Public opinion
research with businesses and consumers for the CFIA annual reputation survey
2022-2023
Final report
Prepared
for: The Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Supplier
Name: Pollara Strategic Insights
Contract number: CW2265540
Contract
value: $ 194,738.55 (including HST)
Award Date: December 16, 2022
Delivery Date: March 31st, 2023
Registration
Number: POR 095-22
For
more information on this report, please contact the CFIA at:
information@inspection.gc.ca
Ce rapport est aussi disponible en français.
This report presents the results of research conducted by Pollara
Strategic Insights on behalf of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. This study
consisted of qualitative (focus groups) and quantitative (survey) research with
two groups at the core of Agency’s mandate: Canadian consumers and
regulated food businesses. This study on reputation, trust, messaging
and other brand attributes allows the CFIA to manage
and develop the CFIA brand.
Cette publication est aussi disponible en français sous le titre : Recherche
sur l'opinion publique auprès des entreprises et des consommateurs pour
l'enquête annuelle de réputation de l'ACIA
This
publication may be reproduced for non-commercial purposes only. Prior written
permission must be obtained from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. For more
information on this report, please contact the Canadian Food Inspection Agency
at: Information@inspection.gc.ca or at:
The
Canadian Food Inspection Agency
1400
Merivale Road
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0Y9
Catalogue Number: A104-208/2023E-PDF
International Standard Book Number (ISBN): 978-0-660-48123-4
Related publications (registration number: POR 095-22):
Catalogue Number: A104-287/2023F-PDF (final report in French)
ISBN: 978-0-660-48126-5
© His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, as represented by the
Canadian Food Inspection Agency, 2023
Political neutrality certification
I hereby certify as Senior Officer of Pollara Strategic Insights that
the deliverables fully comply with the Government of Canada political
neutrality requirements outlined in the Policy on Communication and Federal
Identity and the Directive on the Management of Communications.
Specifically, the deliverables do not include information on electoral
voting intentions, political party preferences, standings within the
electorate, or ratings of the performance of a political party or its leaders.
Signed:
July 2023
Craig Worden
President
Pollara Strategic Insights
The mission of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) is dedicated
to safeguarding food, animals, and plants, which enhances the health and
well-being of Canada's people, environment, and economy.
Mitigating risks to food safety is a top CFIA priority, and the health
and safety of Canadians is a key force behind the design and development of CFIA
programs. The CFIA, in collaboration and partnership with industry, consumers,
and federal, provincial, and municipal organizations, continues to work towards
protecting Canadians from preventable health risks related to food and zoonotic
diseases.
The current and future economic prosperity of the Canadian agriculture
and forestry sectors relies on a healthy and sustainable animal and plant
resource base. As such, the CFIA is continually improving its program design
and delivery in the animal health and plant resource areas in
order to minimize and manage risks. In an effort to
protect the natural environment from invasive animal
and plant diseases and plant pests, the CFIA also performs extensive work
related to the protection of environmental biodiversity.
The reputation and credibility of the CFIA are vital to the Agency’s
ability to deliver on the mandate. As such, these variables are a key part of
the CFIA’s values and drive Agency actions, internally and externally, so trust
is preserved. The best way to communicate with stakeholders is continually
evolving and needs to be examined.
To assess these elements of reputation of the CFIA, a comprehensive POR
study is required using multiple methodologies. This is an annual study on
reputation, trust, messaging and other brand
attributes that allow the CFIA to manage and develop the CFIA brand. This POR
will also capture variables necessary for the POR Indicators required for the
Departmental Results Report and Treasury Board Submission Results Annexes.
Consumers
As was the case in previous
iterations of this study, the research conducted with both consumers and
businesses each comprised both qualitative and quantitative methods. The
qualitative work conducted with Canadian consumers consisted of six (6) online
focus groups, two in French and four in English of some 100 minutes in length
with participants who are primarily responsible for the food shopping in their
households. Consumer participants were offered $150 for their participation in
the study as compensation for their time.
The quantitative phase of the
consumer research was conducted with (N=3003) consumers via an online panel
which took an average of 9 minutes to
complete. An online survey was chosen because of its capacity to deliver the
survey to a broadly representative sample of Canadians efficiently, and because
it is well-adapted to Canadians’ communication habits. There are limitations to
online panels for generalizing the results to the target population, and
caution should be taken when applying inferential statistics.
Regulated
Businesses
The qualitative work conducted
with regulated Canadian businesses consisted of five (5) online focus groups,
one in French and four in English of some 110 minutes in length. Qualitative
research with businesspeople was focused on companies that are involved in the
growing, breeding or transportation of living plants or animals.
