Prof Patrick Wall - University College Dublin (UCD), Ireland

Patrick Wall is the Principal Investigator on the FoodRisC project and Associate Professor of Public Health in UCD’s School of Public Health and Population Sciences, which hosts the National Nutrition Surveillance Centre. His teaching and research interests include food- borne diseases, lifestyle related diseases and health damaging consumer behaviour. He was the first Chief Executive of the Irish Food Safety Authority and the second chairperson of the European Food Safety Authority. Patrick qualified in Veterinary Medicine at University College Dublin, in Human Medicine in the Royal College of Surgeons of Ireland. He has an MSc in infectious diseases from the University of London, an MBA from the Michael Smurfit School of Business and a member in a number of public health institutions.

Anne-Laure Gassin - European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Italy

Anne-Laure Gassin has been Director of Communications at the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) since 2003. She is responsible for developing and implementing EFSA’s communications strategy, with the overall goal of providing effective, consistent, accurate and timely information for all stakeholders and the wider public, based on EFSA’s scientific advice. She chairs a communications network of national food safety agencies to help foster coherence in risk communications on food-related issues across the EU. Before joining EFSA, she worked at the European Commission’s Directorate General Health and Consumers. Prior to that, she also spent over 15 years with the Kellogg Company with responsibility for nutrition communications and regulatory affairs.

Laura Smillie - European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Italy

Laura Smillie joined EFSA as Senior Communications Advisor in 2010 where she plays a key role in defining communications approaches based on EFSA’s strategic priorities. Having completed a Masters in European Communications, she spent two years at Deloitte, followed by five years as a Senior Consultant with Ogilvy Public Relations Worldwide. Thereafter, Laura was Head of Communications at the European Food Information Council for five years. In addition to her practical experience in risk communications, media relations and stakeholder management, she has developed and published a model for optimising the communication of scientific risk uncertainty.

Laura Smillie is the moderator of the first and second sessions:

Where do Europeans seek information about food risks and benefits?

Framing the message: Challenges of communicating Risks and Benefits

Prof George Gaskell - London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE), UK

George Gaskell, Professor of Social Psychology, is Pro-director of the London School of Economics and Political Science. He is a member of EFSA’s Expert Group on Risk Communication and in this role he contributed to the design and analysis of the 2005 and 2010 Eurobarometer surveys on food risks. His research focuses on science and society – in particular the issues of risk and trust; how values influence people’s views about technological innovation, and the governance of science and technology.

Trust in Food Safety; what European consumers tell us

Prof George Gaskell

Findings from The European Food Safety Authority’s 2010 Food Risk Survey:

Across Europe there are three broad areas of concern about food risk (1) Contamination and adulteration (2) Food origins and safety controls (3) Diet-related acute and chronic illnesses.

There are notable cross-national variations in the extent of concern across these three issues and the way in which they are framed in particular countries. Scientists, Food Safety Authorities and European Institutions are widely trusted to give accurate information about serious food risks. Health professionals, family and friends, consumer and environmental protection organisations are also trusted. Trust in information found on the internet is very low across Europe. Within the food chain, only farmers are trusted, however not manufacturers or the supermarkets.

Trust in public authorities has remained largely unchanged since 2005. Changes in particular aspects of trust are generally small in magnitude, but have moved in the direction of greater confidence. In about a third of the countries, a greater percentage of respondents trust authorities to act quickly when citizen’s health is in danger, and also have greater trust in public authorities to do a good job at keeping the public informed.

The perception that food has become safer than it was 10 years ago, engagement with food, perceiving food as a stressor and low generalised risk sensitivity are associated with greater trust in public authorities.

It is suggested that EFSA’s recommendations for effective risk communication – transparency, timeliness and independence are also the building blocks of trust.

