1. Introduction

With the development of the social economy, the standard of living in China has been greatly improved, but food safety problems still frequently appear ^[1]. People are, however, paying more attention to food safety in China ^[2], as these food safety problems not only cause physical harm to consumers but also cause psychological panic. The degree of concern about food safety has gradually become an important key to measuring people's quality of life in China ^[3]. Consumers of commonly consumed foods are particularly concerned. To this end, the states have developed and introduced a series of food standards to ensure consumer safety ^[4][5][6]. By 2020, a food safety supervision system based on risk analysis and supply chain management has been established, and major regional and systemic food safety risks have been controlled. There are two types of food safety: objective food safety and subjective food safety, the latter is also known as the perception of food safety (PFS) ^[7]. Objective food safety refers to a concept based on the assessment of the risk of consuming a certain food by scientists and food experts ^[8]. Perception of food safety is a person's perception of the potential risk associated with food safety questions ^[9], or consumer concern about whether a particular food product can be consumed without harmful effects ^[10]. At present, the overall situation of food safety in China is generally improving. From 2016 to 2020, the evaluation of food safety supervision sampling inspection showed that the overall pass rate was higher than 96%, particularly, for meat products, processed grain products, edible oils/grease products, dairy products, and egg products. In recent years, the State Administration of Market Supervision and Administration has undertaken a series of risk communication measures to improve food safety. However, consumer's perception of food safety risk based on subjective psychological factors often deviates from the actual risk level. public confidence in food safety has not improved significantly. Translating food safety risks to consumers and increasing public trust in the national food inspection can be challenging. Finding a way to improve the public trust toward food safety supervision sampling inspection ^[11] has become a core issue in food safety risk communication.

2. Consumers' Trust in Food Safety Surveillance Sampling

Since the reform and opening up (1978), food safety management has received increasing attention in China. In particular, since the establishment of the State Administration for Market Regulation in 2018, the scope and content of food safety supervision have been improved and intensified to ensure food quality. The academic understanding of food safety management has increased ^[12], as various disciplines have become more integrated, the number of people and institutions providing authoritative research has increased ^[13][14], and food safety management has become an influential academic field. However, due to the impact of major food safety incidents in recent years, the most urgent task for China's food safety management is to enhance public trust in food safety.

Trust is a complex, multidimensional concept that includes both rational components (derived from experience) and irrational components (based on instinct and emotion) ^[15][16]. Trust also occurs at two distinct levels: the interpersonal and the institutional ^[17][18]. Interpersonal trust is negotiated between individuals, for example, between a consumer and a retailer, whereas institutional trust is placed in one or more social systems or institutions (e.g., the Sampling and Monitoring Department of Food Safety, State Administration for Market Regulation, China). Institutional trust is a standard predictor of trust in key institutions in organizations ^[19] such as the government or legal organizations ^[20][21]. Institutional trust theory suggests that people's trust in an institution affects their perceptions of that institution. Research on consumers has extended institutional trust theory to exploring the effects of institutional trust on perceived expertise ^[22], perceived risk ^[23], product trust ^[22], and interpersonal trust ^[24]. Both interpersonal and institutional trust are important for understanding where and how trust can be (re)developed and maintained in the context of food safety regulation and compliance.

The two-dimensional model of trust is currently widely used in the field of food safety and includes competence trust and care trust ^[25]. Competence trust refers to trust based on knowledge and performance, which is judged mainly on the past behavior of the trusted object and the possible behavior in the future expectation, reflecting the cognitive component of trust. Care trust refers to trust based on motivation and relationships, which is generally judged based on the closeness of the public's connection to the trust recipient and inferences about the trust recipient's intentions and motivations, reflecting the emotional component of trust.

Trust plays a crucial role in risk communication and management, and public trust is also a topic that cannot be ignored in the supervision sampling inspection of food products. Some scholars have proposed that factors affecting consumers' confidence in food safety include their trust in participants in the food chain ^{[26][27][28][29][30][31]} and regulatory authorities ^[32][33], memories of food safety events, media reports ^{[33][34][35][36]}, perceptions of the safety of different types of products ^[28][37][38], and consumers' demographic characteristics ^{[27][37][38][39]} and values ^[25].

