Crisis management and risk communication: Why the food industry must get it right

There is public unease about food-related issues including food additives, food poisoning bacteria and GM ingredients. The public wants evidence of no risks, but all regulators can ever offer is no evidence of risk or evidence of a very small risk. The situation is complex because experts and non-experts can perceive the same risk in vastly different ways. The way in which the food industry manages crises and communicates risks will determine the public acceptance and success of new technologies such as GM foods and nanomaterials. There is a need for the food industry (including regulators and scientific experts) to sharpen up their risk communication skills to ensure that technical innovations are accepted by consumers, and crises such as food recalls do not undermine the public's confidence in the food industry. The AIFST has a key role to play in driving the risk communication process and allaying public unease about food-related issues.

National culture, infrastructure, and costs: Factors that lead to the use of wireless technologies

This research-in-progress paper utilizes the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to assess the effects of National Culture, Infrastructure, and Access Costs on the adoption of Wireless Technologies in Australia. The cultural dimensions emanating from the GLOBE project were chosen because of their broad coverage and contemporary nature. Australia is unique in that it has one of the lowest population densities in the world. The provision of wireless technologies is challenging in such an environment, and I believe the model developed in this research will have applicability in other similarly populated countries.