Dr Margôt Kuttschreuter - University of Twente, The Netherlands

Dr Margôt Kuttschreuter is attached to the department of Psychology of Conflict, Risk & Safety at the University of Twente, the Netherlands. Her research speciality is in the field of risk perception and risk communication, in particular relation to food issues. She has ample experience with a large variety of qualitative and quantitative research strategies, such as in-depth interviews, surveys (including data analysis through structural equation modelling) and experiments. Margôt oversees research projects, coaches and advises bachelor and master students on their thesis research, and teaches courses on risk psychology and communication. She is a council member of the Society for Risk Analysis and past-president of the Society for Risk Analysis Europe.

Channels used to seek information on food risks and benefits -

Insights from the FoodRisC project

Dr Margôt Kuttschreuter

The changes in the media landscape as result of the growing number of Internet websites and the rise of social media pose a challenge to risk communicators. Based on the premise that for communication to be effective, it should address consumers’ concerns and should correspond to consumers’ information seeking behaviour, within the FoodRisC project we examined the channels that consumers would use when seeking information on issues related to food risks and benefits. To this end, we carried out a pan-European survey among 7.000 consumers in 9 European countries and we executed an explorative study on actual web browsing behaviour among 300 mothers of young children in the Netherlands.

In the survey, the channel that was found to be preferred the most for information on a food risk situation concerning fresh vegetables was the television news, followed by an Internet search engine such as Google. When they would like to know more about this food risk issue, European consumers were most inclined to use the Internet and start seeking through a search engine. They would also keep an eye out for information in the traditional mass media, but they would not be inclined to consult social media. Consumers from the south of Europe were most inclined to look for additional information, regardless of the communication channel. Motives for information seeking were a general wish to be well informed, the relevance of food issues to the consumers’ personal situation and the expectation of their friends, relatives and other connections that they be well informed about such issues.

The web experiment showed that consumers on average used 4 search terms and that the combination of these search terms had a very similar structure. The webpages that were actually visited by the mothers depended on the content of the search query. The webpages that were visited most could be classified in four groups: social media, the Dutch Nutrition

Centre, news media and (commercial) websites on health related issues. Although the participants expressed a preference for webpages by consumer organisations, such pages were hardly visited. Overall, the participants were satisfied with the results of their search.

Taken together, these results suggest that effective risk communication that answers to consumer information seeking should incorporate at least three modes of information transfer: communication through the traditional mass media (if feasible), communication through Internet websites and communication that allows consumers to respond and upload information themselves. This last form of communication seems to have the potential to tap consumer concerns, to reach out to specific consumer groups with information that addresses their concerns and to build the trust in the organisation that is necessary for effective communication. Such social media elements could also be added to an Internet website. Country differences in media use and individual characteristics call for adaptation of a communication strategy developed at the European level to the individual country in which it will be employed.

Aine Regan - University College Dublin (UCD), Ireland

Aine Regan graduated from National University of Ireland, Galway, with a BA in Psychology (2009) and MSc in Health Psychology (2010). Following graduation, she took up her current position as Research Assistant on the FP7 EU funded project, FoodRisC. This project is investigating consumer perception and communication of food risks and benefits. She is due to submit her PhD, which she carried out within the FoodRisC project, in January 2014. Her main research interests include psycho-social predictors of physical activity and sedentary behaviour in youths, and public perceptions of food risks and benefits, with a specific interest in consumer understanding of food risk and benefit information which may be confusing, conflicting, or uncertain.

The impact of conflicting food risk and benefit messages on consumer perceptions: results from FoodRisC Aine Regan There is concern that consumers are encountering increasing amounts of food and nutrition information, much of which is perceived as conflicting and confusing. Health risk and benefit messages that pertain to the same food (e.g. oily fish, red meat) may leave consumers unsure about the health consequences and advisability of consuming food, where conflict is inferred between the risk and benefit messages.

