Abstract
There is limited understanding of what constitutes public benefit from the perspective of the public, and none that we are aware of related to food consumer science. The purpose of this study is to contribute towards a better understanding of public benefit as a whole and its connection to food choice, essential to driving progress towards responsible consumption and healthier diets. Public benefit, associated trade-offs and responsible actors were investigated via written questions, and food choice was explored during group discussions using the PlayDecide methodology. Adults (n = 105) were recruited in six European countries (Denmark, Germany, Italy, Slovakia, Spain and the UK) and stratified by attained education. Our findings indicate that assumptions should not be made that there is general consensus about what constitutes public benefit, especially with regard to consumer food choice. Group discussions around food-related freedom of choice, education, agency and responsibility suggested that private and public benefit are neither mutually exclusive nor automatically complementary. The serious game approach employed affected a change in participants’ public benefit perceptions, demonstrating its potential to better evaluate the connections between private interests and the common good through meaningful public deliberation.