Consumer Perceptions of Rice Safety and Pesticide Residues in Portugal: A Case Study

Abstract

Portugal has the highest per capita rice consumption in Europe. This study, conducted in Abrantes city through a non-probabilistic questionnaire and interviews with two key institutions in agri-food research and regulation representatives, revealed that most consumers are unaware of whether the rice they eat complies with EU Maximum Residue Levels. Few follow media or official sources on pesticide use, deepening the information gap. Only a small number buy organic rice, showing low prioritization of sustainability. Although there is a strong preference for domestically produced rice due to origin concerns, price is the main purchase driver, followed by nutritional content. Institutional insights highlight DGAV’s vital role in monitoring pesticide residues and INIAV implementing traceability technologies to ensure rice authenticity and safety. These results point out the urgent need for better consumer education and communication strategies, stronger support for sustainable choices, and reinforced regulatory frameworks to promote food safety and sustainability in the rice sector. Portugal has the highest per capita rice consumption in Europe. A survey in Abrantes, complemented by interviews with agri-food regulators and researchers, revealed that most consumers are unaware of whether their rice complies with EU residue limits and rarely follow official information sources. Only a small proportion purchase organic rice, showing limited prioritization of sustainability. While domestic rice is strongly preferred, price remains the main driver of purchase decisions, followed by nutritional value. Institutional insights emphasized DGAV’s role in monitoring pesticide residues and INIAV’s development of traceability technologies to ensure authenticity and safety. These findings underline the urgent need for improved consumer education, greater support for sustainable choices, and stronger regulatory framework.

1. Introduction

The use of chemical substances for pest control has a long historical background. Records show that the Sumerians used sulfur around 4500 years ago. In the 15th century, the Chinese applied mercury and arsenic compounds, and by the 17th century, nicotine extracted from tobacco had become a popular pesticide [1]. In the 20th century, scientific and technological advances, accelerated by global conflicts, fostered the development of the pesticide industry, which began focusing primarily on agriculture. This shift contributed to the rise of industrial agriculture, marked by monocultures and intensive chemical use, aimed at meeting growing global food demands [2]. Pesticides are chemical or biological substances used to control undesirable organisms such as insects, fungi, weeds, rodents, and bacteria [3]. Despite the emergence of alternative practices like Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and Organic Production (OP), pesticide use remains widespread in agriculture, primarily due to the pursuit of profitability in a sector often seen as economically less attractive.

In Portugal, rice is a key component of the national diet. Per capita consumption between 2021/2022 and 2023/2024 was 14.9 kg, slightly higher than the average recorded between 2020 and 2023, according to the National Statistics Institute (Database: Vegetable product supply balances, INE, 2025 [4], https://www.ine.pt). Of the total rice consumed, 22% is imported, while the self-sufficiency rate averages 121% (Appendix A). Rice production entails significant costs, with herbicides accounting for about 18% of the total [5]. Pesticide use has well-documented environmental and health impacts, including soil and water contamination, biodiversity loss, and human health risks. In response, the EU launched the Farm to Fork Strategy (2020), under the European Green Deal, aiming to cut pesticide use by 50%, promote organic farming, and enhance food and environmental sustainability [6]. Portugal enforces strict legislation aligned with EU standards, authorizing pesticide marketing only after safety evaluations that define acceptable doses, intervals, and Maximum Residue Levels (MRLs) [7]. The crop protection sector has invested in lower-toxicity, more sustainable products. Understanding consumer views on pesticide residues is key for both public health awareness and market strategy, reinforcing the role of sustainable consumption. Pesticides are classified by target organism (e.g., insecticides, fungicides), chemical nature (organic/inorganic), or mode of action (e.g., enzyme disruption) as refers Ledoux [8]. Though primarily agricultural, they are also used in public health to control disease vectors.

The environmental risks of pesticide use depend on factors such as the substance’s physical and chemical properties, toxicity, application method and timing, formulation, and dosage [9,10,11]. Although regulatory restrictions have increased and authorization requirements have become stricter (Regulation EC 1107/2009) [12], data show that total sales in tonnes increased between 2018 and 2022, mainly due to greater use of fungicides (

Table 1. Sales of plant protection products by function type in Portugal (tonnes).

Type of Product	2018	2019	2020	2021	2022	Variation Rate (2018–22)	Annual Growth Rate
Fungicides	4338	5770	6405	6273	5981	38%	+8.4%
Herbicides	1939	2222	2402	2352	1906	–2%	–0.4%
Insecticides and Acaricides	676	818	423	291	641	–5%	–1.3%
Others (a)	1109	1064	486	693	530	–52%	–16.9%
Total Sales	8062	9874	9716	9609	9057	12%	+3.0%

Note: Includes soil fumigants, molluscicides, growth regulators, rodenticides, and others. Source: INE (2023) [13].

). Meanwhile, herbicide use decreased by an average of 0.4% per year. This context reinforces the importance of public policies, technological innovation, and consumer education in promoting safer, more sustainable, and responsible agriculture.