Within the FoodRisC project, we carried out qualitative and quantitative research to investigate consumer reactions to food and nutrition information which may be perceived as conflicting and confusing. This research included one-to-one in-depth interviews with European consumers, analysis of comments to online media news articles, and experimental vignette studies with European consumers. The findings from this collection of research indicated that hearing about the risks and benefits pertaining to the same food is perceived as conflicting and confusing and there is a perception that much of the information relating to nutrition and food is characterised in this way. This is a significant area of research as our findings indicate that conflicting information has the potential to cause negative appraisals which could be detrimental for communicators, but also for consumers if they opt to disregard future nutrition advice as a result of scepticism and mistrust in confusing food and nutrition information.

Tony Flood - International Food Information Council (IFIC), US

Having worked with the International Food Information Council (IFIC) for 18 years, Tony Flood is now Senior Director for Food Safety and Defense. He directs the development and continuation of risk/crisis communication programs among academic, government and industry stakeholders on emerging food safety and defence topics. Tony obtained a Communications BS degree at James Madison University and completed risk communication course work at the Harvard School of Public Health’s Center for Continuing Professional Education in the US. He is an active member of the International Association for Food Protection (IAFP) and the Institute of Food Technologists (IFT).

Framing the message: The challenges of communicating risks and benefits Tony Flood According to recent surveys conducted by the International Food Information Council (IFIC) Foundation, approximately 73% of Americans cite at least one media source of food safety information. In recent years we have seen an increase in media attention to food safety issues both in the USA and across the globe – European horsemeat scandal; Clostridium botulinum in New Zealand dairy products; multi state cyclosporia outbreak in the U.S.; Indian school food poisoning and others. As news about foodborne illness outbreaks and fears about chemical contamination span the globe, consumers in the USA are beginning to give a little or a lot of thought about these issues (IFIC Foundation 2013).

Given consumers’ shortened attention span, media sound bites of 140 characters or less requires that we respond to consumers’ interest and concerns in a manner that is clear, quick, timely, and meaningful to them. This session will provide insights into consumer attitudes toward chemicals in food. In providing a roadmap through the consumer thought process - it will identify and suggest optimal approaches to balance the risk / benefit discussion and to improve public understanding about chemicals in food to help consumers feel confident in the safety of their food choices.

Dr Mary Schmidl - University of Minnesota, US

Dr Mary Schmidl is an Adjunct Professor in the Department of Food Science and Nutrition at the University of Minnesota where her focus is on obesity, functional foods, dietary supplements and their impact on global public health and wellness. She has had a distinguished career as a scientist, research director, educator and leader of public and private agencies both in the US and around the world, for more than 40 years. She was the Director of Research, Clinical Division of Novartis (Nestle, Inc.). Prior to this, Mary directed the Nutrition Research Department for AG Bayer. She has commercialised more than 75 new products, authored or co-authored over 100 refereed research papers, magazine articles, patents, book chapters and books and is a frequent speaker at conferences worldwide.

Mary Schmidl is the moderator of the third session: How has the emergence of social media impacted on food risk/benefit communications?

Pieter Rutsaert - Ghent University, Belgium

Pieter Rutsaert graduated as a bio-engineer in Tropical Natural Resources Management at the University of Leuven, Belgium, in 2009. In September 2009, he joined the Department of Agricultural Economics at Ghent University as a full time doctoral researcher on the FoodRisC project. The title of his dissertation is ‘The Value of Social Media in Food Risk and Benefit Communication’. He has a background in agricultural economics and consumer behaviour, and specific expertise in experimental auctions, food risk communication and social media. Pieter is also author and co-author of various scientific publications in peer-reviewed journals and presented his results at several international conferences.

