means alternative specific constants,

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

\*\*\*, \*\*and \* denote statistically significant at 1%, 5% and 10%, respectively

**Table 8.10** Estimation of MWTP

#### **8.5 Conclusions and recommendations**

Table 8.10 also shows the results of the impacts of socio-economic characteristics on price attribute (WTP). Only AGE\*PRICE and EDU\*PRICE are in 1% significant, INȬ COME\*PRICE is in 10% significant. Other variables are not significant in the statistics. AGE\*PRICE is negative, young people find it easier to accept the traceability system and are more willing to pay for a traceability system. EDU\*PRICE is positive, higher educatȬ ed people find it easier to accept the traceability system and have higher WTP. INȬ COME\*PRICE is positive, higher income people are willing to pay more money, but not very much. This may imply that income only impacts a little on WTP for the traceability system. No matter their level of income, people are concerned about food safety and the

136 Food Safety and the Agro-Environment in China: The Perceptions and Behaviours of Farmers and Consumers

**Estimation of socio-economic characteristics impact on price**

**MWTP**

traceability system, and they need safe food whether rich or poor.

PRICE -0.325\*\*\* -0.312\*\*\* GENDER\*PRICE -0.0023 AGE\*PRICE -0.029\*\*\* EDU\*PRICE 0.036\*\*\* FAMILYNO\*PRICE -0.247 KID\*PRICE 0.022 OLDPPL\*PRICE -0.001 INCOME\*PRICE 0.002\* Rho-square 0.265 0.287 Adjusted rho-square 0.262 0.277 Number of observations 1254 1254

denote statistically significant at 1%, 5% and 10%, respectively

**Estimation of information from traceability system**

ASC# -0.674\*\*\* -0.443\*\*\* -2.07 FARM INF 0.659\*\*\* 0.654\*\*\* 2.03 FARM INF+PIC 0.741\*\*\* 0.735\*\*\* 2.28 ANTIBIOTICS RECORD 1.202\*\*\* 1.206\*\*\* 3.69 ALL MEDICINE RECORD 0.961\*\*\* 0.960\*\*\* 2.95 PROCESSING INF 0.282\* 0.274\* 0.87 PROCESSING INF+PIC 0.127 0.121 0.39

**Variable**

Source: consumer field survey 2008 # means alternative specific constants,

**Table 8.10** Estimation of MWTP

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

\*\*\*, \*\*and \*

The results suggest that consumers in Beijing are used to consuming milk in daily life. However, the food safety incidents which occurred have negatively affected consumers' confidence in the food they consume. The results also suggest that the traceability system is still a new thing to consumers in Beijing. They have very little knowledge of the traceability system, but they have a positive attitude toward the traceability system. More than half (57.2%) of the respondents had never heard of the traceability system before the survey, most (87.6%) consumers thought the food traceability system is necessary to ensure the food safety and avoid information asymmetry, although they are only willing to pay a limited amount for the traceability system.

Although respondents thought it is necessary to have traceability system to ensure food safety, they also worry about whether or not the information would be trustworthy. Most consumers could accept a traceability system and are willing to afford a small part of the cost. Therefore, doubts about the veracity of the information that a traceability system provides is the biggest problem at present. Powerful supervision is important to make people trust the information. People's behaviour is hard to control, but good supervision can reduce the risk of providing false information.

Consumers are used to buying milk and dairy products in supermarkets, they believe the modern food supply chain can ensure food safety more than the old tradition way. Milk has become a normal part of the diet for the people in Beijing and they are used to drinking milk every day.

Consumers are concerned about the information on animal medicine use, especially antibiotȬ ics, and are willing to pay more for the information on this. Additionally, people also care about the farm information and they thought the more the information, the better. So providing this information might increase consumers' confidence in the food they consume. These younger, higher educated and higher income people find it easier to accept the traceability system and are willing to pay extra money for the traceability system. But income is not a strong factor affecting willingness to pay.

As most dairy farmers in China are small farmers at present, it is still difficult to carry out a traceability system on dairy farms. However, according to the China Dairy Yearbook, the occupation of small farms is decreasing while the occupation of large farms is increasing, and therefore recording information and tracing back will be the trend in the modern dairy industry.

#### **References**

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

[1] Aizaki H. Nanseki T., Zhou H. Japanese consumer preferences for milk certified as good agricultural practice. Animal Science Journal 2012; doi: 10.1111/j. 1740-0929.2012.01043.x.


[16] Greene W. LIMDEP version 9.0 Econometric Modeling Guide Vol.2: Economic SoftȬ ware Inc, NY, USA, 2002.

[2] Nanseki T., Yokoyama K. JAPAN: Improving Food Safety amongst Food Operators, Ian G. Smith and Anthony Furness Ed. Food Traceability Around the World, VicarȬ

[3] Borst P., Akkermans, H., Top, J. Engineering ontologies. International Journal of HuȬ

[4] Gordijin J., Akkermans H. Designing and evaluating e-business models. IEEE IntelliȬ

[5] Sahin E., Dallery G., Performance evaluation of a traceability system, Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics 2002; (3): 210-218. [6] Dickinson D., Bailey D. Meat Traceability: Are US consumers willing to pay for it?

[7] Hobbs J. et al. Traceability in the Canadian Red Meat Market Sector: Do Consumers

[8] Mu J. Consumers' willingness to pay for a traceability label on poultry meat - which will be effective to calibrate hypothetical bias in CVM: Cheap Talk or Uncertainty Adjustment. Thesis of Master Degree in the People's University of China 2006.(in

[9] Nanseki T., Xu Y., Zeng Y. Feasibility study for comparison of food risk perception in Japan and China, Proceedings of Annual Symposium of the Farm Management SociȬ

[10] Official Website of the Beijing Government. Capital planning of main functional reȬ gions: http://zhengwu.beijing.gov.cn/ghxx/qtgh/t1240927.htm (Accessed on 19 Oct.,

[11] China Ministry of Agriculture.China Statistical Yearbook 2012. Shenyang: Liaoning

[12] Louviere J., Hensher D., Swait J. Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Application.