The quantitative phase of the
regulated business research was conducted with Logit Group and gathered data
from (N=1575) businesses
via emailed invitations sent out from Agency servers. These took
approximately 13.5 minutes on average to complete.
Limitations of
Qualitative Research:
Qualitative research is best
used for broadening our understanding of what matters to the target audiences
and how they think. Qualitative research reveals the diversity of perspectives
among target audiences and highlights issues that may not have previously been
identified or recognized by the research team. That said, the findings from
qualitative inquiry are not and should not be construed as
statistically-representative of the populations being studied.
The purpose of this study is to measure and compare Canadian consumers’
perceptions of food, plant and animal health and safety in Canada as well as to
evaluate reputation and activities of the CFIA, including how the CFIA is doing
as a federal Agency to build consumer familiarity, trust, and confidence in
this realm. Another practical objective is to explore how the public are
receiving communication messaging, measure their awareness of the CFIA’s
activities in their daily lives, and perhaps gain some insights into ways to
improve messaging in their mission to regulate the safety and health of food, plants and animals in Canada.
Year over year, Canadians awareness of the CFIA as the organization
responsible for food, plant and animal health and safety has remained
constant. As well, two in three
consumers claim to have heard or seen something related to the CFIA in the past
year. Sources of awareness are traditional media, the internet and word of
mouth. Digital tools such as the CFIA website, podcasts and
online articles/ videos are having more impact on awareness and familiarity
with the CFIA than newsletters, notices or direct contact
with the Agency.
Another objective of this study is to measure the percentage of
Canadians who agree that CFIA’s activities help ensure food sold in Canada is
safe. Canadians have a high level of trust (5, 6, or 7 on a 7-point scale) in
the CFIA to do what is right to ensure food is safe in Canada (71%). This is
steadily increasing year over year with last year’s trust score (70%), and the
initial score in 2021 being 66% for this metric. Of note, trust is higher among
those in the highest household income bracket, as well as those with higher
education.
While consumers still associate the CFIA brand with similar attributes as
last year, we are seeing a gradual decline in this agreement. The strongest
associations again were “Food recalls are an example of the food system
working” 70% (down 3 pts from last year, and 6pts from 2021), “The CFIA looks
out for the best interests of Canadians” 64% (down 3pts from last year, and
8pts from 2021) and “The CFIA is effective in enforcing food safety
regulations” 61% (down 2 pts from last year and 4 pts from 2021).
Finally, a key driver analysis was conducted to determine the relative
importance of a list of variables for predicting familiarity, trust, or
confidence in the Agency. It found that the Agency should focus messaging on
issues specifically to affect familiarity, trust or confidence as follows:
· The top way to increase familiarity include more communication
about what Agency does, and provide additional ways to access information about
the Agency’s activities
· The top drivers of Agency trust also remain consistent with last
year’s results; driving perceptions that the CFIA is “looking out” for the best
interests of Canadians, and that the CFIA is effective in enforcing food safety
regulations
· Confidence in the CFIA is driven by consumers’ understanding
of the Agency’s mandate, and their understanding that food recalls are an
example of the food system working.
The purpose of this study is to conduct research to measure the CFIA’s
reputation among key stakeholders, namely industries in the food, plant and animal lines. The organizations interviewed fall
within the purview of the Agency and therefore may be more invested with the
Agency as it pertains to their business. We looked at organizational
familiarity, trust and confidence in the CFIA, as well
as communication and brand imagery measures.
A new performance measure (NPS Net Promoter Score) was added to the
survey this year in order to have a one-score overall
evaluation of the CFIA by businesses. All lines of business gave quite
different NPS scores, with Food businesses giving the most favorable score of
48%, followed by Plant businesses (33%) and then Animal (23%). The main
difference is among the negative scores (Detractors rating 0-6 on the scale)
We asked Canadian businesses how confident they are that food, as well
as animals and plants are safeguarded. An encouraging majority gave a top 3 box
score (5, 6, or 7 on a 7-point scale) of 89%. Food businesses rated confidence
91%, while animal and plant were slightly lower at 85% and 86% respectively. Another reassuring result
shows strong confidence in the CFIA when rating
their company's level of confidence that food sold in Canada is safe; the top 3 box score (5, 6, or
7 on a 7-point scale) shows very high confidence across segments in the safety
of food in Canada (total 92%, food 93%, animal 89%, plant 89%).