The role of social media as part of a communication strategy - FoodRisC results Pieter Rutsaert The proliferation of social media applications such as online communities, social networking sites, or blogs, gives the public new means for receiving, and more importantly, providing information. With the introduction of web 2.0 technologies and social media, consumers occupy a central position as communicators and sources of information. These technological developments have led to a revival of ‘prosumption’, a development in the consumption-production relation in which consumers take over the work of producers. The current digital environment enables an active consumer role. Social media makes it possible for consumers to group themselves in communities around a collective purpose and contribute to the production or dissemination of information. The global nature of today’s food chains asks for a global approach in communicating food-related risk and benefit issues. The role of social media as a channel in food risk and benefit communication will be evaluated on the level of information acquisition, information seeking and public participation. Many opportunities are opening up for food risk communicators by the wide variety of social media applications and the digital environment with enormous abilities for storing, retrieving and reusing information. Developing a social media strategy will require organisations to identify the aims and objectives of engaging with social media for their organisation, as well as identifying available resources (time and money) for social media activities.

Adrian Moss - Focus Business Communications, UK

Adrian is Managing Director of Focus Business Communications (Focus), a Digital Communications Agency based in Southampton in the UK, that he co-founded in 2004. He has been in communications for over 30 years – in the last 18 years he has been in the digital space. Focus specialises in audio and video production, webinars and podcasts and was one of the UK pioneers in the use of social media to help clients create and develop online communities as well as analyse and measure customer satisfaction and feedback. Focus works with a range of clients across the public and private sector.

Tracking and Analysis of Social Media - FoodRisC results Adrian Moss Social media use is continuing to grow rapidly with forecasts that nearly one in four people online will use social networks in 2013 and the number of regular users will exceed 2.5 billion by 2017.1

Recent statistics show the following active monthly users over one billion on Facebook, 288 million on Twitter, 277 million on Sina Weibo (China) and 359 million on Google+.2 & 3

Research has shown that members of online communities can be influenced by what fellow community members are saying. When traditional media and social media are both covering a developing story the speed and awareness and hence impact on the wider public can increase significantly. The emergence and rapid growth of mobile social media on smartphones, tablets and other portable devices can only increase this further as news in effect is being delivered in real time wherever we are.

In the social media era it is critical that those responsible for communicating with the public – governments, government agencies or commercial organisations – understand what is being said, by whom and where they are sourcing their information. This way any necessary action to address public concern, misunderstanding or misinformation can be taken quickly and effectively and the results measured by monitoring the online ‘buzz’.

In this presentation we will look at the process taken to identify, select and deploy a powerful and robust tracking and analysis tool to monitor social media and online conversations, and also share the practical steps that can be taken by organisations to help reduce the negative effects of a developing crisis.

1 http://www.emarketer.com/Article/Social-Networking-Reaches-Nearly-One-Four-Around-

World/1009976#KfejEVqwOeyazloW.99 2

http://growingsocialmedia.com/social-media-statistics-and-facts-of-2013-infographic/ 3http://www.businessinsider.com/foreign-social-networks-take-on-facebook-2013-5

Dr Mary Friel - European Food Information Council (EUFIC), Belgium

Mary joined EUFIC as Food Safety & Risk Communication Manager in February 2012. She leads the organisations food safety and quality activities. Prior to joining EUFIC, Mary worked with the Food Safety Authority of Ireland as technical executive in food microbiology. She also worked on a short-term consultancy contract with the Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations (FAO), has lectured part-time on Food Regulatory Affairs in the Dublin Institute of Technology and has worked in a technical role for an indigenous Irish food company. Mary holds a Bachelor of Science (Honours) degree and a PhD in Industrial Microbiology from University College Dublin.

Social and traditional media reporting during food crises - Findings from the FoodRisC project Dr Mary Friel European Food Information Council, Belgium A specific area of research within the FoodRisC project was to explore the role played by traditional and social media during food crises. To do this, media coverage of three food crises was monitored and analysed:

i) The Irish dioxin crisis in pork, 2008

ii) The German dioxin crisis in pork, chicken and eggs, 2010/2011

iii) The German EHEC (enterohaemorrhagic Escherichia coli) crisis in sprouted seeds, 2011

Using specific media monitoring tools, traditional and social media reporting was monitored across a number of countries. A quantitative analysis was carried out to investigate the volume of reporting, the speed of reporting and the significance of specific social media channels. A content analysis was also undertaken to gain a better understanding of the message communicated to the public through traditional and social media. This is important because the media has complete control over the information it transmits to the public. It can therefore influence the public’s attitude, perception and behaviour. Specific attention was given to the primary source quoted, primary story topic and the tone of communication.

