Food Safety
search
cart
facebook twitter linkedin
  • Sign In
  • Create Account
  • Sign Out
  • My Account
Food Safety
  • NEWS
    • Latest News
    • White Papers
  • PRODUCTS
  • TOPICS
    • Contamination Control
    • Food Types
    • Management
    • Process Control
    • Regulatory
    • Sanitation
    • Supply Chain
    • Testing and Analysis
  • PODCAST
  • EXCLUSIVES
    • Food Safety Five Newsreel
    • eBooks
    • FSM Distinguished Service Award
    • Interactive Product Spotlights
    • Videos
  • BUYER'S GUIDE
  • MORE
    • ENEWSLETTER >
      • Archive Issues
      • Subscribe to eNews
    • Store
    • Sponsor Insights
  • WEBINARS
  • FOOD SAFETY SUMMIT
  • EMAG
    • eMagazine
    • Archive Issues
    • Editorial Advisory Board
    • Contact
    • Advertise
  • SIGN UP!
Management

The Complexity of Defining Food Safety

Digging deeper into survey responses

By Omar A. Oyarzabal,Ph.D, Barbara B. VanRenterghem, Ph.D
perspective image
perspective image 2
perspective image 3
perspective image 4
perspective image
perspective image 2
perspective image 3
perspective image 4
January 15, 2021

Our survey of food manufacturers on the meaning of food safety[1] revealed that food manufacturers have different definitions and wide variability in the words used to define food safety. As a follow-up, we interviewed 13 participants who completed the survey and volunteered to provide more insights into their interpretation of food safety. 

All interviewees were from the U.S. and represented midcareer to late-career professionals in the food industry. Except for one interviewee, most participants have worked in the food industry for 11 years or more, and all interviewees have a managerial position with involvement in food safety or are responsible for food safety decisions. The demographics of the 13 interviews are summarized in Table 1. Table 2 shows the level of food safety training and food safety responsibilities for all interviewees. 

Before the actual interviews, all participants were provided with a summary of the survey results (prepublication). When asked if they had read the summary, 85 percent of the interviewees responded yes. When asked if they had any particular comment or found anything striking about the results from the survey, the main comments were: 1) there is a wide range of definitions and interpretations of food safety, 2) food safety means different things to different people, and 3) the definition of food safety varies from what a typical consumer would consider food safety.

When asked if they thought there was a standardized definition of food safety, 85 percent responded no. Those who responded yes could not define food safety or were not sure there was a standardized definition of food safety.

When asked if there should be a standardized definition of food safety, 69 percent answered yes. When asked about the benefits of having a standardized definition of food safety, the reasons provided for yes answers included: 

To provide less ambiguity and a common language:

  • To create a common ground of understanding and consistency
  • Everyone on the same page and eliminate confusion
  • Major stakeholders would have a common language within the system and would provide clearer language for everyone to agree on goals

To help with training and education (food industry and public):

  • Beneficial for training (make it easier to teach and for people to understand)
  • It might increase awareness and facilitate understanding by consumers, public in general
  • Will clarify expectations on how to improve it

Other reasons:

  • It will ensure that manufacturers are controlling the right elements on what food safety actually is
  • It would assist facilities as they develop their food safety plans 
  • Could provide a list of things to do for each segment within the food industry

When asked about the drawbacks or limitations of having a standardized definition of food safety, the answers provided were:

Complexity:

  • There is an added complexity because it may vary with whom we ask. Regulators might say yes, while a consumer might have a different perspective
  • It might be difficult to take into account all different disciplines
  • It might mean different things within different industry segments

Difficulties in meeting standards:

  • Some facilities will have difficulties meeting a standardized definition because of the diversity of food manufacturing, distribution, and consumption
  • A standardized definition in legal terms may be difficult to achieve
  • Consumers may still blur the line between food quality and food safety

Other reasons:

  • It may stop the evolution of our understanding of food safety and the scientific achievement needed to cope with this evolution 
  • It will have to be reassessed and reevaluated periodically. What may be current today may not be current next year
  • It could be too narrow and not serve all stakeholders

When asked if a standardized definition of food safety would help food manufacturers, 77 percent responded yes. Table 3 shows some of the reasons provided to support the answers to this question.

