Abstract
This project investigated science in the economy through the lens of public consumption. It focused on the scientific information and credibility that consumers encounter through claims about the benefits of commercial goods for the environment or their own health. As well as analysing the product claims themselves through secondary data, the project investigated the producers and intermediaries through in-depth interviews and a Q-Methodology statement-sorting exercise.
Project description
The aims of the research were:
1. to analyse and compare the strategies of private-sector operators in making scientific claims about commercial goods and the roles of knowledge intermediaries, such as NGOs, in validating or contesting these claims;
2. to examine the public evaluation of these scientific claims and consider the implications for perceived credibility and purchase decisions;
3. to analyse how scientific information is produced, monitored and audited along product supply chains, especially internationally, as it is translated from point of origin to point of consumption in terms of its content, authority, affiliation and specificity;
4. and, thus, to explore how being attached to product claims and consumption influences not simply the business use of science but more widely the epistemic authority of science in the public domain.
Aims 1, 3 and 4 were investigated using case studies of certification schemes, particularly those that certify organic food in the UK (such as through the Soil Association and Organic Farmers and Growers Ltd.), sustainably produced timber and wood products (under the Forest Stewardship Council’s scheme) and fish products from well managed fisheries (under the Marine Stewardship Council’s scheme).
Different organisations involved in each case study were interviewed, in the UK and USA, to understand how the schemes worked, how they used science and how they sought credibility in the public domain for their claims about the sustainability, ethicality or healthiness of the associated products.
Aims 2 and 4 were investigated through six focus groups with members of the consuming public in York, England, each group meeting twice to discuss consumer trust in science, particularly about food, and the credibility of various assurance schemes, including but not restricted to ones about sustainability, animal welfare and diet.
The project showed that the processes and networks involved in making and verifying scientific claims about commercial products are very complex and include a diverse range of actors from both private-sector companies and NGOs. The claims depend in part upon a network’s reputation for scientific credibility and legitimacy, especially by drawing in diverse and recognised forms of environmental expertise, in order to influence industry to apply for certification as well as the ordinary consumer to buy certified products.
However, communicating this credibility to potential consumers can be problematic. The end product of certification may be a simple logo or product claim that wraps up these complex and heterogeneous processes and hides them from consumers. So, the scientific input and other positive qualities of expertise, independence and transparency that enable certification to work is hidden in the logo or product claim - and consumers find evaluating and unpacking these difficult.
The results suggest that people like the idea of independent verification of products, but are sceptical about the feasibility of doing this in practice, especially across international borders. Therefore, although certification networks are innovative in their approach to integrating science and policy in pursuit of sustainability, such innovation may not be appreciated because of the difficulties of conveying complex verification processes to busy consumers.
The research was disseminated through a variety of academic conferences and workshops in the UK and the USA and through a website hosted by the University of Hull at http://www.hull.ac.uk/geog/research/credibility/index.htm.