[13] Louviere J., Woodworth G. Design and Analysis of Simulated Consumer Choice or Allocation Experiments: An Approach Based on Aggregate Data, Journal of MarketȬ

[14] Adamowicz W., Louviere J., Swait J. Introduction to Attribute Based Stated Choice Methods. Report to NOAA Resource Valuation Branch, Damage Assessment Centre,

[15] Bateman I. et al. Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Technique: A Manual.

Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 2002; 27: 348–364.

138 Food Safety and the Agro-Environment in China: The Perceptions and Behaviours of Farmers and Consumers

Care? Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 2005; 53:47–65.

age Publications Ltd, England 2008; Vol.1: 46-65.

man-Computer Studies 1997; 46(2-3): 365-406.

ety of Japan 2008: 222-223 (in Japanese).

gent System 2001; 16(4): 11-17.

Chinese)

2012)

1998.

Education Press, 2012.5.

Cambridge University Press, 2000.

ing Research 1983; 20: 350-367.

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

Edward Elgar. United Kingdom; 2002: 458.

[17] Min S., Liu L., Wang Z., Nanseki T. Consumers' Attitudes to Food Traceability SysȬ tem in China: Evidences from the Pork Market in Beijing, Journal of the Faculty of Agriculture, Kyushu University 2008; 54(1): 569-574.

Chapter 9

### Awareness Comparison Between Farmers and Consumers

Hui Zhou and Teruaki Nanseki

şǯŗȱ

ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ Ȃ ȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱǽŗȬŘǾǯȱȱ¢¢ȱ ȱȱ ȱȱǰȱ¢ȱȱǰȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ǽřȬŚǾǯȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ǰ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ¢ǯȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ¢ȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱ¢ǯ

ȱȱǰȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȬ ȱȱ ȱȱȱȱǻǼǰȱȱȱȱȱȱ Ȃȱ ȱȱȱȱǯ

#### şǯŘȱȱ

ȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ¢ǯȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ ȱ¡ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱřǯȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱ ȱǰȱŘŖŖŞǯȱȂȱȱ ȱǰȱǰȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱǯȱȱȱȱŗŞŜȱȱ ȱȱȱ¢ȱȱŘŖşȱȱȱǯ ȱȂȱ¢ȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱ¢ǯȱȱ ȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȬȱ¢ǯ

ȱşǯŗȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ¢ǯȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢ǰȱ ȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱǰȱȱȱ ȱȱȱ ȱǯȱȱȱǰȱȱȱśřƖȱȱȱȱ

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

© 2013 Zhou and Nanseki; licensee InTech. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. © 2013 Zhou and Nanseki; licensee InTech. This is a paper distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

ȱȱǰȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱśƖǯȱ ǰȱȱ ŜŖƖȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱśŖŖŖȱ¢ǰȱ ȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱ¢ȱŘŗǯŘƖǯ


Source: field survey in 2011, consumer survey in 2008 (July)

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

Table 9.1 Demographic characteristics of the consumers and farmers

#### şǯřȱȱ

ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱȱ ȱ ȱȱ ȱ ǯȱ ¢ȱȱȱȱ¡ȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ¢ȱȱ ȱȱǰȱ ȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ¡ȱȱ ȱȂȱ ȱȱȱ¢Ȭȱǯȱȱǰȱȱȱ ¢ȱǰȱȱȱȱȬȱǰȱȱȱȱǰȱ ȱȱǰȱ¢ȱȱȂȱȱȱȱȱȬȱǽśǾǯ

ȱȱȱ ȱDZ

ȱȱǰȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱśƖǯȱ ǰȱȱ ŜŖƖȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱśŖŖŖȱ¢ǰȱ ȱȱȱȱ

Consumers of Beijing Farmers from six provincial regions

Gender

Marriage

Age

Edu

Annual Income

ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱȱ ȱ ȱȱ ȱ ǯȱ ¢ȱȱȱȱ¡ȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ¢ȱȱ ȱȱǰȱ ȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ¡ȱȱ ȱȂȱ ȱȱȱ¢Ȭȱǯȱȱǰȱȱȱ

Male Female

married single Others

20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 Over 60

Illiterate Elementary Middle School High School Undergraduate No respond

< 10,000 10,000-30,000 30,000-50,000 50,000< No respond

81.9% 18.1%

N/A

4.2% 18.6% 35.2% 28.6% 13.4%

17.1% 26.2% 43.3% 17.8% 3.2% 5.4%

12.1% 33.7% 33.0% 21.2% 1.0%

45.2% 51.3% 3.5%

142 Food Safety and the Agro-Environment in China: The Perceptions and Behaviours of Farmers and Consumers

60.2% 37.4% 2.4%

2.1% 41.2% 33.4% 16.2% 7.1%

1.2% 5.2% 13.3% 27.1% 48.0% 5.2%

2.2% 9.2% 12.3% 14.1% 22.1% 18.1% 22.0%

ȱȱȱ¢ȱŘŗǯŘƖǯ

Male Female No answer

> married single Others

> "/>18 18~29 30~49 50~64 Over 65

Illiterate Elementary Middle School High School Undergraduate Graduate

< 1,000 1,000~2,000 2,000~3,000 3,000~4,000 4,000~6,000 6,000~8,000 8,000<

Source: field survey in 2011, consumer survey in 2008 (July)

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

Table 9.1 Demographic characteristics of the consumers and farmers

Gender

Marriage

Age

Edu

Monthly Income (yuan)

şǯřȱȱ

$$\mathbf{y} = \boldsymbol{\beta}\_0 + \beta\_1 \mathbf{x}\_1 + \beta\_2 \mathbf{x}\_2 + \dots + \beta\_k \mathbf{x}\_k + \mathbf{u} \tag{9-1}$$

ȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱDZ

$$f\begin{pmatrix} y \\ \end{pmatrix} = P\_y \begin{pmatrix} 1 - \mathbf{P} \end{pmatrix}\_{1-y} \begin{pmatrix} \mathbf{y} = \mathbf{0} \ \mathbf{1} \end{pmatrix} \tag{9-2}$$

 ȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȬȱȱ¢ǰȱ¢ƽŗDzȱ ǰ ¢ƽŖDzȱ¡ȱȱȱȱȱȱȂȱ ȱȱȬȱȱǻ ǼDzȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ǯȱ ȱȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ŗřǯŖȱ ǯ