When asked how they think the public perception of food safety compares with the perception by food manufacturers, all but two interviewees agreed that the public understanding of food safety differs from the manufacturers’ understanding. One respondent thought there were differences in interpretation but not a gap, and another thought that the public, in general, has a good perception of food manufacturers in the U.S. Overall, there was a clearly perceived difference between the way consumers interpret food safety and the interpretation by food manufacturers. All comments could be grouped into two categories: Consumer trust in food safety and a simplified view of food safety by consumers versus a more complex view by food manufacturers. A few comments for each category were:

Consumer trust in food safety:

  • Consumers, in general, tend to trust that the food is safe
  • They (consumers) expect the product is safe the moment they buy it 

Simple view from consumers versus a complex view from manufacturers:

  • The public views it (food safety) as their personal interaction with the food, whereas those of us in the business view it along a continuum
  • Consumers may not understand or agree with the way we perform risk-based analyses

This last category was the most important in interviewees’ minds. The public’s perception of food safety is considered to be narrower, more inconsistent with scientific knowledge, and out of sync with how food manufacturers understand food safety. Part of this difference was explained by a public that takes food safety for granted and has “ingrained expectations” and a perception molded by social media. The public follows trends originating on social media that may have little to do with the science behind the safety of a particular food. The answers included an understanding by manufacturers that some food safety demands by the public may not be valid, but it does not matter because the manufacturers will comply to be able to sell the product. 

When asked how we could help bridge any gap in the understanding of food safety between the public and food manufacturers, all interviewees provided some ideas on how to reduce this gap, with emphasis on education. One interviewee suggested that the industry should use food safety as a marketing tool to communicate with the public. Another interviewee emphasized a simplification of food safety regulations, including labels, to bridge the gap. Here, the example was the “fresh” label on chicken shipped at 22 °F, which is below freezing. This label creates confusion with the public, which sees frozen chicken as “fresh,” and allows for the “wrong perception.” Most of these themes included mainly education in a different context, such as: 1) educating the public about food safety along the continuum (not only in groceries or restaurants), 2) increasing presence in social media, 3) increasing advertising related to food safety, and 4) using food shows on television as a vehicle to discuss food safety. One interviewee, however, suggested that educating the public on every aspect of food manufacturing might be misleading to the public and counterproductive.

At the end of the interviews, when respondents were asked if they would like to add anything else, six interviewees declined to give further comments. Some quotes from the other interviewees were:

    “The more we know, the safer can be the assumption: Is it food I can trust?”

    “Cleaning up the rules and regulations and leveling the playing field and educate the consumer a little bit more.”

    “We don’t discuss food safety enough…I think that people assume that their food will be safe.”

    “From what I’ve seen from this survey, there are a lot of definitions of food safety.”

    “The discipline of food safety is hard to define…each individual’s definition comes from their own experience.”

    “I wish, on consumer education, that manufacturers across the board would continue…and get more engaged…and see their roles in food safety for consumers.”

    “There are things I think about frequently, having a role in food safety…What do people need to know? What is helpful for the public to know? And how do we create that communication?”

    “There is a gap there that we might all benefit from if we can close it a little bit.”

These interviews brought some insights into the current thinking about food safety by food industry professionals. Our findings corroborate the wide variability in the interpretation of food safety and even provide some reasoning for why a standardized definition of food safety is complex, and perhaps elusive. 

With the exception of one participant, who thought that the different words used to describe food safety do not matter because everybody understands food safety at the same level, all interviews highlighted the multiple dimensions of a complex issue: the interpretation of food safety. 

All interviewees either knew there is no standardized definition of food safety or were unable to produce one. Only 69 percent responded favorably to the question “Should there be one standard definition?” The reasons for or against having a standardized definition were equally strong. Most of the reasoning for a standardized definition centered on providing common language with less ambiguity and helping with training. There were very few other compelling reasons, and these mainly were: ensure manufacturers control the right food safety elements, assist in the development of food safety plans, and provide things to do for each segment of the food industry.

