Aleksandra Berezowska

Nutrigenomics-based personalised nutritional advice: in search of a business model?

Nutritional advice has mainly focused on population-level recommendations. Recent developments in nutrition, communication, and marketing sciences have enabled potential deviations from this dominant business model in the direction of personalisation of nutrition advice. Such personalisation efforts can take on many forms, but these have in common that they can only be effective if they are supported by a viable business model. The present paper takes an inventory of approaches to personalised nutrition currently available in the market place as its starting point to arrive at an identification of their underlying business models. This analysis is presented as a unifying framework against which the potential of nutrigenomics-based personalised advice can be assessed. It has uncovered nine archetypical approaches to personalised nutrition advice in terms of their dominant underlying business models. Differentiating features among such business models are the type of information that is used as a basis for personalisation, the definition of the target group, the communication channels that are being adopted, and the partnerships that are built as a part of the business model. Future research should explore the consumer responses to the diversity of “archetypical” business models for personalised nutrition advice as a source of market information on which the delivery of nutrigenomics-based personalised nutrition advice may further build.

Consumer adoption of personalised nutrition services from the perspective of a risk–benefit trade-off

Through a Privacy Calculus (i.e. risk–benefit trade-off) lens, this study identifies factors that contribute to consumers’ adoption of personalised nutrition services. We argue that consumers’ intention to adopt personalised nutrition services is determined by perceptions of Privacy Risk, Personalisation Benefit, Information Control, Information Intrusiveness, Service Effectiveness, and the Benevolence, Integrity, and Ability of a service provider. Data were collected in eight European countries using an online survey. Results confirmed a robust and Europe-wide applicable cognitive model, showing that consumers’ intention to adopt personalised nutrition services depends more on Perceived Personalisation Benefit than on Perceived Privacy Risk. Perceived Privacy Risk was mainly determined by perceptions of Information Control, whereas Perceived Personalisation Benefit primarily depended on Perceived Service Effectiveness. Services that required increasingly intimate personal information, and in particular DNA, raised consumers’ Privacy Risk perceptions, but failed to increase perceptions of Personalisation Benefit. Accordingly, to successfully exploit personalised nutrition, service providers should convey a clear message regarding the benefits and effectiveness of personalised nutrition services. Furthermore, service providers may reduce Privacy Risk by increasing consumer perceptions of Information Control. To enhance perceptions of both Information Control and Service Effectiveness, service providers should make sure that consumers perceive them as competent and reliable.

Willingness to pay for personalised nutrition across Europe

BACKGROUND Personalised nutrition (PN) may promote public health. PN involves dietary advice based on individual characteristics of end users and can for example be based on lifestyle, blood and/or DNA profiling. Currently, PN is not refunded by most health insurance or health care plans. Improved public health is contingent on individual consumers being willing to pay for the service. METHODS A survey with a representative sample from the general population was conducted in eight European countries (N = 8233). Participants reported their willingness to pay (WTP) for PN based on lifestyle information, lifestyle and blood information, and lifestyle and DNA information. WTP was elicited by contingent valuation with the price of a standard, non-PN advice used as reference. RESULTS About 30% of participants reported being willing to pay more for PN than for non-PN advice. They were on average prepared to pay about 150% of the reference price of a standard, non-personalised advice, with some differences related to socio-demographic factors. CONCLUSION There is a potential market for PN compared to non-PN advice, particularly among men on higher incomes. These findings raise questions to what extent personalized nutrition can be left to the market or should be incorporated into public health programs.

The perceived impact of the National Health Service on personalised nutrition service delivery among the UK public

Personalised nutrition (PN) has the potential to reduce disease risk and optimise health and performance. Although previous research has shown good acceptance of the concept of PN in the UK, preferences regarding the delivery of a PN service (e.g. online v. face-to-face) are not fully understood. It is anticipated that the presence of a free at point of delivery healthcare system, the National Health Service (NHS), in the UK may have an impact on end-user preferences for deliverances. To determine this, supplementary analysis of qualitative data obtained from focus group discussions on PN service delivery, collected as part of the Food4Me project in the UK and Ireland, was undertaken. Irish data provided comparative analysis of a healthcare system that is not provided free of charge at the point of delivery to the entire population. Analyses were conducted using the ‘framework approach’ described by Rabiee (Focus-group interview and data analysis. Proc Nutr Soc 63, 655-660). There was a preference for services to be led by the government and delivered face-to-face, which was perceived to increase trust and transparency, and add value. Both countries associated paying for nutritional advice with increased commitment and motivation to follow guidelines. Contrary to Ireland, however, and despite the perceived benefit of paying, UK discussants still expected PN services to be delivered free of charge by the NHS. Consideration of this unique challenge of free healthcare that is embedded in the NHS culture will be crucial when introducing PN to the UK.

Providing Personalised Nutrition: Consumers' Trust and Preferences Regarding Sources of Information, Service Providers and Regulators, and Communication Channels

Background/Aims: Personalised nutrition has potential to revolutionise dietary health promotion if accepted by the general public. We studied trust and preferences regarding personalised nutrition services, how they influence intention to adopt these services, and cultural and social differences therein. Methods: A total of 9,381 participants were quota-sampled to be representative of each of 9 EU countries (Germany, Greece, Ireland, Poland, Portugal, Spain, the Netherlands, the UK, and Norway) and surveyed by a questionnaire assessing their intention to adopt personalised nutrition, trust in service regulators and information sources, and preferences for service providers and information channels. Results: Trust and preferences significantly predicted intention to adopt personalised nutrition. Higher trust in the local department of health care was associated with lower intention to adopt personalised nutrition. General practitioners were the most trusted of service regulators, except in Portugal, where consumer organisations and universities were most trusted. In all countries, family doctors were the most trusted information providers. Trust in the National Health Service as service regulator and information source showed high variability across countries. Despite its highest variability across countries, personal meeting was the preferred communication channel, except in Spain, where an automated internet service was preferred. General practitioners were the preferred service providers, except in Poland, where dietitians and nutritionists were preferred. The preference for dietitians and nutritionists as service providers highly varied across countries. Conclusion: These results may assist in informing local initiatives to encourage acceptance and adoption of country-specific tailored personalised nutrition services, therefore benefiting individual and public health.

The moderating effect of motivation on health-related decision-making

Objective: This study identifies how autonomous and controlled motivation moderates the cognitive process that drives the adoption of personalised nutrition services. The cognitive process comprises perceptions of privacy risk, personalisation benefit, and their determinants. Design: Depending on their level of autonomous and controlled motivation, participants (N = 3453) were assigned to one of four motivational orientations, which resulted in a 2 (low/high autonomous motivation) × 2 (low/high controlled motivation) quasi-experimental design. Results: High levels of autonomous motivation strengthened the extent to which: (1) the benefits of engaging with a service determined the outcome of a risk-benefit trade-off; (2) the effectiveness of a service determined benefit perceptions. High levels of controlled motivation influenced the extent to which: (1) the risk of privacy loss determined the outcome of a risk-benefit trade-off; (2) controlling personal information after disclosure and perceiving the disclosed personal information as sensitive determined the risk of potential privacy loss. Conclusion: To encourage the adoption of personalised dietary recommendations, for individuals with high levels of autonomous motivation emphasis should be on benefits and its determinants. For those with high levels of controlled motivation, it is important to focus on risk-related issues such as information sensitivity.