Food Safety in Japan- Consumers' Perceptions on livestock products and policy-

Shinichi KobayashiCollege of Bioresource Sciences

Nihon University

The purpose of this presentation to describe the changing pattern of livestock

products’ consumption in Japan for the last four decades,

to discuss Japanese consumers’ perceptions on meat in comparison with those of other countries including Australia, particularly in relation to food safety,

to analyse the policy issue related to food safety.

The consumption of livestock products in Japan had increased steeply because of

the Westernization of our diet and 　 reflecting rising income levels The per capita annual meat consumption

increased nearly six times from 5.2 kg in 1960 to 28.8 kg in 2000.

Trend in per capita annual meat consumption

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

1955 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 2000

Total meat Beef Pork Chicken Others

The rate of growth has been declining. The rate of growth of consumption varied by

varieties of meat.

Growth rate of annual meat consumption(%)meat beef pork chicken others

1960s 10.3 7.5 18.2 17.2 15.61970s 6.3 6.2 8.5 8.8 3.61980s 2.3 5.0 1.8 3.2 -6.41990s 1.0 4.0 0.2 0.6 -8.0total 4.5 5.3 6.5 6.8 0.6Note; average by decades from 1960s to the 90s

Net supply of meat by variety

beef

pork

chickenwhale

others

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1960 64 68 72 76 80 84 88 92 96 2000

The increase in household consumption represented less than 10% of total increase in per person beef consumption.

The increase in beef consumption in the 1990s mainly because of the growing demand in the food service industry, which was dependent on imports.

Share of each meat consumption type (estimate) （％）1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Beef Household use 70 62 56 48 43 37Manufacturing 13 14 14 9 8 9Food service industry 17 24 30 43 49 54

Pork Household use 59 52 46 40 40 41Manufacturing 19 25 27 30 31 28Food service industry 22 23 27 30 29 31

Chicken Household use 52 46 40 32 30 31Manufacturing 3 4 7 8 11 9Food service industry 45 50 53 60 59 60

The per capita meat consumption in Japan is still low compared to those in foreign countries.

It is difficult to foresee an increase in the consumption in Japan up to the level of the Western people.

Because of 1.lless calories intake 2. fish consumption

International comparison of meat consumption (1998) kg/headBeef Pork Poultry Mutton & Chevon Total

USA 44.4 30.4 47.1 0.6 122.5Australia 37.3 18.7 30.9 18.9 105.8Denmark 21.4 63.7 19.2 - 104.3

UK 15.8 24.2 26.4 6.2 72.6

Brazil 34.7 9.0 23.9 - 67.6

Taiwan 3.7 42.5 13.1 - 59.3

China 4.7 35.5 9.8 2.3 52.3

Japan 11.8 16.5 13.7 0.5 42.5

Korea 9.1 19.7 9.4 - 38.2

Source：USDA,̀ World Markets and Trade'

Note：Dressed Carcass

Japan showed no item in the group of meats of which the above index exceeds 120.

In other developed countries, all livestock products including milk showed low figures.

As income rise, consumers’ willingness to eat more meat will decline in the developing countries as well as in developed countries.

International comparison of willingness to consume meat Japan USA Australia Thailand Taiwan China Korea

Beef 99 80 93 63 82 138 116Pork 92 90 91 87 71 100 77Chicken 102 118 111 93 88 135 99Turkey 54 124 95 62 63 89 58Ham & sausage 84 81 98 78 58 80 69Eggs 120 87 102 131 131 151 145Milk 139 104 110 135 154 125 171Yoghurt 121 117 116 125 105 99 96Cheese 98 80 95 67 91 71 76Fish 150 131 132 139 141 165 63Vegetable 164 156 147 153 162 170 125Fruits 153 153 147 156 162 172 166Source:Kobayashi,Koizumi,Nagano & others(1994)Note:Consumer attitude index=More - Less(in terms of percentage share of answer)+100

Indexes are consistently high for fish and vegetables. Among livestock products the indexes for pork & chicken are low. There has been a post-import-liberalization decline in the index for beef,

which had remained high until the end of the 1980s. The index for beef, which had fallen to 63 in 1996 when E coli O-157 food

poisoning occurred, recovered in 1998 but was still below 100. The value of the index dropped to 62 in 2002 and recovered to 64 in 2004

due to the impact of BSE in Japan (2001) and in the USA (2004).

Changes in willingness to consume meat1984 1988 1990 1994 1996 1998 2002 2004

Beef 120 127 116 99 63 97 62 64Pork 112 99 85 92 91 107 94 97Chicken 118 120 100 102 92 109 96 95Eggs 125 124 109 120 107 111 116 109Milk 134 140 127 139 113 118 115 113Yoghurt 119 122 113 121 114 125 118 112Fish 134 141 134 150 132 130 146 137

Vegetables 163 154 142 164 138 136 151 146

Source:Kobayashi,Koizumi,Nagano & othersNote:Consumer attitude index=More - Less(in terms of percentage share of answer)+100

Recent Livestock Diseases & Related Incidents in Japan

1996 E-coli O-157 2000 FMD Snow Brand milk poisoning incident 2001 BSE 2003 BSE(USA) 2004 Avian Influenza

The averages for either domestic or imported meats were relatively low (1.9 to 3.2).