Table 9.2 Description of variables

#### şǯŚȱȱȱ

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

#### şǯŚǯŗȱȱȱ ȱȱȱ¢ȱ

ȱşǯŗȱ ȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ ȱ ȱǯȱȱŘŖŖŞǰȱȱȱȱ¢ȱǰȱȱȱǰȱȱȱȱ¢ ¢ȱȱȱ ȱ¢ȱȂȱȱȱȱ¢ǯȱȱȱǰ ȱ ȱȱȱȱȱ¢ǰȱȱȱȱǯȱȱȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ǰȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱȱȱ¢ȱȱǯȱȱ ȱȱȱşǯŗǰȱřŖƖȱȱŚŞƖȱȱȱ ¢ȱȱ¢ȱŘŖŖŞȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ¢ȱȱȱǰȱ ȱ¢ ŗƖȱȱŘŖƖȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱǰȱ ȱ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ŘŖŖŞȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱǯȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ŘŖŖŞǰȱȱ ȱ ȱǻŚŞƖǼȱȱȱȱȱǰȱ ȱȱȱȱǻřŝƖǼȱȱ ȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱŘŖŖŞǯ

Source: field survey in 2011, consumer survey in 2008

Figure 9.1 Consumers and farmers*'* attitude towards food safety

#### şǯŚǯŘȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱ

ȱşǯŘȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ ȱ¢ȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱǯȱȂȱȱȱȱ ¡ȱǯȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱǰȱȱȱ ȱǰȱȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱȱ ȱȱ¢ȱ ǯȱȱȱȱȱǻśŖƖǼȱȱȱȱȬȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱ ȱȱȱǰȱ ȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱśŖƖǯ

Source: field survey in 2011, consumer survey in 2008

#### şǯŚǯřȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱ

ȱ ȱ ȱ ŘŖŖŞȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱǯȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ŘŖŖŞǰȱȱ ȱ ȱǻŚŞƖǼȱȱȱȱȱǰȱ ȱȱȱȱǻřŝƖǼȱȱ

144 Food Safety and the Agro-Environment in China: The Perceptions and Behaviours of Farmers and Consumers

ȱşǯŘȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ ȱ¢ȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱǯȱȂȱȱȱȱ ¡ȱǯȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱǰȱȱȱ ȱǰȱȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱȱ ȱȱ¢ȱ ǯȱȱȱȱȱǻśŖƖǼȱȱȱȱȬȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱ ȱȱȱǰȱ ȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱ

ȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱŘŖŖŞǯ

Source: field survey in 2011, consumer survey in 2008

şǯŚǯŘȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱ

Source: field survey in 2011, consumer survey in 2008

Figure 9.2 Risk of grain be polluted in different stages

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

ȱȱȱȱśŖƖǯ

Figure 9.1 Consumers and farmers*'* attitude towards food safety

ȱşǯřȱȱȱşǯŚȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱ ȱ ȱȱȱǯȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ¢ȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢ǰȱ ȱȱȱȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱȱ ȱ ǯȱ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱȱȱ ¢ ȱȱȱȱǯ


Table 9.3 Information channels of both consumers and farmers


Table 9.4 Most trusted information sources to consumers and farmers

#### şǯŚǯŚȱȂȱ ȱȱȱ¢ȱ

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

ȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢Ȭȱ ȱȱȱǰȱȱȱȱȬȱǯȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ǯȱ ¢ȱ ŘřƖȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱǰȱȱȱȱȬȱǯȱ ȱ ȱ ȱȱȂȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱ ǯ

Note: G= Green Food; O= Organic Food; PF= Nuisance-free Food. The correct order is: O>G>PF Source: field survey in 2011

Figure 9.3 Farmers' understanding of food safety-related certifications

Source: filed survey in 2011

#### şǯŚǯśȱȱȱȂȱ ȱȱȱ¢Ȭȱ

ȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱ¡ȱȱȱȂȱ ȱȱ ¢Ȭȱǯȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱ ȱȱȱşǯśǯȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱǻȬȱǀȱŖǯŗǼȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱŗ ǯ


Source: field survey in 2011.

Note: G= Green Food; O= Organic Food; PF= Nuisance-free Food. The correct order is: O>G>PF

146 Food Safety and the Agro-Environment in China: The Perceptions and Behaviours of Farmers and Consumers

Figure 9.3 Farmers' understanding of food safety-related certifications

Figure 9.4 Farmers' knowledge of food safety-related certifications

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

Source: field survey in 2011

Source: filed survey in 2011

Software: SPSS 13.0 for windows.

Table 9.5 Effects of the factors on farmers' awareness

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

¢ȱ ǰȱ Ȭȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ǰȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ Ȃȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ǯȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱȱ ȱȱǰȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȬ ȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱǯȱȱ ȱȬȱ ȱ¢ȱȱȱȱǯȱ¢ȱ¢ȱȱȱ ȱȱ¢ ȱȱȱȱ ȱǯ

ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ǰȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱȱȱȱȱǯȱȱȱ¢ǰȱȱǰȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱDzȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ ȱȱ ȱȱǯȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ¢ȱ ǯȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ǯ

ŗȱȱŘȱȱȱŖǯŚŖŜȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱǯȱȱȱȱŘȱȱȱ ȱ¢ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱǯȱ ȱŘȱȱȱȱȱȱǰȱ¢ȱȱȬȱ¢ǯȱǰȱȱŘȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱǽŜǾǯ

#### şǯśȱȱȱ¢ȱ

ȱȱ ȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱǯ ȱȱ¢¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ ȱ ȱȱȱǯ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ ȱ¢ȱȱǯȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱǰȱȱ ȱȱȱȱǯȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ¢ȱǯ

ȱȱȱ ȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱǯȱǰȱȬ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȂ ȱȱȱ¢Ȭ ǯȱ ȱ ǰȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Ȭȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ǯȱ ǰȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȂȱ ȱȱȱǯ

ȱȱȱȱ¢ȱ ȱȱȱȱȱǰȱȱ ¢ȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢¢ǰȱ ǰȱ ȱ¢ȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ ¢ǯ