Although several European studies (e.g., EFSA Eurobarometer and comparative surveys) have examined consumer concerns about pesticide residues and food safety, most focus on compliance and monitoring rather than on consumer perceptions and purchasing behavior. To better frame these behavioral aspects, we also draw on the concept of food values developed by Lusk and Briggeman [14], which highlights price, safety, nutrition, and origin as the main drivers of food choice. This perspective the relevance of analyzing how Portuguese consumers balance economic priorities with food safety concerns in the context of rice consumption.

Pesticide Residues and Food Safety Monitoring in Portugal

Pesticide residues in food remain a primary route of human exposure to these substances. While a balanced diet is essential, it is equally important to monitor pesticide levels in the foods we consume. The mounting public demand for safer, traceable, and nutritionally transparent food is indicative of an escalating concern over food quality, particularly in the context of the expanding disparity between urban consumers and rural producers [15,16].

Despite the frequent characterization of traditional food pyramids as obsolete, they persist in emphasizing cereals, particularly rice, as essential components of a healthy diet. This underscores the necessity for rigorous pesticide residue monitoring. As Inocêncio [16] emphasizes, adherence to legal residue levels is imperative for safeguarding public scientific health. Portugal has the 14th highest level of concern about pesticide residues in Europe, with levels of public awareness that exceed the EU average. The national food safety oversight is overseen by the Directorate-General for Food and Veterinary Affairs (DGAV). The Maximum Residue Levels (MRLs) are established following a rigorous scientific risk assessment by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), and subsequently approved by the European Commission. In instances where a specific MRL has not been established, a default limit of 0.01 mg/kg is implemented, contingent upon standard detection capabilities [17]. Portugal’s DGAV implements the National Pesticide Residue Control Programme annually. In 2021, 897 food samples were analyzed, increasing to 964 in 2022. These samples covered fruits, vegetables, and cereals (

Table 2. Summary of pesticide control results in 2021 and 2022 in Portugal.

Category	Samples (2021/22)	No Residues (%)	Below MRL (%)	Above MRL (%)	Infractions (%)
Cereals	28/53	54%/42%	43%/47%	3.6%/11.3%	0%/3.8%
Processed Products	20/25	70%/28%	30%/60%	0%/12%	0%/0.1%
Baby Food	11/15	82%/80%	0%/6.7%	18%/13%	18%/13%
Fruits and Vegetables	800/871	41%/34%	52%/59%	6.3%/7%	4.5%/3.8%
Animal Products	38/10	3%/20%	0%/20%	95%/60%	65.8%/40%
Total	897/964	41%/34%	49%/58%	10%/8%	7%/4.5%

Note: Includes samples from the import control program. Source: DGAV [18,19].

). The overall non-compliance rate dropped from 7% in 2021 to 4.5% in 2022. Violations led to rejected shipments. When residues exceeded legal limits, acute risk assessments were conducted. These assessments considered the toxicological properties of the substances, the consumption patterns of vulnerable groups, and the guidelines provided by the European Commission’s Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF), namely the Working Instructions 2.2 (WI 2.2).

The DGAV detected pesticide residue levels above the MRL in some imported goods, indicating non-compliance. This affected saffron, custard apple, rice, oats, banana, starfruit, cherry, cabbage, spinach, guava, orange, passion fruit, melon, turnip, papaya, pear, pepper, savory, mandarin, and tomato. Domestic rice tests showed no violations. In rice two border-control cases of non-compliance were recorded in 2021 and 2022, involving unauthorized fungicides not approved in Portugal (see

Table 3. Summary of pesticide control results for rice in 2021 and 2022 in Portugal.

Year	Pesticide	No. of Samples Collected in Mainland	No. of Samples Collected in Madeira (M)/Azores (A)	Origin	Unauthorized Pesticide in the EU	Unauthorized Use on Crop (National Products)	Non-Compliant Agricultural Practice	With/Without/Possible Risk (WR/NR/PR)	Total (Samples with Infractions)
2021	propiconazole	1		Paraguay	X			NR (No Risk)	1
2022	tricyclazole + thiamethoxam	1		India	X			PR (Possible Risk)	1

Note: NR—no risk; PR—possible risk. X: it was found. Source: DGAV (2023) [19].

).

In accordance with the exploratory nature of the present study, the following research questions guided the analysis: What is the level of consumer awareness with regard to the presence of pesticide residues in rice? Which factors exert the greatest influence on the purchasing decisions of rice consumers in Portugal?

The present study seeks to explore the manner in which socio-demographic characteristics influence consumer perceptions and behaviors with regard to rice safety and sustainability.