Official government food safety supervision departments are the main bodies that carry out food sampling inspections. Owing to the complexity of the food production system, consumers are not able to accurately judge the safety of food during the food consumption process, leading them to rely on other participants in the food chain to provide them with safe food, as well as on the government and society’s regulatory systems ^[40]. When consumers believe that the results of food sampling inspections can be trusted and that when food safety problems occur, the authorities will take appropriate action to prevent them from endangering public health, such as issuance of recalls ^[41], these beliefs have the potential to directly influence the level of consumer optimism about food safety. When carrying out food safety surveillance and sampling inspections, steps such as the development of sampling plans, the development of food safety standards, and the allocation and implementation of work can all reflect the actual competence of the authorities concerned, which translates into competence trust in the trust model ^{[42][43][44][45]}. Therefore, the quality of food safety supervision sampling inspection work may affect the public's attitude toward its results.

2.1. Effect of Institutional Trust on Attitude

Institutional trust is comprised of competence trust and care trust. The safety and reliability of food are important reflections of the government's ability to monitor and manage risk in the market. In the relationship of government trust, the subject is the citizen, and the object is the government. Hetherington ^[46] incorporated government competence into the connotation of government trust, and the level of public trust in the government to have the knowledge and skills required for its management is a performance-based indicator of trust in the government. Levi ^[47] posited that the goodwill of the government is an important component of government trust, representing the extent to which the government cares for people's livelihoods and interests, as measured by the motivations and goals of government management behavior. To a large extent, consumers believe that the government is responsible for ensuring food safety ^[48] and should take responsibility for disclosing food safety information and communicating risk. National food safety monitoring and inspection departments should regularly publish relevant information and undertake risk monitoring. Consumers’ trust in the work of food safety supervision sampling inspection departments directly affects their attitude toward the results released to the public by these authorities. Yang and Holzer ^[49] suggested that the public's approval of government work reflects the public's trust in government. It is generally believed that the higher the public's trust in government, the higher the level of satisfaction with the government's work, and the more credible the information released to the government. Based on the above discussion, the following hypotheses were formulated:

H1: The public's competence trust in safety supervision sampling inspection has a significant positive effect on the attitude toward the public announcement of the qualified rate of safety supervision sampling inspection of commonly consumed foods.

H2: The public's care trust in safety supervision sampling inspection has a significant positive effect on the attitude toward the qualified rate of safety supervision sampling inspection of commonly consumed foods.

2.2. Effect of Institutional Trust on the Perception of Food Safety

Institutional trust is essential for relationships, certifications, and organizational assurance, and can be facilitated by increasing consumer confidence in normative and expected outcomes ^[50]. Consumers' perception of food safety is defined as “the consumer's perceived judgment of the level of food safety under specific circumstances” ^[51]. Scholars have generally theorized a strong correlation between trust and risk perception ^[52]. For example, Hu ^[53] found that populations with a high level of trust in companies using gene technology generally had lower risk perception. When choosing food products, consumers may have specific concerns about safety, hygiene, cleanliness, and the presence of chemical residues ^[54]. Consumers who purchase food often interact directly with food retailers and indirectly with the food regulators responsible for managing food hazards ^[55]. De Jonge ^[11] argued that consumers trust the organizations that form the food supply chain (e.g., producers, manufacturers, and retailers of food) and food regulators (e.g., governments, legislatures, and consumer associations). Previous research has shown that trust affects the perceived food safety of various food products ^[33]. Researchers have confirmed that trust in government associations affects consumers’ perception of food safety ^[56]. For example, Feng ^[57] found that trust in the State Food and Drug Administration had a significant effect on risk perception. Another study showed that the more ineffective the public perceived government regulation of additive safety to be, the higher their level of risk perception of additives and the greater the likelihood of refusal to purchase ^[58]. This suggests that the effectiveness of government supervision of food safety significantly affects the level of consumers' perceptions of food safety. Therefore, the following hypotheses were proposed:

H3: The public's competence trust in supervision sampling inspection has a significant negative effect on the perception of food safety.

H4: The public's care trust in supervision sampling inspection has a significant negative effect on the perception of food safety.

2.3. Effect of Perception of Food Safety on Attitude

The relationship between risk perception and attitude has been studied. Consumers' food safety risk perception is based on a subjective perception of existing risks. The reality of such risks may not necessarily exist but will have a great impact on consumers’ attitudes. Lobb ^[59] suggested that attitudes towards the product are negatively affected by risk perception based on the SPARTA model. Choi ^[60] found that consumers' perception of risk negatively affected their attitude toward street food. However, Dang ^[61] argued that risk perception had a positive effect on attitude toward traceable foods. The more risk perceived, the more likely consumers could express a positive attitude toward traceable foods. Per common sense, risk perception has a negative impact on attitude regarding common foods ^[59][60]. We conclude that the lower the public perception of overall food safety risk, the more they agree with the results of the high pass rate recorded by the regulatory agencies. This led us to the following hypothesis:

H5: The perception of food safety has a significant negative effect on the public's attitude toward the qualified rate of safety supervision sampling inspection of commonly consumed foods.