ȱȱ¢Ȭȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱ¢¢ǰȱ ǰȱȱȱȱ ȱǯȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱ ȱȱǯ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱǯȱȱȱǰȱȱ¡ȱ ȱȱȱȱǰȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱȂȱ Ȭ ȱȱȱ¢ȬȱDzȱ ȱȱ¡ǰȱȱ ȱȱ ȱȱ¡ȱȱȱȱȱ ȱ ȱ ȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱǯȱ ǰȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ ǯȱȱȱȱǰȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱǯ

#### 

¢ȱ¢ȱŘŖŗŖDzȱśśǻŗǼDZȱśŜşȬśŝǯ

ǽřǾ ȱǯǰȱȱǯǰȱȱǯǰȱȱǯȱȂȱȱȱȱ¢ȱ¢ ȱDZȱȱȱȱȱȱȱǰȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȬ ǰȱ
¢ȱ¢ȱŘŖŖŞDzȱśřǻŘǼDZȱśŜşȬśŝŚǯ

şǯśȱȱȱ¢ȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ǯȱ

ȱ ȱȱȱǯ

¢ȱǯ

ȱ ȱȱǯ

ȱǯ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱǯȱ

ȱȱŘŖŗŖDzȱŗŖŗȬŗŗşȱǻȱǼǯ

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

ȱȱ ȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱǯ ȱȱ¢¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ

148 Food Safety and the Agro-Environment in China: The Perceptions and Behaviours of Farmers and Consumers

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ ȱ¢ȱȱǯȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱǰȱȱ ȱȱȱȱǯȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ

ȱȱȱ ȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱǯȱǰȱȬ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȂ ȱȱȱ¢Ȭ ǯȱ ȱ ǰȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Ȭȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȂȱ ȱȱȱǯ

ȱȱȱȱ¢ȱ ȱȱȱȱȱǰȱȱ ¢ȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢¢ǰȱ ǰȱ

ȱȱ¢Ȭȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱ¢¢ǰȱ ǰȱȱȱȱ ȱǯȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱǯȱȱȱǰȱȱ¡ȱ ȱȱȱȱǰȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱȂȱ Ȭ ȱȱȱ¢ȬȱDzȱ ȱȱ¡ǰȱȱ ȱȱ ȱȱ¡ȱȱȱȱȱ ȱ ȱ ȱȱȱȱ

ǯȱȱȱȱǰȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ

ǽŗǾ ȱǯǰȱ ȱǯǰȱȱǯȱȱȱ¢ȱDZȱȱȱȱȬ ǯȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱǰȱ
¢ȱ¢ȱŘŖŗŖDzȱśśǻŗǼDZȱśŜşȬśŝǯ

ǽŘǾ ȱ ǯǰȱ ȱ ǯǰȱ ȱ ǯȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ǯ ȱǯȱǽǾȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱǰȱȱȱ¢ȱ

ȱ¢ȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ ¢ǯ

ǰȱȱȱ

ǰȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ


#### **Chapter 10**

### **Risk Governance System for Food Safety in Japan and China**

Teruaki Nanseki and Min Song

#### **10.1 Introduction**

Consumers' concerns over food safety are always crucial issues in the world. These concerns are a result of various events relating to food safety. Some notable examples of these events are bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), more commonly known as mad cow disease; residues of agro-chemicals in agricultural products and food contamination by environmental pollution. Food safety issue is more complicated because of world trade of food. As an example, Japan imports a huge amount of food from foreign countries including China, which is one of the biggest exporting countries. Therefore, it is necessary to improve the safety of not only domestic food, but also imported food for Japanese consumers. In other words, the food traceability system and risk management at the farm level are crucial for food safety in China as well as in Japan.

This chapter aims to establish an academic basis for the development of a risk governance system for food safety in East Asia using the cases of Japan and China. First, the histories of food safety policy in Japan and China are briefly reviewed. Second, the current statuses of the food traceability system in both countries are clarified. Third, consumer perception on food safety is analysed from various aspects. Fourth, the current statuses of risk management at the farm level (e.g., good agricultural practices or GAP) in both countries are described. Finally, concluding remarks is given for further research.

#### **10.2 Data source and survey method**

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

Various survey data, including several of the authors' original surveys, and government statistics are used for analysis in this chapter (Table 10.1). The authors' original survey on consumer consciousness of food safety was done in Japan and China, 2008 [1]. The respondents of the preliminary surveys are 297 in total in China. The survey in Japan was an indoor group

investigation using a survey slip. The survey in China was an individual interview. The authors' original survey on consumer consciousness on pork and milk traceability was undertaken in China [2].

An Internet survey on food traceability was conducted in Japan for 1059 registration monitors by a Japanese survey company (see goo Research (2007) [3]). A survey for 4150 food retailers was undertaken in Japan using the mail survey method by the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries [4]. A nationwide survey on public opinion on food and agriculture was undertaken in Japan of 5000 people using the individual interview method by the Cabinet Office (2008) [5].


Note: a: number of investigations, b: number of respondents, c: response rate

**Table 10.1** Major survey characteristics in Japan and China

### **10.3 Food safety policy in Japan and China**

#### **10.3.1 Food safety policy in Japan**

investigation using a survey slip. The survey in China was an individual interview. The authors' original survey on consumer consciousness on pork and milk traceability was

152 Food Safety and the Agro-Environment in China: The Perceptions and Behaviours of Farmers and Consumers

An Internet survey on food traceability was conducted in Japan for 1059 registration monitors by a Japanese survey company (see goo Research (2007) [3]). A survey for 4150 food retailers was undertaken in Japan using the mail survey method by the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries [4]. A nationwide survey on public opinion on food and agriculture was undertaken in Japan of 5000 people using the individual interview method by the Cabinet

**research method**

slips in China.

slips.

slips.