2. Materials and Methods

Given the central objective of this research—to understand consumers’ concerns on pesticide residues in rice—a questionnaire survey was adopted as the primary data collection instrument. This approach was complemented by interviews with the National Phytosanitary Authority (DGAV) and the State Laboratory of Ministry of Agriculture. (INIAV). The institutional component of the study consisted of semi-structured interviews, conducted as guided conversations rather than formal questionnaires, with representatives of DGAV and INIAV. The interviews were focused on three main topics: The institutional monitoring of pesticide residues and compliance with EU legislation represent the first of three key areas of focus. The second is traceability and innovation in rice production, and the third is communication strategies to consumers regarding food safety. The information collected was analyzed using thematic content analysis, a method that enabled the identification of recurrent themes and their integration with the survey findings. The institutional interviews provided additional insights that reinforced the survey results, particularly regarding monitoring (DGAV) and traceability (INIAV), thereby strengthening methodological triangulation. The selection of these techniques was deemed appropriate, as they have been demonstrated to be effective in rapidly acquiring information. The second point is subdivided into two subpoints, the first of which is numbered.

2.1. Data Collection Tool: Survey Instrument

According to Henriques [20] and Kelley [21], the efficacy of questionnaire-based surveys in data collection is contingent upon the attainment of a sufficiently large sample size, a prerequisite for ensuring the reliability and validity of statistical analyses. This perspective is corroborated by the works of Groves et al. [22] and Fink [23], which underscore the significance of rigorous sampling procedures in minimizing bias and enhancing the generalizability of findings. Furthermore, as noted by Taherdoost [24], the implementation of this method requires a clear delineation of the study universe—that is, the total population for whom the questionnaire is intended—or, when full coverage is not feasible, the use of a representative sample that reflects the key characteristics of the target population.

A quantitative approach was employed in this study to ensure methodological rigor and support the generalization of findings to a broader population, emphasis by Moreira [25]. The questionnaire, composed of predefined questions, underwent a pre-test with 16 regular rice consumers to evaluate the clarity, relevance, and estimated completion time. Following necessary refinements, the final survey was administered in person between 3 and 18 July 2023, across various public locations in Abrantes city, including supermarkets, cafés, restaurants, and leisure areas—at different times and with participants of varying age groups, thereby enhancing the representativeness of the sample. All participants were duly informed of the study’s objectives, estimated duration, and the assurances of anonymity and data confidentiality.

The adoption of a non-probabilistic sampling approach was necessitated by the exploratory nature of the study and the absence of a comprehensive sampling frame of rice consumers in the region. This methodological approach facilitated the participation of individuals from diverse socio-demographic backgrounds, thereby ensuring a comprehensive representation of the city’s population. Whilst it must be noted that this approach does not permit statistical generalization to the entire Portuguese population, it is nevertheless considered to provide valuable insights into consumer perceptions and behaviors. These insights are considered consistent with the aims of an exploratory case study.

2.2. Survey Data Analysis Technique

The collected data were analyzed using Microsoft Excel and IBM SPSS Statistics (version 29). Descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, non-parametric tests, and cluster analysis were applied to identify response patterns and potential relationships between the variables under investigation.

Although the survey was originally designed as a questionnaire, in this work it is presented in tabular format (Appendix B). This presentation was chosen to provide a clearer and more concise overview of the questions, response options, and conditional logic, thereby allowing the reader to quickly visualize the structure of the instrument. The tabular format enhances organization, avoids redundancy, and improves readability within the academic context.

3. Results

3.1. Sample Description and Methodology

The survey comprised 160 participants, selected through face-to-face interviews in Abrantes, located in the Santarém District within Portugal’s Tejo region.

Abrantes was selected as a case study because it combines characteristics of urban, peri-urban, and rural areas, thereby reflecting a diversity of consumer profiles within a single municipality. The region’s demographic structure, consumption patterns, and accessibility rendered it a suitable location for conducting exploratory fieldwork. The city’s manageable size and socio-demographic diversity allowed for efficient data collection while still capturing variations in consumer behavior relevant to broader Portuguese contexts.

The sample size was calculated using Yamane’s formula [26] for a 90% confidence level and a 10% margin of error (n = N/[1 + N(e²)]), resulting in a required minimum of 100 participants based on the 2021 population of 16,802 (INE Database, 2021 [27]). The actual sample exceeded this, allowing for increased precision. Applying the finite population correction (Expression (1)), the margin of error at a 95% confidence level was 7.71% [28,29].

$$e=Z \surd \left({\displaystyle \frac{p\left(1-p\right)}{n}}\ast {\displaystyle \frac{N-n}{N-1}}\right)$$

(1)

With a population size (N) of 16,802, a sample size (n) of 160, a proportion (p) of 0.5, and a Z-score of 1.96 for a 95% confidence level, the sample meets statistical requirements for representativeness. Most respondents were male (57.5%), with females representing 42.5%. The largest age group was 45–64 years (32.5%), followed by 25–34 years (23.8%). Most participants were single (46.9%) and had completed secondary education (44.4%). The majority (51.9%) lived in households with two to four members (Appendix C). The following section will provide a general analysis of the survey data.

3.2. General Analysis of Survey Data

The first section of the survey examined monthly rice consumption frequency, attention to product origin, and preference for provenance.