There was consensus that a standardized definition would help with food safety training but less consensus on whether such a definition would help with different interpretations. The reasoning against a standardized definition centered on the complexity of this topic and the challenges for the industry to meet “standards” that could come from such a definition. The other compelling “against” reasons included: 1) it would stop the evolution of our understanding of food safety and the scientific achievement needed to cope with it; 2) the need for periodic reassessment and evaluation; 3) the definition may be too narrow and not serve all stakeholders; 4) the definition might not apply to everybody and might create conflicts.

A major point of agreement among all interviewees was the differences in the perception of food safety by consumers versus food manufacturers. This question was meant to include the word “perception” and not “understanding.” From the previous survey, we could extract that an “understanding” of food safety implies understanding “management, handling, practices, procedures, preparation, and/or manufacturing” that when “properly implemented” will result in “safe food products.” For the interviews, we chose the word “perception” because it may be more appropriate to define the way the public reacts to food safety. However, it could be argued that perception is reality, and therefore knowledge, for the public.

The higher number of participants wishing for a standardized definition of food safety, contrasted with a series of important limitations for the formulation and implementation of such a definition, highlights a logical conundrum in the minds of people with expertise in food safety: a desire for a standardized definition of food safety, but the knowledge that such a definition could not be easily formulated, or if formulated not easily accepted by many in the food industry.      


Reference

1. www.food-safety.com/magazine-archive1/aprilmay-2020/the-meaning-of-food-safety/.

 

Omar A. Oyarzabal, Ph.D., is an associate professor of food safety at the University of Vermont.

 

Barbara B. VanRenterghem, Ph.D., is the editorial director of Food Safety Magazine.

KEYWORDS: consumers food safety standards survey

Share This Story

Looking for a reprint of this article?
From high-res PDFs to custom plaques, order your copy today!

Omar A. Oyarzabal, Ph.D., is an associate professor of food safety at the University of Vermont.

Barbara vanrenterghem headshot original 200

Barbara B. VanRenterghem, Ph.D., is the former Editorial Director of Food Safety Magazine.

Recommended Content

JOIN TODAY
to unlock your recommendations.

Already have an account? Sign In

  • people holding baby chicks

    Serovar Differences Matter: Utility of Deep Serotyping in Broiler Production and Processing

    This article discusses the significance of Salmonella in...
    Methods
    By: Nikki Shariat Ph.D.
  • woman washing hands

    Building a Culture of Hygiene in the Food Processing Plant

    Everyone entering a food processing facility needs to...
    Sanitation
    By: Richard F. Stier, M.S.
  • graphical representation of earth over dirt

    Climate Change and Emerging Risks to Food Safety: Building Climate Resilience

    This article examines the multifaceted threats to food...
    Best Practices
    By: Maria Cristina Tirado Ph.D., D.V.M. and Shamini Albert Raj M.A.
Subscribe For Free!
  • eMagazine Subscription
  • Subscribe to eNewsletter
  • Manage My Preferences
  • Website Registration
  • Subscription Customer Service

More Videos

Sponsored Content

Sponsored Content is a special paid section where industry companies provide high quality, objective, non-commercial content around topics of interest to the Food Safety Magazine audience. All Sponsored Content is supplied by the advertising company and any opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and not necessarily reflect the views of Food Safety Magazine or its parent company, BNP Media. Interested in participating in our Sponsored Content section? Contact your local rep!

close
  • Deli Salads
    Sponsored byCorbion

    How Food Safety is Becoming the Ultimate Differentiator in Refrigerated and Prepared Foods

Popular Stories

Image of Tyson Foods logo and the logos of Tyson Foods brands

Tyson Foods is Reformulating Food Products to Eliminate Petroleum-Based Synthetic Dyes

USDA building.jpg

More Than 15,000 USDA Employees Take Trump Administration's Resignation Offer

Woman reading the warning label on a bottle of wine

A 40-Year Hangover: Efforts to Revive 1980s Advocacy About the Potential Negative Effects of Alcohol Consumption

Events

May 12, 2025

The Food Safety Summit

Stay informed on the latest food safety trends, innovations, emerging challenges, and expert analysis. Leave the Summit with actionable insights ready to drive measurable improvements in your organization. Do not miss this opportunity to learn from experts about contamination control, food safety culture, regulations, sanitation, supply chain traceability, and so much more.