This presentation provides an overview of the findings from this research. They provide valuable lessons for those charged with the remit of food safety and risk communication.

Dr Christine Prue - Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), US

Dr Christine Prue is the Associate Director for Behavioral Science at the National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases at the CDC in the US. She works to apply and advance the science of health behavior and health communication to prevent and control infectious diseases. Since 2008 she has led communication response efforts to numerous foodborne outbreaks, conducted research to develop messages promoting consumer food safety behaviors, guided communication of new scientific findings, and led efforts to engage public health, industry, and consumer advocacy partners. She is the co-developer of CDC’s new Clear Communication Index, a research-based tool to plan and assess communication products.

CDC’s perspectives on the role of social media in communicating food risks Dr Christine Prue Authors: Christine Prue*, Dana Pitts, and Amy Heldman

Each year roughly 1 in 6 people in the United States gets sick from eating contaminated food. Local, state, and federal public health officials track sicknesses, hospitalizations, and deaths in addition to investigating outbreaks to find the food, or the settings where food is served, that makes people sick. Investigators also look into the circumstances that led to the food becoming contaminated so that lessons learned from their investigation can inform food industry practices and policies.

Food risk communication offers communication professionals many opportunities to apply communication science and practices from many disciplines including: social marketing, risk communication, health literacy, science communication, organizational branding, media relations, partner engagement, and visual communication/graphic design. CDC works to provide content when, where, and how users want it, so social media is an important part of our communication strategy.

This presentation will offer examples of CDC’s communication about food risks before, during, and after outbreaks along with a description of how social media was used. Because of all the interesting scientific intersections of communicating food risks, effective use of social media is just one of many challenges that communication professionals face. The presenter will describe work that is aimed at addressing these challenges.

*Christine Prue will present this work

Dr John O’Brien - Nestle Research Centre, Switzerland

Dr John O’Brien is Head of Food Safety and Quality at the Nestle Research Centre in Lausanne, Switzerland. He was Chief Executive of the Food Safety Authority of Ireland and held a number of senior posts with the Danone Group in Paris. He is currently Chairman of the Board of Directors of the International Life Sciences Institute, Europe, a member of the International Scientific Advisory Board at Queen’s University and a visiting professor at the University of Ulster. A graduate of UCC and the University of Surrey, John’s training was in toxicology, food chemistry and food science.

Dr Suzan Fiack - Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Germany

Dr Suzan Fiack is head of the Press and Public Relations unit in the department, Risk Communication at the Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) in Germany. The BfR is a scientific institution that advises the Federal Government on questions of food, chemical and product safety. The unit is responsible for communication and PR activities for the institute. They translate scientific findings into easily comprehensible information and give recommendations on consumer health protection. Before the BfR, Suzan worked as a scientist at Schering AG and was Business Development Director at Wiley-Blackwell, John Wiley & Sons. She received her PhD in pharmacy from the Humboldt University in Berlin.

Kate Trollope - EU Food Policy, UK

Kate Trollope edits EU Food Policy, the online news service she set up three years ago on food legislation and food policy in Brussels (www.eufoodpolicy.com). She has more than 20 years of experience reporting on food issues, covering food labelling, health claims, additives, food fraud, genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and nanotechnology – to name just a few of the hot topics. EU Food Policy provides subscribers with ‘breaking news’ covering the major stories as they happen and also publishes a weekly newsletter on Friday morning. She has a degree in English from Exeter University and is married with two teenage daughters.