When rating the CFIA on a number of attributes
and value statements, Food businesses rated the CFIA higher than did Plant and
Animal businesses. Similar to last year the same 4
statements involving respect, helpfulness, and fairness earned the highest
scores. Encouragingly, businesses with Indigenous owners or those with more
than 50% of employees who are visible minorities tended to agree significantly
more with these statements about the CFIA. Communication messaging is seemingly
doing well at reaching these minority groups.
A key driver analysis was also conducted to predict the most important
drivers of Agency familiarity, trust, and confidence among businesses.
· Similar to the last 2 years, the top
attributes that drive familiarity are clear guidance on regulations,
representatives carrying their duties in a respectful manner, and engaging in
open and honest dialogue about policies.
· In terms of driving Agency trust among businesses, the primary
driver is perceived “fairness”, and “sensitivity” to the specific needs of
businesses.
· The top two drivers of businesses’ confidence in the CFIA are the
same as last year although flipped in importance. The Agency needs to
communicate that they are “Competent” and “Fair” in order to
instill confidence among businesses.
The principal findings from our discussions with both consumer and
business participants centre on the diversity of their
views about food safety and the CFIA and their implications for the Agency and
its communications strategy.
Consumers
We found consumer participants to vary in their interest in food
generally, varyingly concerned with the ecological and environmental impact of
food production, more or less required to adjust to
the rising costs of food, and of differing inclination to trust the organizations–
namely governments and food companies – involved in the making and supervision
of food. We found as well that Canadians
with dietary and health related restrictions on what they can eat have
particular and unique concerns about ingredients, transparency, and the safe
food practices in industry that make of them a distinct audience. In the very
simplest of senses, these influences contribute to broadly divergent
conceptions of food safety, opposing those who see it largely as a matter of
avoiding exposure to pathogens and their immediate threat of food poisoning and
those who’s conception includes longer term threats implications for the health
of humans, society and the planet.
A particularly challenging implication in this swirl of influences is that
participants hold them in different combinations and to varying degrees –
resulting in a mix that much complicates public-facing communication for the
CFIA. In sum, our qualitative findings
suggest very clearly that the CFIA’s reputation is likely to improve if these
differences are accounted for. This report describes these differences in some
detail and offers some insight into some of the more evident ways Canadians
might be clustered accordingly.
Business
Operators
The business operators we spoke to also emerged as a heterogeneous
group. In their case, we found that their views about regulations and the CFIA
vary as a function of their size, their maturity, their particular
area of activity, the degree to which they are subject to regulatory
oversight, and finally their organizational values. We encountered clear evidence that bigger
organizations are better equipped to deal with regulatory oversight, often
evolving their core structures accordingly.
Bigger companies – and especially highly regulated ones -- are more
likely to have people tasked specifically to regulatory compliance. These human
and financial resources investments contribute to the accumulation of
specialized knowledge about regulations, and in some cases the development of
personal contact with the Agency staff which in turn greatly enhance their
ability to navigate the regulation process. Not surprisingly, these bigger
companies are more likely to be autonomous in their efforts to keep abreast of regulations
and related changes, and more assertive in defending their interests.
Smaller companies and those who experience less frequent contact with
the CFIA look very different. Many if not most are preoccupied with securing
their business and generally do so with fewer human and financial
resources. Operators of smaller
companies appear more likely to see regulations and compliance as one priority
among many others they must deal with and to deal with regulations reactively
as opposed to proactively. The issues of smaller and less regulated companies
are more likely to center on recognizing when and in which contexts they are
subject to regulations, and the challenges of keeping up with regulatory
changes. Although these smaller
companies appear to be less likely to encounter compliance issues (in no small
part because they are much less under scrutiny), there is some evidence to
suggest that when they are, they may be at risk of infractions that bigger
companies might well avoid.
Finally, we found varying inclinations among both small and larger, highly and less highly regulated companies to see compliance
as a virtuous value. Some of the
operators we spoke to clearly see compliance as either good for business, or
simply as a social good, and sometimes both.
Other operators tend to see compliance as a burden - to be resisted in
some cases, more of an annoyance in some cases, and in others, as an obstacle
to doing business in a particular field.
Not surprisingly, where a company sits on these dimensions appears to
have a clear and powerful influence on compliance, on the quality of
communications with the Agency, and for the Agency’s reputation. This report also discusses the diversity of
businesses in more detail.
Ultimately, these findings on differentiation across both consumer and
business audiences suggest that the CFIA has both the potential to improve to
its reputation, business relations, and performance by learning more about how
these two audiences are segmented and configuring its work accordingly.