2.4. Effect of Generalized Trust on Attitude and Perception of Food Safety

Generalized trust is a kind of trust based on similar values and norms that undergird social trust, also known as social trust, i.e., trust in strangers or many people in society. Compared to individualized trust, building social trust is more time-consuming, but costs less and may bring greater social efficiency. The empirical results of one study show that social trust had a significant positive impact on the well-being of the population ^[62]. Kunitoki ^[63]found that increasing social trust in the HPV vaccine in Japan led to renewed confidence in the vaccine and a reduction in preventable deaths and complications. Liu ^[64] explored the impact of social trust on parents' risk perceptions and vaccination intentions in China, where social trust was negatively associated with perceived risk but positively associated with perceived benefits. Therefore, the following hypotheses were proposed.

H6: The public's generalized trust has a significant positive effect on the public’s attitude toward the qualified rate of safety supervision sampling inspection of commonly consumed foods.

H7: The public's generalized trust has a significant negative effect on the perception of food safety.

3. The effect of public's care trust and competence trust

Table 1 shows the ultimate decision of the proposed hypothesis of the model. The t-value for the path of H1 (2.587), H2 (12.678), H3 (−5.612), H4 (−6.451), H5 (−5.341), and H7 (−4.146) was higher than the standard value. Therefore, the study findings indicate the existence of statistically significant positive relationships between competence trust (β = 0.129, p < 0.05), care trust (β = 0.736, p < 0.01), perception of food safety (β = −0.151, p < 0.01), and the public's attitude toward a high qualified rate of supervision sampling inspection. Other significant relationships were observed between competence (β = −0.295, p < 0.01), care (β = −0.431, p < 0.01), generalized trust (β = −0.146, p < 0.01), and perception of food safety. Thus, the outcomes corroborate hypotheses 1–5, and 7. In contrast, generalized trust did not show a significant relationship with the public's attitude (p > 0.05) (see Figure 1). Therefore, hypothesis 6 was rejected.

Table 1. Structural Equation Model and Hypothesis Testing Result.

Note: COT: Competence trust; CAT: Care trust; GT: Generalized trust; PFS: Perception of food safety; ATT: The public's attitude toward the high qualified rate of safety supervision sampling inspection of commonly consumed foods. ** Significant at 5% level, *** Significant at 1% level, STD = Standard.

Figure 1. Structural Equation Model. 

The public's care trust and competence trust were important factors influencing their attitude toward the results of sampling and inspection. In terms of the total effect, care trust had a greater weight than competence trust and was the core focus of trust enhancement, as shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Direct Effect, Indirect effect, and Total effect (Public's attitude toward the high qualified rate of safety supervision sampling inspection of commonly consumed foods.).

4. Improvement Measures

At the same time, consumers' opinions on measures to improve the supervision sampling inspection process were studied. As shown in Figure 2, the foci that could significantly increase their trust in the supervision sampling inspection of commonly consumed foods were as follows: “The sampling process should be open and transparent (IM2: Mean score = 3.63),” “The rigorous regulation should be implemented (IM8: Mean score = 3.58),” and “The most stringent standards should be established (IM7: Mean score = 3.58).”

Figure 2. Improvement measures for food safety supervision sampling inspection. Data are presented as mean. IM1: The sampling scheme should be scientific and reasonable; IM2: The sampling process should be open and transparent; IM3: The sampling and analysis techniques should be accurate; IM4: The sampling and testing results should be open and transparent; IM5: The sampling and testing results should be interpreted in detail to respond to public concerns; IM6: Substandard products should be effectively traced and recalled; IM7: The most stringent standards should be established; IM8: Rigorous regulation should be implemented; IM9: The most severe penalties should be imposed; IM10: The most serious accountability should be upheld.

5. Discussion

The two-dimensional models of trust that are currently more widely used in the food safety field are competence trust and care trust. Competence trust refers to trust based on the performance of competence in terms of knowledge, skills, and behavior. Care trust refers to trust based on motivation and relationships and reflects the public's relationship with the person they trust and their assumptions about the intentions and motivations of the person they trust.

