. General Accounting Office. 2000. Food Safety: Improvements Needed in Overseeing the Safety of Dietary Supplements and Functional Foods. GAO/RCED-00-156. Washington, DC: GPO.
25. Veeman, Michele. 2001. Consumers, public perceptions and biotechnology. Staff Paper 01-01. Edmonton, AB: University of Alberta, Department of Rural Economy.