3.2.1. Monthly Frequency of Rice Consumption

Results reveal a consistent pattern of moderate to high rice consumption among respondents (n = 160). While 13.0% consumed rice 1–3 times per month, the majority reported higher frequencies: 21.9% (4–7 times), 28.8% (8–10 times), and 29.4% (11–21 times). A smaller group (6.9%) consumed rice 22 times or more. Overall, 93.1% reported eating rice at least four times monthly. Notably, all participants stated they could not go a full month without consuming rice, underscoring its staple role in their diet (

Table 4. Frequency of consumption (N = 160).

Frequency of Consumption (per Month)	% of Respondents
1–3 times	13.0
4–7 times	21.9
8–10 times	28.8
11–21 times	29.4
≥22 times	6.9
Total	100

).

3.2.2. Attention to Rice Origin at the Time of Purchase

Regarding respondents’ attention to the origin of the rice purchased—whether domestic or imported—most indicated that they consider this factor relevant. Specifically, 51.3% of participants reported paying attention to the product’s origin, while 48.7% stated they did not. Among those concerned with origin (n = 82), preference for domestically produced rice was nearly unanimous: 98.8% favored national rice, with only one respondent (1.22%) preferring imported rice (

Table 5. Rice origin preference (N = 160).

Attention to Origin When Buying Rice	% of Respondents
Yes	51.3
No	48.7
Total	100

).

This subsection presents the proportion of respondents (n = 160) who reported paying attention to the origin of rice when purchasing. In the following subsection (Section 3.2.3), we analyze only the subgroup of those respondents (n = 82) who declared that they do pay attention to origin.

3.2.3. Preference for Rice Origin at Time of Purchase

This subsection focuses on the subgroup of respondents who reported paying attention to rice origin (n = 82) and examines whether they preferred Portuguese or imported rice. Regarding whether respondents pay attention to the origin of the rice they purchase (domestic vs. foreign), about 51.3% said they do consider the product’s origin when buying, while 48.7% do not. Among those who care about the origin (82 individuals), nearly all (98.8%) prefer domestically produced rice, with only one respondent (1.22%) favoring imported rice (

Table 6. Rice origin preference (N = 82).

Preference for Origin (n = 82)	% of Respondents
Domestic (Portuguese rice)	98.8
Imported rice	1.2
Total	100

).

3.2.4. Factors Influencing Rice Purchase Decisions

To understand what drives consumers when buying rice, respondents rated the importance of four factors on a 1–5 Likert scale (1: Not important; 5: Very important): price, brand, nutritional information, and packaging.

V1: Price: The most influential factor; 43.1% rated it as very important (5), while only 10% said it had no impact (1). V2: Brand: Opinions were more moderate; 31.9% rated brand as moderately important (3). Still, 20.6% considered it important or very important. V3. Nutritional Information: Gaining importance, with 26.8% rating it moderately important and 22.5% rating it very important, reflecting growing health concerns. V4. Packaging: Least important factor; 28.8% considered it of little importance, and only 10.6% rated it as significantly influencing their choice.

The results of the study indicate that among the analyzed criteria—namely price, brand, nutritional information, and packaging—price is the factor that most influences rice purchasing decisions, being considered “very important” by 43.1% of respondents. This finding is consistent with data presented by the 2022 Eurobarometer, published by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) [30]. The EFSA study was based on 26,509 interviews conducted in the 27 Member States of the European Union between March and April 2022, of which 1006 took place in Portugal. The findings of the study indicated that the cost of food emerged as the predominant factor influencing consumer choices across Europe, with a weighted average of 54% at the EU level. The survey revealed that respondents in Portugal (74%), Greece, and Latvia (both 70%), were the most likely to consider price as one of the most important elements in food purchasing decisions. This increased relevance attributed to food cost can be contextualized by recent socioeconomic shifts, namely the emergence of the Coronavirus pandemic and the outbreak of armed conflict in Europe, events that directly impacted markets and citizens’ purchasing power [30].

The preceding inquiries facilitated comprehension of the respondents’ behavior with regard to rice consumption. However, it is equally relevant to analyze their perception about the use of pesticides and the presence of residues in agricultural products. The following questions were thus posed in order to assess the participants’ level of knowledge on the topic: Question 1 (Q1): What is the monthly consumption of rice? Question 2 (Q2): When purchasing rice, is the origin of the rice given any consideration? Question 3 (Q3): If the previous question was answered in the affirmative, which rice is preferred? Question 4 (Q4): Is there any knowledge of pesticide residues in rice intended for consumption? Question 5 (Q5): Is there any following of news/information about pesticide residues in rice intended for consumption? Question 6 (Q6): Respondents were asked whether they considered the rice they purchased to be in accordance with legislation regarding pesticide residues. Question 7 (Q7): They were asked whether they had ever purchased certified organic rice. Question 8 (Q8): Respondents who answered in the affirmative to the previous question were asked how often they purchased it. Finally, Question 9 (Q9): Respondents were asked whether they considered rice to be a healthy product.