The current results indicate that institutional trust has a significant positive effect on the attitude toward the public announcement of the qualified rate of safety supervision sampling inspection of commonly consumed foods. This result is consistent with the finding of Costa-Font M ^[65], which showed that consumers' trust in public regulatory authorities is an important factor affecting the public's attitude toward GM food and reduces their worry. The results also indicate that care trust has greater weight on changing the attitude towards supervision sampling inspection than competence trust. This suggests that food safety supervision and sampling organizations will be more effective in fostering trust in qualified rates by focusing on care trust than on competence trust, which is consistent with the findings of previous studies [66,67]. In a study on topics such as food additives, Chen ^[66] found that addressing the public's level of apprehension or feelings of helplessness should increase the public’s care trust in the government rather than competence trust. Supervision sampling inspection should focus on emotion and rationality when communicating with the public, prioritizing emotional responses, demonstrating similar values and similar core concerns, and responding positively to audience concerns ^[67]. In the meantime, supervision sampling inspection departments should convey the attitude that they are fully considering the public’s interest, enhancing care trust, reducing confrontational interpretations, and thus accumulating core evidence to convince people with reason.

The survey also explored the public trust in supervision sampling inspection. Among the ten efforts to enhance trust, the public most strongly endorsed “The sampling process should be open and transparent”, “The most stringent standards should be established”, and “The rigorous regulation should be implemented”. The third lowest ranking for “The sampling and testing results should be open and transparent” reflects, to some extent, the openness and transparency of the process more than the openness and transparency of the results in terms of trust in food safety supervision sampling inspection.

5.1. Managerial Implications

The results of the study suggest that adequate national supervision sampling work may improve consumer trust in food risk screening, as well as promoting public approval of the qualified rate of supervision and sampling inspection. Here are some measures proposed for food safety regulators. In the production of food safety supervision sampling inspection videos, the General Administration can consider the results of perception surveys and prioritize the presentation of views and beliefs shared by the public, such as demonstrating the ability to detect potential food safety hazards and the openness and transparency of the supervision sampling inspection process to promote public empathy and enhance the acceptance and trust of the message. When formulating food sampling and inspection plans, the difference between “sampling and inspection priorities” and “public concerns” can be narrowed appropriately by incorporating commonly consumed food categories that are of high public concern in questionnaires and public opinion surveys to actively respond to audience concerns and enhance public trust in the government's sampling inspection. It is recommended that the disclosure of information on food items of key concern to the public should be enhanced to meet the information needs of the public in depth. The focus on food information disclosure should be considered a top priority to meet the information needs of the public. When the sampling test results are released, expert interpretations can be combined to clarify professional information that the public should know and want to know but do not know in an easy-to-understand way ^[68].

China can learn from the more advanced work of other countries. For example, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Europe's leading food risk management agency, has produced a detailed summary of the different approaches used in its work alongside a guidebook. Its work has also gained public attention, safeguarding the quality of EFSA's food safety science, and enabling a transparent and trustworthy relationship based on open and effective dialogue. The EFSA classifies audiences and suggests content strategies for communicating with different audiences, as well as providing on the technical and professional skills needed ^[18]. Not only does this increase the efficiency of communication with the audiences but also increases audience trust in EFSA-related work^{[18] [69]}.

5.2. Policy-Making Implications

Food safety supervision is a systematic project, which transforms the supervision of government departments into a cooperative supervision mechanism dominated by government departments and involving the participation of relevant social forces. To improve the effectiveness of food safety supervision, relevant departments should focus more on consumer concerns when formulating policies. Policymakers should realize that the entire food system has to work toward fulfilling consumers' needs ^[70]. The principle of taking consumers as the center is reflected in the sampling inspection, re-inspection, and processing activities organized by the food market supervision and administration department. China's food safety supervision system of laws and regulations should also be further improved, with strict implementation of food safety laws and regulations. We should strengthen oversight of food safety across the board, establishing the strictest standards, enforcing stringent regulation, imposing the severest penalties, and insisting on the most serious accountability. The study also found that these strategies could significantly increase public trust in the supervision sampling inspection of commonly consumed foods.

6. Conclusions

To improve public trust in food safety, this present study focused on food safety surveillance and sampling. Consumers' competence trust, care trust, and perception of food safety to be the factors that significantly affect the public's attitude toward the high qualified rate of supervision sampling inspection. Care trust was the core focus of trust enhancement rather than competence trust. Measures for enhancing public trust in national food inspection can be developed based on this research.

This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/foods11131971