European Perspectives on Public Benefit in Relation to Food: Insights from a Serious Game Approach

There is limited understanding of what constitutes public benefit from the perspective of the public, and none that we are aware of related to food consumer science. The purpose of this study is to contribute towards a better understanding of public benefit as a whole and its connection to food choice, essential to driving progress towards responsible consumption and healthier diets. Public benefit, associated trade-offs and responsible actors were investigated via written questions, and food choice was explored during group discussions using the PlayDecide methodology. Adults (n = 105) were recruited in six European countries (Denmark, Germany, Italy, Slovakia, Spain and the UK) and stratified by attained education. Our findings indicate that assumptions should not be made that there is general consensus about what constitutes public benefit, especially with regard to consumer food choice. Group discussions around food-related freedom of choice, education, agency and responsibility suggested that private and public benefit are neither mutually exclusive nor automatically complementary. The serious game approach employed affected a change in participants’ public benefit perceptions, demonstrating its potential to better evaluate the connections between private interests and the common good through meaningful public deliberation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Sustainability
Published
2024-11-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/su16219559
Primary Topic
Behavioral Health and Interventions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

European Perspectives on Public Benefit in Relation to Food: Insights from a Serious Game Approach

Erik Janšto, Elisa Iori, Патрик Ровны, Lada Timotijević et al.
Sustainability
Behavioral Health and Interventions
article

European Perspectives on Public Benefit in Relation to Food: Insights from a Serious Game Approach

Erik Janšto, Elisa Iori, Патрик Ровны, Lada Timotijević, Morten Høst Haugaard, Monique Raats, Charo Hodgkins, Javier de la Cueva González-Cotera, Clara Mehlhose, Alina Schäfer, Lisa Mohebati, Violeta Stancu
article en

Abstract

There is limited understanding of what constitutes public benefit from the perspective of the public, and none that we are aware of related to food consumer science. The purpose of this study is to contribute towards a better understanding of public benefit as a whole and its connection to food choice, essential to driving progress towards responsible consumption and healthier diets. Public benefit, associated trade-offs and responsible actors were investigated via written questions, and food choice was explored during group discussions using the PlayDecide methodology. Adults (n = 105) were recruited in six European countries (Denmark, Germany, Italy, Slovakia, Spain and the UK) and stratified by attained education. Our findings indicate that assumptions should not be made that there is general consensus about what constitutes public benefit, especially with regard to consumer food choice. Group discussions around food-related freedom of choice, education, agency and responsibility suggested that private and public benefit are neither mutually exclusive nor automatically complementary. The serious game approach employed affected a change in participants’ public benefit perceptions, demonstrating its potential to better evaluate the connections between private interests and the common good through meaningful public deliberation.

SustainabilityVol. 16(21)
Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra (SK), Aarhus University (DK), University of Surrey (GB), University of Göttingen (DE), University of Bologna (IT)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 77%
Behavioral Health and Interventions
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.