Kate Trollope is the moderator of the 4th session: Engaging with journalists and bloggers.

Edward Sykes - Science Media Centre (SMC), UK

Ed Sykes is Head of Mental Health & Neuroscience at the Science Media Centre (SMC) in London, UK. SMC is an independent press office that helps ensure the public have access to the best scientific evidence and expertise through the news media when science hits the headlines. The SMC believes scientists can have a huge impact on the way the media cover scientific issues, by engaging more quickly and more effectively with the stories that are influencing public debate. Ed has worked at the UK and Australian SMCs, leading on topics as diverse as genetic modification (GM), stem cells, climate change, the Fukushima nuclear crisis and the swine flu pandemic, for which he gave evidence to the Hine review.

How to handle controversy: Food and the media Edward Sykes No matter how controversial the topic is, there are good ways of handling it and there are bad ways. Unfortunately, most organisations take what they think is the easy route and wait for it all to blow over but that is when it all goes horribly wrong. Saying “no comment” does

not help! I have worked with scientists on issues such as GM crops, animal research, stem cell research, nanotechnology and nuclear power and I will explain how using a few simple rules can make a massive difference in how the story is covered by the media. Stick to the science, describe what is known and what is yet to be established, don’t hype or over-claim, discuss relative and absolute risks, tell people the news (good and bad) as early as possible, always try and work with the specialist journalists and above all, remember that every story is an opportunity for experts to tell the truth about the science.

Rebecca Wells - City University London, UK

Rebecca Wells is a PhD candidate in Food Policy and Journalism at City University, London. Her PhD research analyses the interaction between food policy and media coverage – looking specifically at diet’s role in the prevention of cancer. Rebecca also teaches on a Science and Society module at City University’s Journalism Department. She was a journalist at the BBC for many years, including working as a producer on BBC Radio 4’s respected, The Food Programme. Her work won the Glenfiddich Award for Best Radio Programme, the Guild of Food Writers Michael Smith Award for Work on British Food and the Guild of Beer Writers Silver Tankard Award.

Reporting Food Risk – what is the role of the journalist? Rebecca Wells The presentation explores the key challenges food journalists face when reporting food risks and benefits, and also questions the role of the journalist in this area. The media is often cited as one of the primary sources of health information, yet research has shown that some media coverage of nutrition messages can be sensationalised, inaccurate and unbalanced. Journalists have been shown to struggle with the complexity of food risk and food science. They have been seen to misunderstand the statistics and interpretation of risk. They have been accused of creating false balance’. However, research also recognizes that journalists operate in a highly contested arena, with tensions between key sources such as industry, non‐governmental organisations, scientists and government. These sources compete for media coverage – sometimes to put an issue on the agenda, at other times lobbying journalists to frame issues or messages in a particular way.

Therefore the journalist’s role is more complex than simply translating risk messages for a lay audience. Many mass media organisations are in flux – facing increasing competition from new media and social media. Some have argued that the resultant increasing economic pressure on mass media organisations reduces the capability of their journalists to both report responsibly and navigate this contested terrain effectively.

Prof Monique Raats - University of Surrey, UK

Professor Monique Raats is Director of the Food, Consumer Behaviour and Health Research Centre at the University of Surrey. Her research portfolio of national and European research projects is wide ranging in terms of methods used and topics, including food-related communication. She has published over 85 peer-reviewed papers, 16 book chapters, and co-edited two books (The Psychology of Food Choice; Food for the Ageing Population). She is a founding member of the International Society of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity. In 2011 Monique joined the UK’s Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition and is a member of its Subgroup on Maternal and Child Nutrition.

Drivers and barriers in food risk/benefit communications for journalists and bloggers - FoodRisC results Prof Monique Raats A series of semi-structured interviews were conducted with professional journalists, expert bloggers and hobby bloggers in four countries (Belgium, Germany, Spain, UK), all of whom had reported on at least one of two major food risk events (Dioxin contamination of animal feed (Jan 2011) and Enterohaemorrhagic Escherichia coli (EHEC) contamination of vegetables (May 2011)) to better understand (1) how they perceive food risk and benefit stories in terms of the issues they chose to write about, (2) the sources they use to generate their stories and (3) their perceived roles as communicators.