Consumers in Fukuoka, Japan and Beijing, China. Indoor group investigation using survey slips in Japan, and individual interviews and survey

Consumers in Beijing, China. Individual interviews and survey

Consumers in Beijing, China. Individual interviews and survey

20-year-old residents, individual

stratification random sampling

goo Research registration monitors, closed-door type

Internet survey

Food retailers, mail surveys a: 4150,

interviews, two-step

**Sample information (see note)**

a and b: 111 in Japan a and b: 124 in China

a: 401, b: 388(valid), c: 96.8%

a: 5000, b: 3144, c: 62.9%

b: 2085, c: 50.2%

a: unknown, b: 1059 (valid response)

**Research date and remarks**

July to October

December 2007 to January 2008

September 2008

As of January 1, 2008, January to February 2008

September 2007

2008

a and b: 209 September 2008

**Name of survey Survey respondents and**

Consumer consciousness survey concerning food safety (preliminary survey, in Japanese and Chinese)

Consumer consciousness on milk traceability (in

Consumer consciousness on pork traceability (in

Public opinion poll concerning role of food, agriculture, and farm

Food industrial trend investigation (in Japanese)

General results on residents' opinions regarding food traceability

Note: a: number of investigations, b: number of respondents, c: response rate

(in Japanese)

**Table 10.1** Major survey characteristics in Japan and China

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

Chinese)

Chinese)

village

undertaken in China [2].

Office (2008) [5].

**Reference or investigator**

The authors' original survey (2008) [2]

The authors' original survey (2008)

The authors' original survey (2008) [1]

The Cabinet Office (2008) [5]

The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (2008) [4]

goo Research (2007) [3]

In April 2002, the MAFF announced a restructuring plan for food and agriculture in order to deal with the problem of food safety. In May 2003, the Food Safety Basic Law was enacted (Figure 10.1) to promote food safety. The Food Safety Commission was established in July of the same year based on the law, and was tasked to scientifically and objectively assess the effect of food on health, and to make recommendations on food policy. In July 2003, due to changes in policy, the MAFF was restructured, and to promote risk management and to administer the changes for consumers, a safety bureau and a consumption bureau were newly established.

**Figure 10.1** Basic Food Safety Law and related laws in Japan

Subsequently, the Beef Traceability Law was enacted, and related laws, namely the Animal's Food Safety Law, Agricultural Chemicals Regulation Law, Fertilizer Control Law, Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) Technical Support Law, and others were revised.

#### **10.3.2 Food safety policy in China**

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

Since 2000, China has adopted numerous measures and programs regarding domestic food safety and international trade, in order to introduce, extend, encourage, and even mandate a traceability system in the food supply chain. In the legislation before 2001, there are specific laws or regulations concerning food safety, but little referring to traceability. However, in recent years, a traceability of food system gradually evolved into the necessary policy options. According to the law of the People's Republic of China on agricultural products' safety and quality issued in 2006, all agricultural enterprises must establish an authentic production recording system, from which data should be kept for at least two years; otherwise, transgresȬ sors will be penalized with not more than 5000 yuan. In addition, individual producers are also encouraged to keep records on their own production. Such actions are considered as the rudiments of the food traceability system in China [1].

#### **10.4 Food traceability system in Japan and China**

#### **10.4.1 Food traceability system in Japan**

The introduction ratio is high among meat retailers and large-scale retailers, but is low among vegetable and fruit retailers, and small-scale retailers. The main reasons for non-introduction are as follows. (1) There is no budget for the equipment and staff required to introduce and implement the system (41.2%). (2) The introduction method is not known (39.4%). (3) Neither the suppliers nor the customers request it. In 2007, 31.6% of the investigated food retail operators can identify the producer of all products, and 40.3% can specify the producer of some products, representing a rise of 7.7 percentage points from 2005. The main reasons for nonspecification are as follows. (1) Information about the supplier is not recorded and kept by the retailer (47.4%). (2) Information about the supplier is not recorded and kept with the trader (40.3%).

Source: Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (2008) [4]

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

**Figure 10.2** Increase in traceability system adoption in the food industry in Japan

By law, the traceability system is obligated for beef and rice. However, there is no law obligation for other types of food. Moreover, vegetables and fruits are being produced by many small-scale producers. Therefore, the standardization of the commodity is difficult, and the marketing channel complex. In addition, even if the cost is subsidized by the government for an individual producer, wholesaler, and retailer, the advantage of the traceability system introduction is not clear.

#### **10.4.2 Consumer***'***s perception of the system in Japan**

sors will be penalized with not more than 5000 yuan. In addition, individual producers are also encouraged to keep records on their own production. Such actions are considered as the

154 Food Safety and the Agro-Environment in China: The Perceptions and Behaviours of Farmers and Consumers

The introduction ratio is high among meat retailers and large-scale retailers, but is low among vegetable and fruit retailers, and small-scale retailers. The main reasons for non-introduction are as follows. (1) There is no budget for the equipment and staff required to introduce and implement the system (41.2%). (2) The introduction method is not known (39.4%). (3) Neither the suppliers nor the customers request it. In 2007, 31.6% of the investigated food retail operators can identify the producer of all products, and 40.3% can specify the producer of some products, representing a rise of 7.7 percentage points from 2005. The main reasons for nonspecification are as follows. (1) Information about the supplier is not recorded and kept by the retailer (47.4%). (2) Information about the supplier is not recorded and kept with the trader

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

By law, the traceability system is obligated for beef and rice. However, there is no law obligation for other types of food. Moreover, vegetables and fruits are being produced by many small-scale producers. Therefore, the standardization of the commodity is difficult, and the marketing channel complex. In addition, even if the cost is subsidized by the government for an individual producer, wholesaler, and retailer, the advantage of the traceability system

rudiments of the food traceability system in China [1].

**10.4.1 Food traceability system in Japan**

Source: Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (2008) [4]

introduction is not clear.

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

**Figure 10.2** Increase in traceability system adoption in the food industry in Japan

(40.3%).