Domestic meats were always higher than imported ones.

The score for domestic beef in 2002 was exceptionally low due to BSE in Japan.

The score for domestic beef recovered to 2.7 in 2004 while imported one dropped to 1.9.

Consciousness for the safty of meat

2002 2004 2002 2004Beef 2.1 2.7 2.0 1.9Pork 2.6 3.1 2.1 2.2Chicken 2.7 3.0 2.1 2.1Fish 3.0 3.2 2.3 2.3Note:5-grade answers from "No"(1) to "Yes"(5)

Source:Kobayashi,Koizumi,Nagano & others

Domestic Imported

The reasons being anxious about eating livestock products in terms of the safety (%)Eggs Milk

Domestic Imported Domestic Imported Domestic Imported Domestic Domestic

ＢＳＥ 30.7 47.3 1.3 2.7 0.8 1.5 0.4 1.9infectious diseases 15.1 22.5 9.5 25.0 13.2 25.9 7.7 3.3antibiotics 14.7 20.3 11.4 21.6 14.0 24.9 10.3 5.1hormone 12.9 20.6 10.9 19.3 12.5 22.7 10.1 4.0preserve 9.8 18.5 7.2 18.3 7.0 18.0 4.5 6.3germ 9.1 13.5 5.4 14.6 8.4 19.5 7.0 7.0chemical residue 7.0 7.3 3.3 7.5 3.8 9.2 4.2 4.7clone 5.5 13.2 1.7 5.7 0.8 2.9 0.3 0.1coloring 4.1 5.5 3.6 5.7 2.2 4.7 2.3 0.9FMD 4.1 9.6 1.3 3.3 0.1 0.9 0.0 0.3slaughtering method 3.4 7.3 2.4 7.9 2.2 5.7 0.5 0.0genetically modified 3.1 8.2 2.6 6.4 1.8 4.5 1.4 0.6transportation 1.9 7.8 1.3 7.9 1.8 8.7 4.6 3.3shop 1.9 0.9 1.5 1.9 1.5 1.9 1.7 1.1radiation 1.8 2.9 1.1 2.7 0.8 2.7 0.9 0.9others 0.5 1.1 0.4 0.9 1.1 1.5 0.9 0.6total 125.5 206.4 64.6 151.5 72.0 155.4 56.7 40.2

Beef Pork Chicken

Two third of consumers decreased beef consumption because of BSE in 2001.

10% of consumers increased the consumption of other meats such as pork and chicken.

People simply decreased the eating of meats, rather than shifting from beef to other meats.

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Beef Pork Chicken Mutton Chevon

Change of meat consumption after BSE

decreased fairly decreased unchanged increased increased fairly

Consumers stopped eating beef & related foods (2004)

64.5% of consumers stopped eating beef just after the first BSE

Two and half years later , the majority restarted consuming it again,

although 16.1% of consumers still did not eat beef.

(%) at BSE at present

Beef 64.5 16.1Processed beef 45.5 25.0

Retort pouch 28.7 20.6Gelatin 17.5 16.2Confectionery 9.1 8.3Others 1.8 1.4

167.0 87.6

The reasons restarted eating beef afterBSE

0 20 40 60

others

becommingused to BSE

no infection tohuman beings

not many BSEcattle

just wanted toeat

BSE tests onevery cattle

%

As far as food safety is concerned, domestic products are always valued far above imported ones not only in Japan but in Australia and the US.

However, consumers do not think that farmers, distributors and the government are paying enough attention to production and distribution of safe foods.

Consumer consciousness of agricultural products2002 2004

USA Australia

Domestic food are safer than imported ones. 3.5 3.7 4.0 3.6 3.9

Farmers produce safe foods. - 3.2 2.7 2.8 2.9Food manufacturers and distributors pay enough attention to safety. 2.8 3.0 2.7 2.0 2.6The government pays enough attention to food safety. 2.8 3.2 2.6 2.1 2.6

Source:Kobayashi,Koizumi,Nagano & othersNote:5-grade answers from "No"(1) to "Yes"(5) are indexed.

1994

Japan

Two major food safety policies after the BSE incidence

Setting up the Food Safety Committee independently from the MAFF and the Ministry of Welfare and Labor in July 2003.

The beef traceability law has been enforced from December 2003.

　Data base for cattle

Scheme of Beef Traceability System　 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 By　Mr.　Suzuki、 NLBC

MAFF

Farm

Slaughterhouse/Meat packer

Meat shopRestaurant

data entry

NLBC

Consumer

DNA inspection

Calving date Sex

Dam’s ID 　 　 Breed

Feeding place

Owner’s name

10 digits

entry 10degits

cattle data

Web page

On-site inspection

10 digits orlot number

10 digits orlot number

Labeled meat block

Labeled pack meat or dish

Cattle attached ear tags

Internet

By　Mr.　Suzuki　on　NLBC　

Official　 Ear　 Tags

20030930 NIKKEI

Package of beef

SupermarketSupermarket

The touch panel

at the experimental stage

From Dec.2004

Only one fourth of consumers know the traceability system.

But most of those who do not know of it support the idea that the system is necessary for assuring the beef safety.

Traceability system of cattle and beef (%)Yes No Don't know

Do you know 'Traceability system'? 23.8 76.2 -Traceability system is necessary. 76.4 0.9 22.7