| Literature DB >> 34900901 |
Xun Xi1,2, Shaobin Wei3, Kuen-Lin Lin4, Haitao Zhou5, Kui Wang6, Haiyan Zhou7, Zhao Li5, Nan Nan8, Liping Qiu1, Feng Hu1, Fu-Sheng Tsai9,10,11, Dongxiang Chen12.
Abstract
Exploring the intrinsic relationship between digital technology and the efficiency of food safety supervision contributes to a better understanding of the role of digital technology in food safety supervision and how to maximize its influence. This study employed sample data from 31 regions in China between 2015 and 2017 for an empirical analysis of the correlation between the two and to examine the moderating effects of the knowledge levels of food producers and consumers. The results show that the development of digital technology contributes to enhancing the efficiency of food safety supervision. In this process, the higher the knowledge level of consumers, the greater the positive promotional effect of digital technology. On the contrary, when the knowledge level of producers is higher, it is not conducive to enhancing the effect of digital technology on the efficiency of food safety supervision. The author holds the view that this is related to the fact that employees in the food production and manufacturing industry have insufficient moral and legal knowledge. This not only limits the effect of digital technology on enhancing the efficiency of food safety supervision, but also opens the door to illegal production for some unprincipled producers. The policy implications are that digital technology should be used to improve food safety supervision, the moral and legal knowledge of food producers should be improved, and consumers should be encouraged to use digital technology more in the pursuit of food safety. Implications for national healthcare system would be also discussed in our paper.Entities:
Keywords: digitalization; food safety regulation; food safety supervision efficiency; knowledge level of consumers; knowledge level of producers
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34900901 PMCID: PMC8655841 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.753950
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Public Health ISSN: 2296-2565
Explanation of the evaluation indicators of food safety supervision efficiency.
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|
| Input | Level of regulatory funding investment | (Food safety affairs expenditures/total public safety affairs expenditures) × 100% |
| Intensity of random inspections | (Total inspected batches/total population of the region) × 100% | |
| Intensity of administrative punishment | (Total amount of penalty concerning food safety/number of food safety violations) × 100% | |
| Output | Food safety qualified rate | (Qualified batches in random inspections/Total inspected batches) × 100% |
Descriptive statistics.
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regul_Effic | 93 | 1.0402 | 0.5778 | 0.262 | 3.426 |
| Digit | 93 | 2.4062 | 4.5873 | 0.006 | 23.5763 |
| Consu_Edu | 93 | 0.089 | 0.0524 | 0.04 | 0.304 |
| Produ_Edu | 93 | 0.0307 | 0.0294 | 0.002 | 0.16 |
| Per_GDP | 93 | 3.3428 | 1.7624 | 1.0971 | 8.4277 |
| Pop_Dens | 93 | 4.2708 | 6.5533 | 0.024 | 37.54 |
| Output_Val | 93 | 7.4339 | 8.0309 | 0.0658 | 44.5199 |
Variance inflation factor test.
|
|
|
|---|---|
| Digit | 3.18 |
| Consu_Edu | 7.45 |
| Produ_Edu | 9.60 |
| Per_GDP | 6.51 |
| Pop_Dens | 1.97 |
| Output_Val | 3.48 |
| Mean | 5.36 |
Digital technology, knowledge level, and food supervision efficiency.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Digitit | 0.09759*** | 0.00018 | 0.01157 | |
| Consu_Eduit | 9.04392* | 2.66346 | 9.27435** | −3.99166 |
| Produ_Eduit | 11.8633** | 0.72685 | 10.34224* | 4.06119 |
| Digitit×Consu_Eduit | 0.01219 | 0.21780 | ||
| Digitit×Produ_Eduit | 4.60956* | – | 1.95973† | |
| Per_GDPit | 0.19829** | 0.12972 | 0.20084** | 0.30255*** |
| Pop_Densit | −0.37289* | −0.04525** | −0.55757** | −0.07381*** |
| Output_Valit | −0.01553* | 0.01153 | −0.00692 | 0.00398 |
| Cons | 2.08533** | 0.62881** | 2.74456*** | 0.26921 |
| Time fixed effect | Yes | No | Yes | No |
| Regional fixed effect | Yes | No | Yes | No |
| Hausman test | 23.21*** | |||
| 0.79 <0.374> | ||||
| IS-stat | 1.63 <0.444> | |||
|
| 0.7399 | 0.1073 | 0.7577 | 0.6721 |
| Obs | 93 | 93 | 93 | 93 |
Note: .
Bold values represent the final reference results.
Figure 1Adjustment effect of consumer knowledge level.
Figure 2Adjustment effect of producer knowledge level.
Endogenous test.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Digitit | 0.18117*** | 0.20864** |
| Consu_Eduit | 13.74281*** | 10.52923* |
| Produ_Eduit | 4.69192† | 17.28182* |
| Digitit×Consu_Eduit | 0.62396† | |
| Digitit×Produ_Eduit | −2.00417† | |
| Per_GDPit | 0.27711** | 0.25826*** |
| Pop_Densit | −0.57782* | −0.55472* |
| Output_Valit | −0.02689** | −0.03529** |
| Cons | 1.03869 | 0.93208 |
| Time fixed effect | Yes | Yes |
| Regional fixed effect | Yes | Yes |
| Hausman test | 0.43 <0.9999> | 0.61 <0.9999> |
|
| 0.8287 | 0.8353 |
| Obs | 93 | 93 |
Note: .
Robustness test results.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Digitit | 0.10362*** | 0.09615** |
| Consu_Eduit | 6.86016† | 6.15503* |
| Produ_Eduit | 10.85996** | 8.58882* |
| Digitit×Consu_Eduit | 2.44427*** | |
| Digitit×Produ_Eduit | −1.53999† | |
| Per_GDPit | 0.10353 | 0.06206 |
| Pop_Densit | −0.28222 | −0.48052** |
| Output_Valit | −0.02063* | −0.01243 |
| Cons | 1.99785** | 2.81957*** |
| Time fixed effect | Yes | Yes |
| Regional fixed effect | Yes | Yes |
|
| 0.7553 | 0.7800 |
| Obs | 93 | 93 |
Note: .