**10.4 Food traceability system in Japan and China**

This section presents the consumer evaluation of the food traceability system in Japan based on a survey by a Japanese research survey company [3]. In 2007, 19.1% of the respondents understood the content of the traceability system, and 30.7% know only the name. However, only 7.1% had experienced actually examining the traceability of food. Although the consumȬ ers want to buy safe food, evaluating food safety from information provided by the producers and the distributors is difficult. Some 31.0% of the respondents could not evaluate the information provided by the system itself. Some 23.3% did not trust the information provided by the system based on their negative experiences in the past. Therefore, the consumers do not understand the importance of the system, and consequently, the resulting additional costs that would be passed onto them for implementing the system. The survey showed that 26.7% of the consumers do not want to pay any additional cost for traceability information, and 71.6% do not want to pay any additional cost of more than 4% of the price of food for traceability information (Figure 10.2). The most important purpose of the traceability system is to enable a prompt recalling of polluted commodities should a contamination occur. Traceability information is important to tracing the commodity forward and back. However, product recalls are done by distributors and producers, and not by consumers. In this sense, consumers do not need traceability information, which explains the survey results.

Source: goo Research (2008) [3]

**Figure 10.3** Additional payment for food traceability in Japan

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

The respondents who had used the system questioned the trial use of the system. According to them, the system should be used (1) because doing so is publicized in the news (58.5%), (2) to confirm production region information (32.1%), (3) to confirm producer information (24.5%), (4) to confirm traceability of the purchased food (13.2%), and to confirm the agro-chemical history of the purchased food. The survey also showed that the consumer is more interested in information on the production rather than the distribution process.

#### **10.4.3 Food traceability system in China**

As early as 1992, the "Green Food" program was launched by the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA). In April 2001, the "Action Plan for Nuisance-Free Agricultural Products" was formally carried out by the MOA. These actions in part aimed to install simple traceability systems. Up to now, even though there is no formal, unified, and standard food traceability system implemented for the whole market, increasingly more wholesale markets and agricultural product suppliers are building diverse forms of specific food safety systems, using measures such as appointing and specifying suppliers, checking receipts and tickets, and detailed market recording. A survey covering 1329 city markets and 1108 rural markets performed in 2006 by the Ministry of Commerce of China showed that 53.7% of city markets, 32% of supermarkets, 80.4% of wholesale markets of agricultural products, and 70.7% of retail markets have introduced the above initial measures to foster traceability (Ministry of Commerce of China, 2006). More than half of the frozen food available in 2008 could be traced back to its origin.

#### **10.4.4 Consumer recognition of the system in China**

The authors' original consumer survey was conducted in 2007 on the pork market of Beijing [1]. The results showed that only 1.5% of the respondents are very familiar with the system and 12.1% rather familiar (Figure 10.4). Some 26.2% have moderate knowledge and 32.2% slight knowledge. Further, 27.8% know nothing about the system. Several surveys by the authors in Japan and China indicated that the recognition rate of the food traceability by consumers in China is almost the same or higher than that in Japan. Although the objectives and methods for the surveys in both countries are similar, a further survey is needed for a more precise comparison of both countries.

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

The respondents stated that they would purchase pork with traceability information because it assures the pork quality. Surprisingly, however, they do not care about the details of the food traceability system. On the other hand, the respondents stated that they would not purchase pork with traceability information for the following reasons: lack of trust in the authenticity of the information in the system (42.1%), lack of knowledge about the system (26.7%), and potentially higher prices caused by the system (23.7%). Table 10.2 presents further results on this survey. The surveys indicated that in both countries, many consumers do not trust the information provided by food traceability. This lack of trust is therefore a key issue for food traceability.

**10.4.3 Food traceability system in China**

**10.4.4 Consumer recognition of the system in China**

more precise comparison of both countries.

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

**Figure 10.4** Consumers' knowledge level of the food traceability system in China

Source: Min et al. (2008) [1]

As early as 1992, the "Green Food" program was launched by the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA). In April 2001, the "Action Plan for Nuisance-Free Agricultural Products" was formally carried out by the MOA. These actions in part aimed to install simple traceability systems. Up to now, even though there is no formal, unified, and standard food traceability system implemented for the whole market, increasingly more wholesale markets and agricultural product suppliers are building diverse forms of specific food safety systems, using measures such as appointing and specifying suppliers, checking receipts and tickets, and detailed market recording. A survey covering 1329 city markets and 1108 rural markets performed in 2006 by the Ministry of Commerce of China showed that 53.7% of city markets, 32% of supermarkets, 80.4% of wholesale markets of agricultural products, and 70.7% of retail markets have introduced the above initial measures to foster traceability (Ministry of Commerce of China, 2006). More than half of the frozen food available in 2008 could be traced back to its origin.

156 Food Safety and the Agro-Environment in China: The Perceptions and Behaviours of Farmers and Consumers

The authors' original consumer survey was conducted in 2007 on the pork market of Beijing [1]. The results showed that only 1.5% of the respondents are very familiar with the system and 12.1% rather familiar (Figure 10.4). Some 26.2% have moderate knowledge and 32.2% slight knowledge. Further, 27.8% know nothing about the system. Several surveys by the authors in Japan and China indicated that the recognition rate of the food traceability by consumers in China is almost the same or higher than that in Japan. Although the objectives and methods for the surveys in both countries are similar, a further survey is needed for a

The respondents stated that they would purchase pork with traceability information because it assures the pork quality. Surprisingly, however, they do not care about the details of the food traceability system. On the other hand, the respondents stated that they would not purchase pork with traceability information for the following reasons: lack of trust in the authenticity of the information in the system (42.1%), lack of knowledge about the system


**Table 10.2** Reasons for choosing pork with or without traceability information in China

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

#### **10.5 Consumer***'***s perception on food safety in Japan and China**

The authors' original survey in Japan showed that consumers recognize several factors affecting food safety. Some 72.1% recognize the residues of agro-chemicals in rice, and 58.6% in vegetables. For rice, consumers also recognize heavy-metal contamination (53.2%), as well as impurities (36.0%), quality degradation (34.2%), genetic modification (27.9%), and food additives (18.9%). For vegetables, they also recognize bacillus contamination and rotting (23.4%), as well as genetic modification (9.9%) (Figure 10.5).

Similarly, the authors' survey in China showed that consumers recognize several factors that decrease food safety. Some 50.0% of the investigated consumers recognize agro-chemical residues in vegetables and 34.5% in rice (Figure 10.6). This result does not mean that agrochemical residues are the biggest factor in food contamination statistically, but rather an indication of the consumers' perception of the food safety factors. Meanwhile, 27.6% of the respondents recognize food additives in rice and 22.7% in vegetables. These results indicate that in contrast to the Japanese case, food additives are recognized as a second important factor decreasing food safety.