May 13, 2025

Traceability Next Steps—Supply Chain Implementation

Live Streaming from the Food Safety Summit: Join us for this engaging and highly practical workshop focused on building and sustaining traceability efforts across the food supply chain. 

May 13, 2025

Effective Sanitation Basics

Live Streaming from the Food Safety Summit: This dynamic workshop will help participants understand the sanitation process, effective monitoring, use of data streams, and root cause analysis basics.

View All

Products

Global Food Safety Microbial Interventions and Molecular Advancements

Global Food Safety Microbial Interventions and Molecular Advancements

See More Products
Environmental Monitoring Excellence eBook

Related Articles

  • The Meaning of Food Safety

    See More
  • virtual meeting

    Risk Culture: How Reducing Complexity Improves the Safety of Consumers, Team Members, and the Company

    See More
  • Who's Managing The Safety of Food Delivery?

    See More

Related Products

See More Products
  • 9781138198463.jpg

    Food Safety Management Programs: Applications, Best Practices, and Compliance

See More Products

Events

View AllSubmit An Event
  • May 12, 2025

    The Food Safety Summit

    Stay informed on the latest food safety trends, innovations, emerging challenges, and expert analysis. Leave the Summit with actionable insights ready to drive measurable improvements in your organization. Do not miss this opportunity to learn from experts about contamination control, food safety culture, regulations, sanitation, supply chain traceability, and so much more.
  • July 25, 2024

    How Rapid Development of Technology Has Revolutionized Food Safety

    On Demand: In this webinar, you will hear from leading technology and policy experts from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), food safety laboratories, and food processors, who will discuss these technological advances and how you can use them to benefit your food safety program.
View AllSubmit An Event

Related Directories

  • Food Safety and Quality Consultants LLC

    Food Safety and Quality Consultants, LLC (FSQC) is a professional full-service food safety and quality consulting firm offering a complete line of training, consulting, and auditing services to meet your needs. We will help you turn the complicated into compliance by making your food safety systems simple and effective!
  • We R Food Safety Inc.

    Scalable, affordable and fully customizable software designed by industry experts and backed by a world-class team of consultants and support personnel. Our proprietary software modernizes your food safety systems, provides your staff real-time data and visibility. We have the ability to construct custom reporting providing you information that is important to your business.
  • KLEANZ Food Safety Technologies

    KLEANZ Food Safety Technologies is proud to be the leader in software and services for the Food and Beverage industry. For over 30 years, we have ensured that our clients’ Food Safety, Sanitation Management, and Maintenance needs are satisfied and streamlined. We pride ourselves in helping our clients mitigate risk.
×

Never miss the latest news and trends driving the food safety industry

eNewsletter | Website | eMagazine

JOIN TODAY!
  • RESOURCES
    • Advertise
    • Contact Us
    • Directories
    • Store
    • Want More
  • SIGN UP TODAY
    • Create Account
    • eMagazine
    • eNewsletter
    • Customer Service
    • Manage Preferences
  • SERVICES
    • Marketing Services
    • Reprints
    • Market Research
    • List Rental
    • Survey/Respondent Access
  • STAY CONNECTED
    • LinkedIn
    • Facebook
    • Instagram
    • X (Twitter)
  • PRIVACY
    • PRIVACY POLICY
    • TERMS & CONDITIONS
    • DO NOT SELL MY PERSONAL INFORMATION
    • PRIVACY REQUEST
    • ACCESSIBILITY

Copyright ©2025. All Rights Reserved BNP Media.

Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing