Food, consumer concerns, and trust: Food ethics for a globalizing market

The use of biotechnology in food production gives rise to consumer concerns . The term "consumer concern" is often used as a container notion. It inclu des concerns about food safety, environmental and animal welfare consequenc es of food production systems, and intrinsic moral objections against genet ic modification. In order to create clarity a distinction between three dif ferent kinds of consumer concern is proposed. Consumer concerns can be seen as signs of loss of trust. Maintaining consumer trust asks for governmenta l action. Towards consumer concerns, governments seem to have limited possi bilities for public policy. Under current WTO regulations designed to preve nt trade disputes, governments can only limit their policies to 1) safety r egulation based upon sound scientific evidence and 2) the stimulation of a system of product labeling. An analysis of trust, however, can show that if governments limit their efforts in this way, they will not do enough to av oid the types of consumer concerns that diminish trust. The establishment o f a technical body for food safety - although perhaps necessary - is in its elf not enough, because concerns that relate directly to food safety cannot be solved by "pure" science alone. And labeling can only be a good way to take consumer concerns seriously if these concerns are related to consumer autonomy. For consumer concerns that are linked to ideas about a good socie ty, labeling can only provide a solution if it is seen as an addition to po litical action rather than as its substitution. Labeling can help consumers take up their political responsibility. As citizens, consumers have certai n reasonable concerns that can justifiable influence the market. In a free- marker society, they are, as buyers, co-creators of the market, and societa l steering is partly done by the market. Therefore, they need the informati on to co-create that market. The basis of labeling in these cases, however, is not the good life of the individual but the political responsibility pe ople have in their role as participants in a free-market. Then, public conc erns are taken seriously. Labeling in that case does not take away the poss ibilities of reaching political goals, but it adds a possibility.