When questioned about their knowledge regarding the presence of pesticides in agricultural products, 37.5% of the 160 participants reported having sufficient knowledge of the topic, 32.5% indicated very limited knowledge, and 21.2% stated having no knowledge at all. A mere 8.8% of respondents asserted that they possessed a sufficient level of knowledge regarding the matter. With regard to the monitoring of information on pesticide residues in rice, 47.5% of respondents reported not following any news, scientific articles, research, or other information sources on the subject, whereas just 12.5% indicated that they did. With regard to the question of whether purchased rice complies with EU legislation on Maximum Pesticide Residue Levels, 45.6% of respondents considered compliance to be moderate, 31.9% believed that products fully comply, and 12.5% believed there is no compliance.

The present findings are in accordance with those of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) [30,31]. This is further supported by data and other studies [32,33] which demonstrate an increasing level of consumer concern regarding food safety, particularly with regard to chemical residues in food. European consumers are increasingly concerned about food safety, with a particular emphasis on chemical and biological risks. The primary concerns relate to the presence of pesticide residues, antibiotics, hormones in animal products, and additives such as colorants and preservatives. Organic farming is a practice that involves the legal restriction of synthetic pesticides and fertilizers. This practice is often perceived as being more beneficial to human health. Surveys indicate that 59.4% of respondents have purchased organic rice at least once, though primarily on an occasional basis. Concerns pertaining to the presence of pesticide residues in conventional rice continue to be a subject of debate. Despite the stringent regulations implemented by the European Union [7], consumers express a preference for healthy and varied diets. However, there is frequently a lack of awareness regarding the protective measures that are in place. As demonstrated by Djekic [33], “the need for reducing pesticide use became a major issue in public policies due to the myriad of negative impacts pesticides have on human health and the environment…” and the promotion of sustainable production, organic certification, and ‘zero residue’ initiatives has been shown to assist in ensuring compliance and fostering trust, while concurrently supporting resilient, sustainable agriculture.

3.3. Bivariate Relationship Between Variables

At this stage of the study, bivariate correlation analyses were conducted to identify statistically significant relationships among variables. According to Field [34], bivariate correlation can be measured using three main coefficients: Pearson’s r, Spearman’s rho (ρ), and Kendall’s tau (τ). Spearman’s rho is a non-parametric measure appropriate for ordinal variables or when normality assumptions are not met. Given the sample size (>30), Spearman’s rho was chosen, as it is robust to distribution asymmetries and outliers [35]. The analysis revealed strong, positive, and statistically significant correlations among the variables.

Correlation between Education Level, Rice Consumption, and Knowledge of Pesticide Residues: Spearman’s correlation showed strong positive associations—education level and monthly rice consumption (rs = 0.901, p < 0.001), education level and knowledge of pesticide residues (rs = 0.870, p < 0.001), and rice consumption and pesticide knowledge (rs = 0.911, p < 0.001). These results suggest that higher education is linked to greater rice consumption and higher awareness of pesticide residues, indicating a more informed consumer profile regarding food safety (Table 6).

Correlation between Education Level and Product Attributes: Spearman’s analysis showed strong, positive, and statistically significant correlations between education level and price (rs = 0.923, p < 0.001) and brand (rs = 0.929, p < 0.001). There were also strong correlations between brand and nutrition information (rs = 0.982, p < 0.001), and between nutrition information and packaging (rs = 0.959, p < 0.001). These results indicate that individuals with higher education levels tend to value brand, price, and product information more when selecting products, suggesting a more discerning and quality-oriented consumption behavior.

Correlation between Household Size, Rice Consumption, and Pesticide Knowledge: Spearman’s analysis showed positive and statistically significant correlations between household size and rice consumption (rs = 0.886, p < 0.001), household size and pesticide knowledge (rs = 0.848, p < 0.001), and rice consumption and pesticide knowledge (rs = 0.911, p < 0.001). These findings suggest that larger households tend to consume more rice and have greater awareness of pesticide residues, highlighting the relevance of social factors in promoting food safety awareness.

Correlation between Household Size, Price, Brand, Nutrition Information, and Packaging: Spearman’s analysis revealed statistically significant correlations (p < 0.001) among all variables. Price and brand showed a very strong positive correlation (rs = 0.929). Nutrition information and packaging also correlated strongly (rs = 0.959). Household size correlated positively with nutrition information (rs = 0.834) and price sensitivity (rs = 0.834), suggesting that larger households value nutrition information and are more price-sensitive. These findings highlight robust relationships among product attributes and consumer preferences.

A summary of the main statistical test results is provided in

Table 7. Bivariate relationship between variables.

Variable Comparison	Test Used	Significant Differences (p < 0.05)	Notes
Gender × Rice consumption frequency	Mann–Whitney U	Yes	Women reported higher consumption frequency
Gender × Purchase factors (price, brand, nutrition, packaging)	Mann–Whitney U	Yes	Women valued attributes more than men
Education × Importance of nutrition information	Kruskal–Wallis H	Yes	Higher education linked to greater concern
Household size × Rice consumption	Kruskal–Wallis H	Yes	Larger households consumed more rice
Education × Knowledge of pesticide residues	Spearman’s correlation	Strong positive (rs = 0.870, p < 0.001)	Higher education associated with greater awareness
Household size × Pesticide knowledge	Spearman’s correlation	Strong positive (rs = 0.848, p < 0.001)	Larger households more aware of residues

, which synthesizes the significant relationships identified between socio-demographic variables, consumption behavior, and awareness of pesticide residues.

