Public multi-criteria assessment for societal concerns and gradual labelling

Food Policy

Volumn 40, Issue , 2013, Pages 97-108

  Michalopoulos, T ^a   Hogeveen, H ^a   Heuvelink, E ^a   Oude Lansink, A G J M ^a  

^a WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Corporate societal responsibility; Labelling; Market optimisation; Product assessment; Production externalities; Race to the top; Societal and consumer concerns; Technological innovation

Indexed keywords

ASSESSMENT METHOD; CONSUMPTION BEHAVIOR; FOOD PRODUCTION; INNOVATION; MULTICRITERIA ANALYSIS; SUSTAINABILITY; TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT;

EID: 84876319118     PISSN: 03069192     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2012.12.010     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Andersen, E.S., Philipsen, K., 1998. The evolution of credence goods in customer markets: exchanging 'Pigs in Pokes'. Paper Presented at the DRUID Winter Seminar, Middelfart, Denmark.
2. Baidu-Forson J.B.R., Waliyar N.F. Utilizing conjoint utility analysis to design modern crop varieties: empirical example for groundnut in Nigeria. Agri. Econom. 1997, 16:219-226.
3. BBC, Kinver, M., 2008b. Food needs 'fundamental rethink'. BBC News, 27 December. http://www.news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7795652.stm.
4. BBC, Carpenter, J., 2008a. Foods 'should label up eco-costs'. BBC News, 8 September. http://www.news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7604996.stm.
5. Bos, J., de Haan, J., Sukkel, W., 2007. Energieverbruik, broeikasgasemissies en koolstofopslag: De biologische en de gangbare landbouw vergeleken. Wageningen UR report 140, Wageningen.
6. Brom F. Food, consumer concerns, and trust: food ethics for a globalizing market. J. Agric. Env. Ethics 2000, 12:127-139.
7. Brookes G., Barfoot P. GM crops: the global economic and environmental impact - the first 9years 1996-2004. AgBioForum 2005, 8:187-196.
8. Buckler E.S., Thornsberry J.M. Plant molecular diversity and applications to genomics. Curr. Opinion Plant Biol. 2002, 5:107-111.
9. van Calker, K.J., 2005. Sustainability of Dutch dairy farming systems: A modelling approach. PhD Thesis. Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
10. Carson R. Silent Spring 1962, Mariner Books, New York, USA.
11. Chang R. Introduction. Incommensurability: Incomparability and Practical Reason 1997, 1-34. President and fellows of Harvard College, USA. R. Chang (Ed.).
12. Coff, C., Barling, D., Korthals, M., Nielsen, T. (Eds.), 2008. Ethical Traceability and Communicating Food. The International Library of Environmental, Agricultural and Food Ethics Series, vol. 15. Springer.
13. Costa, J.M., Heuvelink, E., 2005. Introduction: the tomato crop and industry. In: Heuvelink, E. (Ed), Tomatoes. Crop Production Science in Horticulture Series 13, Oxford, United Kingdom.
14. Costa J.M., Heuvelink E. Greenhouse Horticulture in Almeria Spain 2000, Wageningen University, Wageningen.
15. Crusak M.A., Cakmak I. Methods to improve the crop delivery of minerals to humans and livestock. Plant Nutritional Genomics, vols. 277-280 2005, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, United Kingdom. M. Broadley, P. White (Eds.).
16. Di{dotless}az-Balteiro, L., Romero, C., 2003. A multicriteria approach to characterize sustainability in forest ecosystems: an application in Spain. Conference on Decision Support for Multiple Purpose Forestry. April 23-25, Vienna, Austria.
17. Diaz-Balteiro L., Romero C. In search of a natural systems sustainability index. Ecol. Econ. 2004, 49:401-405.
18. Dodgson, J., Spackman, M., Pearman, A., Phillips, L., 2000. DTLR multi-criteria analysis manual. National Economic Research Associates (NERA) report. DETR, London, United Kingdom.
19. EC., 2004. Pesticide residues monitoring second and fourth quarter report. http://www.pesticides.gov.uk/uploadedfiles/Web_Assets/PRC/PRC_2004_Q4_report.pdf.
20. Frewer L. Societal issues and public attitudes towards genetically modified foods. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2003, 14:319-332.
21. Giannakas K. Information asymmetries and consumption decisions in organic food product markets. Can. J. Agri. Econom. 2002, 50:35-50.
22. Gremmen B. Genomics and the intrinsic values of plants. Genom. Soc. Policy 2005, 1(3):1-7.
23. Hardin G. The tragedy of the commons. Science 1968, 162:1243-1248.
24. Keeney R.L., Raiffa H. Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preference and Value Tradeoffs 1976, Wiley, New York, USA.
25. (IBRD) International Bank for Reconstruction and Development 2005 International Comparison Program Tables of final results 2008, The World Bank, Washington, D.C., USA.
26. Keulartz J., Schermer M., Korthals M., Swierstra T. Ethics in technological culture: a programmatic proposal for a pragmatist approach. Sci. Technol. Hum. Val. 2004, 29(1):3-29.