**Figure 10.5** Risk factors perceived as decreasing food safety in Japan

**Figure 10.6** Risk factors perceived as decreasing food safety in China

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

The survey in Japan also showed that 75.7% of consumers recognize cultivation at the farm level (in terms of operation and place) as a key risky process that decreases the safety of imported vegetables. Some 61.3% recognize this issue in domestic vegetables and 53.2% in rice, which is mainly a domestic commodity. Some 66.7% recognize food processing as a key risky process in rice, 47.7% in domestic vegetables, and 62.2% in imported vegetables (Figure 10.7).

For imported vegetables, transportation is also recognized as an important risky process. The results of the surveys in China and in Japan indicated that risk management in production and processing is important for improving consumer trust in the safety of food (Figure 10. 8).

**Figure 10.7** Risky processes (operation and place) perceived as decreasing food safety in Japan

**Figure 10.8** Risky processes (operation and place) perceived as decreasing food safety in China

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

**Figure 10.6** Risk factors perceived as decreasing food safety in China

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

**Figure 10.5** Risk factors perceived as decreasing food safety in Japan

158 Food Safety and the Agro-Environment in China: The Perceptions and Behaviours of Farmers and Consumers

The survey in Japan also showed that 75.7% of consumers recognize cultivation at the farm level (in terms of operation and place) as a key risky process that decreases the safety of imported vegetables. Some 61.3% recognize this issue in domestic vegetables and 53.2% in rice, which is mainly a domestic commodity. Some 66.7% recognize food processing as a key risky process in rice, 47.7% in domestic vegetables, and 62.2% in imported vegetables (Figure 10.7).

For imported vegetables, transportation is also recognized as an important risky process. The results of the surveys in China and in Japan indicated that risk management in production and processing is important for improving consumer trust in the safety of food (Figure 10. 8).

Furthermore, the survey in Japan also showed that more than 95% of the respondents feel that domestic rice (99.1%) and vegetables (95.5%) are safe (Figure 10.9). On the other hand, more than 80% of the respondents feel that imported rice (82.0%) and vegetables (71.2%) are unsafe. The survey in Japan by the Cabinet Office (2008) surveyed the consumers on whether they selected domestic products or imports when buying food. Some 89.0% of the respondents chose domestic food and only 0.5% chose imported food. Some 89.1% of those who selected domestic farm products identified food safety as a selection criterion, along with quality (56.7%), freshness (51.6%), and taste (28.0%). On the other hand, 80.0% of those who selected imported farm products answered that the most important food selection criterion is price, followed by freshness (26.7%) and safety (20.0%). The rate of food self-sufficiency (supply calorie based) of Japan is 40%. Further, Japan imports a huge amount of food from foreign countries every year. Therefore, it is necessary to improve the safety of not only domestic food, but also imported food.

**Figure 10.9** Consumers*'* perceptions on the safety of rice and vegetables in Japan

#### **10.6 Risk management at the farm level in Japan and China**

#### **10.6.1 GAP as a risk management approach at the farm level**

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

Good agricultural practices (GAP) and good manufacturing practices (GMP) are sets of principles, regulations, and technical recommendations applicable to production, processing, and food transport, and that address human health care, environmental protection, and improvement of conditions of workers and their families [6]. GAP are a risk management approach at the farm level for safe food production through sustainable farming with low negative environmental impacts. There are various types of GAP around the world. GlobalȬ GAP, formerly known as EUREPGAP, is a nongovernmental GAP.

EUREPGAP was established in 1997 as an initiative by retailers belonging to the Euro-Retailer Produce Working Group (EUREP). Over the last 10 years, as global trading increased, a growing number of producers and retailers around the world began to adopt the practices (Figure 10.10). GlobalGAP are the most acceptable GAP in the world; as of April 2008, 81000 producers from 80 countries and regions are GlobalGAP-certified. Among them, 271 are from the People's Republic of China and six from Japan. In 2011, GlobalGAP-certified producers around the world reached 112600.

Source: GlobalGAP (2012) [7]

**Figure 10.9** Consumers*'* perceptions on the safety of rice and vegetables in Japan

**10.6.1 GAP as a risk management approach at the farm level**

GAP, formerly known as EUREPGAP, is a nongovernmental GAP.

around the world reached 112600.

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

**10.6 Risk management at the farm level in Japan and China**

160 Food Safety and the Agro-Environment in China: The Perceptions and Behaviours of Farmers and Consumers

Good agricultural practices (GAP) and good manufacturing practices (GMP) are sets of principles, regulations, and technical recommendations applicable to production, processing, and food transport, and that address human health care, environmental protection, and improvement of conditions of workers and their families [6]. GAP are a risk management approach at the farm level for safe food production through sustainable farming with low negative environmental impacts. There are various types of GAP around the world. GlobalȬ

EUREPGAP was established in 1997 as an initiative by retailers belonging to the Euro-Retailer Produce Working Group (EUREP). Over the last 10 years, as global trading increased, a growing number of producers and retailers around the world began to adopt the practices (Figure 10.10). GlobalGAP are the most acceptable GAP in the world; as of April 2008, 81000 producers from 80 countries and regions are GlobalGAP-certified. Among them, 271 are from the People's Republic of China and six from Japan. In 2011, GlobalGAP-certified producers

**Figure 10.10** GlobalGAP-certified producers

#### **10.6.2 GAPs in Japan and China**

The Japan Good Agricultural Initiative (JGAI), established by a group of producers, began its activities, including the extension of GAP, in April 2005. The society, JGAP, was established in November 2006 as an incorporated nonprofit organization, and developed the JGAP Code for vegetables, fruits, and grain. The JGAP has now completed a complete benchmarking procedure, which is fully recognized as a GlobalGAP Integrated Farm Assurance (IFA) Version 3.0 equivalent. As of October 2008, 87 producers, including one in Korea, had obtained this certification. In July 2012, JGAP-certified producers reached 235, including two producers in Korea and Thailand.