Despite the presence of elevated correlation coefficients (rs > 0.9), multicolinearity assessments (including the Variance Inflation Factor, VIF) revealed no statistical inconsistencies. These elevated values are indicative of the internal consistency of the responses, particularly the near-unanimous preference for Portuguese rice among those who reported paying attention to the origin of the rice (n = 82). It is important to acknowledge the potential influence of social desirability and national identity on survey responses, particularly in relation to topics such as food safety and national product preference. In this context, it is possible that some participants may align their responses with perceived expectations or cultural values (e.g., trust in domestic products) rather than with purely individual behaviors. This can contribute to consistently high correlations.

3.4. Analysis of Group Differences

Beyond bivariate analysis, additional tests were conducted to examine the relationship between respondent characteristics and survey responses. Normality was assessed using Kolmogorov–Smirnov and Shapiro–Wilk tests; all variables (gender, age, employment status, household size, education, marital status) had p-values < 0.05, rejecting normality. Therefore, non-parametric tests were applied [34]. For gender (dichotomous), the Mann–Whitney U test was used; p < 0.05 indicates significant differences. For variables with more than two categories (age, marital status, employment, household size, education), Kruskal–Wallis H test was applied; p < 0.05 indicates significant differences between group medians.

Group differences for gender: The Mann–Whitney test is a statistical test that is used to compare the distributions of two samples, or to test the significance of a difference between two samples. The Mann–Whitney U test identified significant gender differences in all variables except for the preference for domestic versus foreign rice. For instance, 100% of female respondents consumed rice more than 8–10 times per month, while the proportion of male respondents who consumed rice less than this number was 100%. Furthermore, the study revealed that women placed a higher value on price, brand, nutrition information, and packaging compared to men.

Group differences for marital status, professional status, education, age, and household size: The Kruskal–Wallis H test revealed statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) among the variables of marital status, professional status, education, age, and household size. The analysis revealed a positive correlation between marital status and rice consumption. Furthermore, the study indicated that individuals with higher levels of education exhibited a greater concern for nutrition information, brand, packaging, and price. A divergence in consumption frequency and product choice criteria was observed among larger households. These findings are consistent with those of studies suggesting that education and household composition shape perceptions of food safety, as referred to by Sameshima et al. [36].

3.5. Two-Step Cluster Analysis

A two-step cluster analysis was conducted following the approach described by Bacher et al. [37], using SPSS. Sociodemographic variables and responses to questions Q1 to Q9 (excluding Q3 and Q8) were included, resulting in the identification of two distinct clusters (BIC criterion, silhouette > 0.5; n = 160). Cluster 1 (57.5%): Mainly younger, single men with lower education levels, low rice consumption, and limited awareness or concern about chemical residues. Cluster 2 (42.5%): Primarily women aged 35–64, with higher education, married, showing higher rice consumption, and greater concern for food quality, safety, and nutrition.

Purchase Preferences: A second cluster analysis using continuous (Q1, Q2, Q4–Q7, Q9) and categorical (V1–V4) variables also revealed two clusters (BIC criterion). Cluster 1 (56.9%): low-frequency consumers, limited knowledge, low concern for safety attributes. Cluster 2 (43.1%): informed, frequent consumers prioritizing price, nutrition, and safety information. These insights can guide educational campaigns and public policies [36].

The main socio-demographic and behavioral characteristics of the two clusters are summarized in

Table 8. Cluster analysis results.

Cluster	Demographic Profile	Consumption Behavior	Awareness and Attitudes	Purchase Priorities
Cluster 1 (57.5%)	Younger, mainly single men, lower education	Lower rice consumption	Limited awareness of pesticide residues	Price-driven, low concern for safety attributes
Cluster 2 (42.5%)	Older, mostly women (35–64), married, higher education	Higher rice consumption	Greater concern with food quality and safety	Balance of price, nutrition, and safety information

, which highlights their distinct profiles in terms of rice consumption, awareness, and purchase priorities.

3.6. Research Perspectives: Rice Traceability and Valorization

Interviews were conducted with representatives from DGAV and INIAV, two key Portuguese institutions in agri-food regulation and research. DGAV oversees phytosanitary regulation, ensuring rice traceability and promoting sustainable plant protection practices through advisory services and applicator training. INIAV focuses on research and development/innovation enhancing national rice production through coordination of projects like ‘Rice Breeding Programme [38] and the European Trace-Rice project (http://trace-rice.eu/), which aims to improve rice product traceability and authenticity as referred to by Sampaio et al. [39]. INIAV also develops methods to detect pesticide residues and mycotoxins to improve rice quality and shelf life. About 22% of rice consumed in Portugal is imported, mostly unhusked (Appendix A); DGAV ensures its compliance with EU regulations via lab testing and EFSA reporting. INIAV is developing a digital application using blockchain under Trace-Rice to provide transparent information on rice origin, production, and phytosanitary management. Together, DGAV and INIAV ensure the safety, quality, and sustainability of Portuguese rice production, combining regulatory oversight with research and innovation.

