Article 2                          (Source: Food Research International, 2017 99(1):58-71)        During the last century, industrialized countries have overcome lack of foodsecurity with the key contribution of agrifood industrialization. Food processing hasplayed a crucial role as it allowed extending the shelf life of food products, reducedfood losses and waste, as well as improved nutrient availability and optimization.However, day-to-day consumer perception focuses on other aspects than theseachievements. In modern societies, the increasingly globalized markets and greaterprocessing in the food chain has contributed to a perceived distance and knowledge gapbetween people and food manufacturers (e.g. how food is produced, where is itproduced, etc.).        For instance, food contamination accidents have affected Europe in the lastdecades, such as BSE and dioxin. Consu umers are concerned about the heavy use ofpesticides in the conventional and intensive agricultural practices, the use of artificialingredients, additives or colourants such as E133, and the adoption of controversialfood technologies like GMOs. This has prompted consumers to become skeptical orworried about adverse health effects entailed in this food system. Moreover, thegrowing public concemn about the contribution of the food system to climate changeand its overall negative effects on sustainability have led constenvironmental and social consequences of food production.      The trends of healthiness and sustainability have triggered consumers intoconsidering which components are used in the food products that they cat in everydaylife. A new trend in food products has emerged, which is often summarized under theumbrella of the so-called "clean labe!" and has been taken up by a multitude of foodindustry stakeholders. The term clean label itsclf appeared for the first time during the1980s when consumers started to avoid the E-numbers listed on food labels becauscthey were allegedly associated with negative health effects. The food industry hasstarted to respond to the increasing consumer demand of such clean label products bysupplying food products that are perceived as 'cleaner'. For example, in2010 Heinz tomato ketchup was reformulated to remove high fructose com syrup fromthe ingredient list and was renamed as Simply Heinz.         To date there is no an established, objective and common definition of what a cleanlabel is, but rather several definitions or interpretations, often provided by market trendreports but not backed up by consu umer behavior re earch or theory. Ingredion (2014)recommends to consu mers that "a 'clcan label' positioned on the pack means thecan be positioned as 'natural', 'organic' andor free fromadditives/preservatives'" Edwards (2013) defines a clean label "by being produced freeof chemicals' additives, having easy-to-understand ingredicnt lists, and being producedby use of traditional techniques with limited processing"' One of the key questions iswhich ingredients may be part of a clean label, or, more importantly, which ingredicntsdefine a clean label product by their absence. Busken (2013) proposes that the answerto this depends on the consumer perception of an ingredient.        With regard to the clean label trend, we argue that hints about the item being aclean label food are used as such cues. We argue that their casy usage and inference todesirable, but unobservable characteristics explains the popularity of clean label.Typically, consu umers might use cues found on the front of the package (FOP) such asvisuals indicating naturalness, organic certification logos, or free-from claims ofproducers, thus, these products might be perceived as clean labcl. However, we arguethat not only peripheral processing is expected to play a role for clean label, but alsocentral processing. In some cases consumers might proceed to access information onthe back of the pack (BOP) in store or, even more likely, at home. There is a greaterlikelihood that consumers who are engaging in this effort are characterized by greaterinvolvement and thus motivation to process, or that the situation at home provides betteropportunity to look at infornation and engage with it, thus, identifying the product asclean labei. Therefore, central, more in-depth and conscious information processingwill occur more likely at home. Consumers might then look at the ingredientinformation or nutrition facts more closely, and inspect and assess whether or not theythink the product is a clean label food in their opinion. However, given that consumersmight not find this easy to assess, they might nevertheless rely on heuristics, such asthe degree to which ingredient names sound chemical or are unknown, or the merelength of the ingredient list. In addition to using this observable feature as a cue to aproductdesired quality, consumers might also favor products with understandable, short, knownand simple ingredient lists in order to reduce the cognitive effort needed in assessingthe product.        We suggest to define clean label, both in a broad sense, where consumers evaluatethe cleanliness of product by assumption and through inference looking at the front-of.pack label and in a strict sense, where consumers evaluate the cleanliness of product byinspection and through inference looking at the back-of-pack label. Results show thatwhile 'health' is a major consumer motive, a broad diversity of drivers influence theclean label trend with particular relevance of intrinsic or extrinsic productcharacteristics and socio-cultural factors. However, 'free from' artificialadditives/ingredients food products tend to differ from organic and natural products.Food manufacturers should take the diversity of these drivers into account indeveloping new products and communication about the latter. For policy makers, it isimportant to work towards a more homogenous understanding and application of theterm of clean label and identify a uniform definition or regulation for 'free from'artificial additives/ingredients food products, as well as work towards decreasingconsumer misconceptions.
[!--empirenews.page--]
【題組】11. Which purpose is WRONG for food processing?
(A) Augment the expiration date offood.
(B) Diminish resource abuse.
(C) Ameliorate the nutrition of food.
(D) Falsitythe quality of food.