In China, the Certification and Accreditation Administration of the People's Republic of China (CNCA) established the China Good Agricultural Practices (ChinaGAP) benchmark system based on the EUREPGAP. On December 31, 2005, the CNCA published the ChinaGAP national standards GB/T20014.1-20014.11-2005 and ChinaGAP rules, both of which apply to grain, fruits, vegetables, dairy cows, beef cattle, sheep, pigs, and poultry. Some 347 enterprises have applied for the ChinaGAP certification, and as of June 2008, 230 enterprises have acquired it [8]. In 2012, the ChinaGAP had certified a total of 108023 producers [9]. This tendency may be because the ChinaGAP is strongly promoted by the government for the export of agricultural products, while the JGAP is mainly promoted by a private organization because Japan's exports of farm products are not as large.

#### **10.6.3 Appropriate agro-chemical use at the farm level**

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

Appropriate agro-chemical use is a major element of GAP. For example, the JGAP (Version 2.1 forvegetableandfruits)has129controlpoints,46(36%)ofwhicharerelatedtoappropriateagrochemical use. Furthermore, consumers feel that agro-chemicals are a major risk factor decreasȬ ing the safety of food in both Japan and China. An information and communication technologybased (ICT-based) decision support system for the risk management of agro-chemical use has

been developed, which has been used by more than 47000 farmers as of October 2012 in Japan [10]. This risk management system can be integrated into the food traceability system, and this integrationcontributestoincreasedfoodsafety.ThesystemisexpectedtobeintroducedinChina in order to decrease the risk of inappropriate use of agro-chemicals.

#### **10.7 Concluding remarks**

This chapter first reviewed the histories of food safety policy in Japan and China briefly. Next, it clarified the current statuses of the food traceability systems in both countries, and then analyzed consumer perception on food safety from various aspects. Finally, it described the current statuses of risk management at the farm level (i.e., GAP) in both countries.

The authors' various surveys in Japan and China indicated that the recognition rate of the food traceability system by consumers is similar in both countries. The surveys indicated that many consumers do not trust the information provided by food traceability in both countries significantly. This lack of trust is therefore a key issue relating to food traceability. The authors' surveys in both countries showed that both Chinese and Japanese consumers recognize agrochemical residues as a key risk factor decreasing food safety. Further, the surveys showed that most consumers in both countries recognize cultivation at the farm level (operation and place) as a key risky process decreasing food safety. This result implies that risk management at the farm level, including through GAP, is key to promoting consumer trust in food safety. An integration of the food traceability system and the risk management system at the farm level is therefore essential for food safety. To establish the academic basis of the development of such a system, further researches on risk management at both farm level and regional level, as well as consumer perceptions of food safety, are needed.

#### **References**


AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

been developed, which has been used by more than 47000 farmers as of October 2012 in Japan [10]. This risk management system can be integrated into the food traceability system, and this integrationcontributestoincreasedfoodsafety.ThesystemisexpectedtobeintroducedinChina

162 Food Safety and the Agro-Environment in China: The Perceptions and Behaviours of Farmers and Consumers

This chapter first reviewed the histories of food safety policy in Japan and China briefly. Next, it clarified the current statuses of the food traceability systems in both countries, and then analyzed consumer perception on food safety from various aspects. Finally, it described the

The authors' various surveys in Japan and China indicated that the recognition rate of the food traceability system by consumers is similar in both countries. The surveys indicated that many consumers do not trust the information provided by food traceability in both countries significantly. This lack of trust is therefore a key issue relating to food traceability. The authors' surveys in both countries showed that both Chinese and Japanese consumers recognize agrochemical residues as a key risk factor decreasing food safety. Further, the surveys showed that most consumers in both countries recognize cultivation at the farm level (operation and place) as a key risky process decreasing food safety. This result implies that risk management at the farm level, including through GAP, is key to promoting consumer trust in food safety. An integration of the food traceability system and the risk management system at the farm level is therefore essential for food safety. To establish the academic basis of the development of such a system, further researches on risk management at both farm level and regional level,

[1] Min S., Liu L., Wang Z., Nanseki T. Consumers' attitudes to food traceability system in China: evidences from the pork market in Beijing, Journal of the Faculty of AgriȬ

[2] Xu Y., Nanseki T., Zeng Y. Food safety issues and consumer perception in China. Nanseki T. [Ed] Food risk and safety in East Asia, Agriculture and Forestry Statistics

[3] goo Research. General results on residents' opinionsregarding food traceability, 2007:

[4] The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries of Japan. Food industrial trend investigation 2008: http://www.maff.go.jp/toukei/sokuhou/data/syokuhin2007/

current statuses of risk management at the farm level (i.e., GAP) in both countries.

in order to decrease the risk of inappropriate use of agro-chemicals.

as well as consumer perceptions of food safety, are needed.

culture, Kyushu University 2008; 53(2): 569-574.

http://research.goo.ne.jp/database/data/000665/ (in Japanese).

Publishing Inc. 2010: 101-119 (in Japanese).

syokuhin2007.pdf (in Japanese).

AH Formatter V6.0 MR4a (Evaluation) http://www.antennahouse.com/

**10.7 Concluding remarks**

**References**




### *Edited by Teruaki Nanseki and Min Song*

The prediction of China's rise is the subject of this book. The main ideas of this book are derived from Kanshokufuji, a new concept proposed by the chief editor of Prof. Nanseki, pertaining to a sound food system in a sound agro-environment. It implies that food supply and demand are non-separable in terms of location due to the importance of retaining the suitable condition of the environment and biodiversity in the region. This concept is necessary and useful for coping with environmental issues and related food safety issues. From this view point, several integrated surveys in both rural and urban areas of China were conducted by the food risk research group at the Research Institute for East Asia Environments (RIEAE), Kyushu University to reveal the current status of the environment, food, and agriculture in this country. The results of the surveys are introduced in this book, along with implications and recommendations. We hope this book be referential for policy-makers, researchers and industry personnel relating to food, agriculture and environment.

Photo by Apirut / Shutterstock

Food Safety and Agro-Environment in China: Perceptions and Behaviors of Farmers and Consumers

Food Safety and Agro-

Environment in China

Perceptions and Behaviors

of Farmers and Consumers

*Edited by Teruaki Nanseki and Min Song*