4. Discussion

The present study investigates consumer perceptions of pesticide use in rice consumption in Abrantes, Portugal, the country with the highest per capita rice consumption in Europe. A survey of 160 participants revealed that rice is a dietary staple, with price being the primary factor influencing purchase decisions. Despite a strong preference for domestically produced rice, driven by trust in national products, consumer awareness of pesticide residues and related regulations remains low. The findings of the study indicate a positive correlation between higher education levels and larger household sizes with increased rice consumption and heightened awareness of pesticide-related issues. The application of cluster analysis to the available data yielded the identification of two distinct consumer profiles. The first of these profiles was characterized by a younger demographic, with a predilection for low prices and limited awareness of the issues. The second profile comprised older consumers who prioritized food safety and quality, and who were had higher education. These findings emphasize the necessity for targeted educational campaigns, enhanced traceability systems, and public policies that promote informed, health-conscious consumption. These results are indirectly consistent with Baker [40], who identified distinct consumer segments in the fresh apple market, one being highly price-sensitive and another prioritizing food safety and quality attributes. More recently, Makowska et al. [41] provided evidence of age-related differences in food choice, reporting that younger consumers tend to be more price-oriented, while older generations place greater emphasis on safety, quality, and attributes such as country of origin. Despite Portugal being Europe’s largest per capita rice consumer, respondents displayed limited knowledge of pesticide residues, echoing EFSA [30] findings that European consumers often lack detailed understanding of pesticide regulations and residue levels. Media underreporting contributes significantly to this knowledge gap [32]. Preference for domestic rice highlights trust in local production, an established pattern linked to perceived safety and quality [42]. Gender and household differences also influence attitudes, with women and larger households prioritizing nutritional information and food safety more [43]. Strengthening DGAV’s monitoring role, expanding INIAV’s traceability initiatives, and promoting targeted public education campaigns are essential measures to improve consumer knowledge, foster sustainable practices, and increase organic rice consumption as referred to by Charlebois et al. [44].

A notable illustration of this phenomenon is the marked preference for domestically produced rice, as indicated by a survey in which 98.8% of consumers expressed a preference for such products. This finding suggests a high degree of trust in national production. However, the absence of a direct correlation between this preference and awareness of agricultural practices, such as pesticide use, suggests that consumer confidence is predominantly influenced by perception or nationalism rather than by verifiable data [42,45]. Nevertheless, this preference could be utilized in awareness campaigns promoting sustainable production and traceability, especially if framed around enhancing transparency and consumer empowerment.

A salient finding that emerges from the data is the predominance of price as the primary purchase decision factor (43.1%), eclipsing considerations such as nutritional information or safety certifications. This economic prioritization mirrors trends observed in the Eurobarometer survey [30], highlighting the influence of post-pandemic economic constraints and geopolitical instability—particularly the war in Ukraine—on consumer behavior. Despite the growing salience of sustainability and food safety as values, these considerations are frequently eclipsed in the face of economic pressures [11,32].

Statistical correlations have been identified between educational level, household size, and knowledge about pesticide residues, emphasizing the role of social and educational factors in shaping food-related perceptions and behavior [36], Wieke et al. [46] work revealed that, in general, older respondents perceived food-related risks to be slightly higher compared to younger respondents, and women tended to perceive risks to be higher than men. These findings support the need for more targeted and differentiated public policies that take into account such variables to enhance food literacy and promote more responsible consumption patterns.

The involvement of institutional bodies, such as the Phytosanitary National Authority in DAGV and the Research Institution (INIAV), serves to corroborate the presence of substantial control mechanisms and ongoing technological innovation. Projects such as Trace-Rice, which focus on the digital traceability of rice, represent significant progress in this field. However, the limited impact of these initiatives on public perception indicates a communication gap between applied research and consumer outreach [44,47].

It has been posited that the apparent absence of awareness among Portuguese consumers with regard to pesticide residues may be interpreted not as negligence or ignorance, but rather as a rational form of cognitive economy. In intricate food systems, consumers frequently employ heuristics, such as the provenance of the product or brand familiarity, to reach decisions without comprehending the intricacies of the subject matter, as articulated by Kahneman [48]. Trust in domestic production may not stem from misinformation but from a strategic simplification process based on perceived institutional reliability and food culture.

Furthermore, certain authors, including Guthman [49] and Scrinis [50], posit that an excessive emphasis on consumer responsibility may serve as a diversionary tactic that diverts attention from the underlying causes of food-related issues. These underlying causes encompass ineffective public policies, social inequality, and unsustainable corporate practices. The absence of systemic accountability is a consequence of this diversionary tactic. In this view, the onus of ensuring food safety should lie more heavily on regulatory frameworks and corporate compliance than on consumer literacy. Therefore, while enhancing consumer awareness remains important, structural reforms and transparent labeling systems may offer more impactful solutions.