Journalists publishing by both classical and online channels consider themselves primarily as qualified and professional, and perceive themselves to be operating within a framework of recognised journalistic standards. Marked differences were observed during the analysis between the way in which ‘expert bloggers’ perceive themselves, the way in which they operate in terms of food risk and benefit communication and their perceived roles when compared to ‘hobby bloggers’.

There is clear potential for official sources responsible for food risk/benefit communication to maximise on the benefits offered by social media to quickly disseminate information to a wider audience although it is important to recognise new social media as channels which must not be confused with sources. However, on the whole, this research highlights the continued importance of maintaining and enhancing traditional channels such as official websites, email alerts and telephone contact. It may also be beneficial for official sources to develop a greater understanding of the needs expressed here by professional journalists to be able to access additional information over and above what is being officially published such that they may develop their articles into contextualised, balanced and perhaps even more importantly interesting stories for their audiences.

Caroline Scott-Thomas, Foodnavigator, France

Caroline Scott-Thomas is an editor at FoodNavigator, an exclusively online publication specialising in issues that affect the food and beverage industry. Her particular focus is the European market, although she brings global experience, having previously worked for FoodNavigator-USA and FoodNavigator-Asia. Prior to completing a Master’s degree in journalism from Edinburgh Napier University, she had spent five years working as a chef. She works from William Reed Business Media’s Montpellier office in the south of France.

Josephine Wills – European Food Information Council (EUFIC), Belgium

Having qualified from the Royal Veterinary College in London in 1981, Dr Jo Wills spent several years in veterinary practice and earned her PhD from the University of Bristol Veterinary School, in 1986. After several years postdoctoral research at the University of Manchester Medical School, she joined the company Mars, where she worked in science, communication, and regulatory roles for 18 years, latterly as European Head of Scientific and Regulatory Affairs for all product categories. In January 2006, Jo was appointed to Director General of the European Food Information Council, based in Brussels. Jo has published over 100 scientific papers, edited four books and lectured extensively worldwide.

Jo Wills is the moderator of the 5th session: Key challenges for future food-related risk communications.

Prof Alan Reilly - Food Safety Authority of Ireland (FSAI)

Prof Alan Reilly is Chief Executive of the Food Safety Authority of Ireland (FSAI) and Adjunct Associate Professor at the Institute of Food and Health, School of Agriculture, Food Science and Veterinary Medicine, University College Dublin (UCD). After studying at UCD, Ireland, and at Brunel University, UK, he has worked for over 39 years in the area of food safety. Before joining the FSAI in 1999, he worked for the Food Safety Programme of the World Health Organization (WHO) in Geneva, Switzerland, as well as for the Natural Resources Institute of the University of Greenwich, UK. He acts as an adviser to national and international food safety organisations such as the WHO and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).

Key challenges for future food-related risk communication – what we have learned from the horsemeat incident? Prof Alan Reilly The adulteration of beef products on the European market with horsemeat was first identified by the Food Safety Authority of Ireland in January 2013. A major food fraud scandal unfolded over the next 3 – 4 months that involved major food brands and retail businesses all over Europe. The impact of this incident varied from loss of market share, customers looking to competitors for the supply of safer products and loss of consumer confidence in implicated brand names. It resulted in severe economic damage and the erosion of food businesses’ reputations, as the media sensationalised stories and public trust was eroded.