27. van Kooten O., Heuvelink E., Stanghellini C. New developments in greenhouse technology can mitigate the water shortage problem of the 21st century. Acta Horticult. 2006, 767:45-52.
28. Van der Knijff A, Benninga J, Reijnders C. 2004. Energie in de glastuinbouw Ontwikkelingen in de sector en op bedrijven t/m 2003. LEI rapport 3.04.13. The Hague, The Netherlands.
29. Korthals M. Taking consumers seriously: two concepts of consumer sovereignty. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 2001, 14:201-215.
30. Korthals M. Ethical dilemmas in sustainable agriculture. Int. J. Food Sci. Biotechnol. 2001, 32:813-820.
31. Korthals M. Ethics of differences in risk perception and views on food safety. Food Protect. Trends 2004, 24:498-503.
32. Lammerts Van Bueren E.T., Verhoog H., Tiemens-Hulscher M., Struik P.C., Haring M.A. Organic agriculture requires process rather than product evaluation of novel breeding techniques. Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 2007, 54:401-412.
33. Lancaster K.J. A new approach to consumer's theory. J. Polit. Econ. 1966, 74:132-157.
34. Mahalakshmi V., Ortiz R. Plant genomics and agriculture: From model organisms to crops, the role of data mining for gene discovery. Electron. J. Biotechnol 2001, 4(2). full5.
35. Makokha S.N., Karugia J., Staal S.J., Oluoch- Kosura W. Valuation of cow attributes by conjoint analysis: a case study of western Kenya. AfJARE 2007, 1(2):95-113.
36. Michalopoulos T., Korthals M., Hogeveen H. Trading 'ethical preferences' in the market: outline of a politically liberal framework for the ethical characterization of foods. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 2008, 21:3-27.
37. Michalopoulos T., forthcoming. The Citizen Goes Shopping: E.CH.O., a decision -support framework for the assessment and optimization of production from the perspective of the public. Applied Philosophy and Business Economics, Wageningen University.
38. Michalopoulos T., in preparation. Public multi-criteria assessment for societal concerns and gradual labeling: A market-scale implementation supplement.
39. Morris C.E., Sands D.C. The breeder's dilemma - yield or nutrition?. Nat. Biotechnol. 2006, 24:1078-1080.
40. Muñoz, P., Anton, A., Montero, J.I., Castells, F., 2003. Using LCA for the Improvement of Waste Management in Greenhouse Tomato Production. Life Cycle Assessment in the Agri-food sector. In: Proceedings from the 4th International Conference on Life Cycle Assessment in the Agri-Food Sector. Bygholm, Denmark.
41. Nap, J.P., Jacobs J., Gremmen, B., Stiekema, W.J., 2002. Genomics and sustainability: exploring a societal norm. In: NWO (Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research) Essays. De maatschappelijke component van het genomics onderzoek. NWO, The Hague, the Netherlands.
42. NRC, Snoeijen, M. 2007. Een beetje diervriendelijk: 'compromisvlees' voor de klant van de kiloknaller. NRC Handelsblad, February 17, 41.
43. Pannell D.J., Glenn N.A. A framework for the economic evaluation and selection of sustainability indicators in agriculture. Ecol. Econ. 2000, 33:135-149.
44. de Pelsmacker P., Driesen L., Rayp G. Do consumers care about ethics? willingness to pay for fair-trade coffee. J. Consum. Affair. 2005, 39:363-385.
45. van der Ploeg A., van der Meer M., Heuvelink E. Breeding for a more energy efficient greenhouse tomato: past and future perspectives. Euphytica 2007, 158:129-138.
46. Pluimers, J.C., 2001. An Environmental Systems Analysis of Greenhouse Horticulture in the Netherlands: the Tomato Case. PhD. Thesis. Wageningen University, Wageningen, the Netherlands.
47. Rao, V.H. 2008. Development in conjoint analysis. Handbook of Marketing Models, International Series in Operations Research and Management Sciences, vol. 121, part 2:23-53.
48. Rennings K., Wiggering H. Steps towards indicators of sustainable development: linking economic and ecological concepts. Ecol. Econ. 1997, 20:25-36.
49. Rommens C.M., Haring M.A., Swords K., Davies H.V., Belknap, William R. The intragenic approach as a new extension to traditional plant breeding. Trends Plant Sci. 2007, 12:397-403.
50. Rawls, J., A Theory of Justice, Revised edition, 1999.
51. Russell W.A., Sparrow R. The case for regulating intragenic GMOs. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 2008, 21:153-181.
52. Steuer R.E. Multiple Criteria Optimization: Theory, Computation, and Application 1989, Krieger, Malabar.
53. Slovic P. Trust, emotion, sex, politics, and science: surveying the risk-assessment battlefield. Risk Anal. 1999, 19:689-701.
54. Tamiz M., Jones D., Romero C. Goal programming for decision making: an overview of the current state-of-the-art. Eur. J. Operat. Res. 1998, 111:569-581.
55. van der Velden, N.J.A., Janse, J., Kaarsemaker, R.C., Maaswinkel, R.H.M., 2004. Duurzaamheid van vruchtgroenten in Spanje; Proeve van monitoring. LEI. Den Haag, The Netherlands.
56. Wynne B. Public engagement as a means of restoring public trust in science - hitting the notes, but missing the music?. Commun. Genet. 2006, 9:211-220.