Despite the frequent use of the terms “organic” and “sustainable” by consumers as if they were synonymous, it is important to recognize the distinction between these two concepts. The certification of organic products is governed by a stringent set of criteria that prohibit the utilization of synthetic pesticides, genetically modified organisms, and synthetic fertilizers. Conversely, sustainable agri-food products encompass not only environmental standards but also considerations of social equity, fair labor practices, local economic resilience, and long-term resource efficiency. Consequently, an organic product may not be considered sustainable if it is not produced in accordance with social responsibility principles or if it generates a high volume of transport emissions. In order to prevent misconceptions and to encourage more informed choices, it is recommended that future consumer awareness strategies highlight these distinctions.

Understanding consumer perceptions and fears regarding food safety risks provides crucial insights that support the design of targeted educational initiatives and effective food safety policies [51,52,53].

In summary, the case study demonstrates that price is the primary factor influencing rice purchasing decisions in Portugal, while consumer awareness of pesticide residues remains low and is often shaped by trust in domestic production. Furthermore, socio-demographic factors, including educational attainment and household size, were found to have a significant impact on perceptions of food safety. These results are consistent with recent European evidence indicating that consumers are willing to pay a premium for “Zero Residue” certification, particularly when combined with Integrated Pest Management labels. This combination of metrics has been shown to signal environmental sustainability and food safety to a comparable degree as that of organic certification, as reported by Califano et al. [54]

5. Conclusions

The study examined consumer perceptions in Abrantes, a small city, in a sample of 160 respondents representative of a Portuguese case study about pesticide use in rice. Despite Portugal’s high per capita rice consumption, most respondents showed limited awareness about food safety, especially pesticide residues, and were unfamiliar with compliance to legal residue limits. Few consumers purchase organic rice, showing low value for this option; price remains the main purchase factor. There is trust in domestic rice but overall limited exposure to information on pesticide use.

The National Phytosanitary Authority (DGAV) plays a key role in monitoring pesticide residues, while the State Laboratory of Ministry of Agriculture (INIAV) spearheads initiatives in rice varietal improvement and digital traceability systems. Closing the persistent gap between consumer practices and knowledge in Portugal requires integrated, multi-level strategies. This includes strengthening DGAV’s regulatory oversight, increasing the implementation and visibility of the INIAV’s traceability tools, and investing in bespoke food education programs. However, systemic reforms such as improved labeling schemes, transparency in pesticide usage, corporate compliance, and better institutional communication are likely to yield more impactful and long-lasting outcomes than behavioral interventions alone. This study highlights the critical need to reinforce consumer education mechanisms and strengthen the traceability and accountability structures in the Portuguese rice value chain.

Whilst the present study provides valuable insights into consumer perceptions of food safety and pesticide residues, it is important to acknowledge several limitations. The research is dependent on self-reported data, which is subject to potential biases such as response bias and social desirability bias, particularly in relation to topics concerning food safety awareness. Furthermore, the study sample is restricted to the municipality of Abrantes, which, although socio-demographically varied, may not be representative of the broader Portuguese population. Albeit considered a case-study, the conclusions follow the same trend as those of EFSA [31].

Future research should delve deeper into how consumers perceive and evaluate various sustainability claims, with particular attention to the distinction between “organic” and “sustainable” labels. These concepts are often conflated, yet they reflect different priorities and regulatory frameworks.

Whilst the term ‘organic certification’ is primarily associated with production methods, such as the exclusion of synthetic pesticides, the concept of sustainability encompasses a broader range of environmental and social considerations. These include, but are not limited to, labor rights, resource efficiency, and climate resilience.

Moreover, the exclusive utilization of quantitative methodologies resulted in a restriction of the capacity to delve into the underlying motivations, beliefs, and emotional factors that influence consumer choices. The application of qualitative approaches could have enhanced the analysis of risk perception and behavioral patterns. Finally, the absence of a comparative regional or national sample has the effect of reducing the potential to generalize findings to different contexts within Portugal or across Europe.

Future research should examine in greater depth how consumers interpret and value different types of sustainability claims, particularly the distinction between “organic” and “sustainable” labels. A mixed-methods approach—combining quantitative surveys with qualitative interviews or focus groups—would allow for a more comprehensive understanding of the psychological, cultural, and economic drivers behind consumer behavior.

Longitudinal studies could evaluate the impact of traceability systems and institutional communication campaigns (such as those linked to the Trace-Rice project) on food literacy and purchasing decisions. Moreover, further investigation into the social dimensions of sustainability in rice production—including labor conditions, community engagement, and fair pricing—would fill an important knowledge gap. Finally, comparative analyses across agri-food sectors and EU countries could help assess how Portugal’s consumer perceptions align with broader European trends in food safety and sustainable consumption. Comparative studies across different agri-food sectors and EU countries could help to evaluate how Portugal’s situation aligns with or diverges from broader European trends in food risk perception and sustainable consumption. It is recommended that future research adopts a mixed-methods approach, combining quantitative surveys with qualitative interviews or focus groups, in order to deepen understanding of the psychological, cultural and economic drivers behind consumer behavior in relation to pesticide residues and rice consumption.