The horsemeat incident has demonstrated that national food control authorities need to have robust risk communication plans integrated into crisis management strategies and that protocols for multi-agency collaboration are essential components of such plans. Communication channels such as social media and the internet need to be central to these plans, as they contributed to the rapid dissemination of both information and miss-information during the incident. The horsemeat incident quickly turned into a global story and a key challenge in communication was the 24/7 global coverage during the extended and evolving incident, which gradually spread across Europe. During the horsemeat incident, reporting on social media channels surpassed traditional media channels. A key lesson was the need to monitor and use social media channels to focus attention on the website of the Food Safety Authority of Ireland where up-to-date factual information was published.

Best practice for food companies during the horsemeat incident shows that immediate proactive risk communication increases public trust and minimises reputational damage. This presentation will discuss key lessons from the European-wide horsemeat incident where social media is driving the consumer communication agenda and influencing change.

Dr Julie Barnett – University of Bath, UK

Dr Julie Barnett is a Professor of Health Psychology at the University of Bath, UK. Prior to this, She worked at Brunel University. She is a social psychologist, with particular interests and expertise around risk appreciation, risk communication, the maintenance and change of behaviour, public engagement processes and how social science informs policy development. Currently, her work is exploring the role of user engagement in the development of medical devices, effective communication of food risks and benefits and management requirements of plant disease. Over the last ten years she has been part of a range of largely interdisciplinary projects funded by the EPSRC, ESRC, the European Union, the Department of Health, the Health and Safety Executive, the Ministry of Defence, the Environment Agency, the Food Standards Agency and the Wellcome Trust.

The horsemeat scandal: understanding the impact on consumers - results from FoodRisC: Prof Julie Barnett The Vizzata tool was developed in the context of the EU-funded project FoodRisC. It enables the on-line exploration of consumer reactions to specific stimulus materials; it involves presenting the target audience with small pieces of content (e.g. text, images, videos) and eliciting questions and comments in relation to these. It is a new method for refining risk communications.

The first Vizzata study began on 19 January 2013 (just after the horsemeat DNA news went public) with 44 participants in the UK and Ireland: their concerns and questions focused on 3 key areas (1) How the adulteration happened (2) How was the horsemeat found (i.e. the role of testing) (3) What are the short and long term implications. The second study was in May, and involved 61 participants from the UK and Ireland who were asked to rate and explain their confidence in processed meat products. 62% of the participants raised and used the example of the horsemeat incident to explain their lower levels of confidence.

The studies showed that consumer confidence was affected by a breach in trust: researchers found that the horsemeat scandal brought about concerns regarding product content, labelling, and respondents expressed their surprise and shock at the length of the supply chain.

The horsemeat incident has high signal value – crystallising diffuse concerns about product content, mismatch of content with labels and suspicions about the food chain.

Beate Kettlitz – FoodDrinkEurope, Belgium

Beate Kettlitz studied food chemistry at Humboldt University in Berlin, Germany, and joined FoodDrinkEurope (located in Brussels) as a Director for Food Safety, Science and R&D in April 2005. Prior to this, she worked for six years as a food policy advisor at The European Consumers’ Organisation (BEUC). Having obtained a special professional certificate in the field of hygiene practice in 1978, Beate has also worked for the Regional Hygiene Institute of Potsdam, Germany, where she was responsible for the control of, and gave professional advice for, dairy products, dietetic products, baby food and other foodstuffs.

Dr Mary Brennan – Newcastle University, UK

Dr Mary Brennan is a Senior Lecturer in Food Marketing at Newcastle University. She has an Agricultural and Food Engineering degree from University College Dublin, Ireland, and an MSc and PhD in Food Marketing from Newcastle University, UK. She has completed research projects on domestic food safety practices (Food Safety Promotions Board Ireland; Food Standards Agency); communicating food risk uncertainty to the public (FSA); consumer quality and safety perceptions of organic and low input food (EU FP6); and lay and expert engagement with environmental issues (ESRC Science in Society programme). Previously, Mary was a member of the International Life Sciences Institute’s Consumer Science Expert Groups on Consumers Risk Perception of Food Choice and Food Risk/Benefit Communication.