# Modeling the Formation Mechanism of Food Safety Risk in Catering O2O Distribution Link

Authors: Ting Wu; Yilei Pei; Dandan Li; Peng Su
Journal: Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society
 (2021)

---

## Abstract

This paper aims to solve the problem of food safety in catering O2O distribution link. We applied the system dynamics method to model the formation mechanism of food safety risk in the distribution link. The results of our experiment include identifying the risk factors that may be faced by food safety in the distribution link from five perspectives: O2O catering enterprise’s own risk, logistics distribution team’s distribution risk, O2O catering platform supervision risk, user-supervision risk, and government department supervision risk, and establishing a risk index evaluation system based on the Analytic Hierarchy Process. With the help of the system dynamics model, the corresponding risk formation mechanism system model flow diagram is established, and the model simulation analysis is carried out. Through this research, we concluded that we can use the risk model to understand the risks faced by different subjects so as to make targeted countermeasures.


---

## Body

## 1. Introduction

In recent years, the economy of the traditional catering industry has been in recession. In order to find a new development path, more and more traditional catering enterprises choose to integrate with the Internet to realize online payment and offline consumption [1]. With the rapid development of the Internet plus era, catering O2O distribution has become a new network catering mode, which has attracted wide attention. Meanwhile, the rise of catering O2O is also slowly changing consumers’ living habits. Consumers can get convenient takeout services at home by ordering and paying on a mobile app.According to the 47th statistical report on China’s Internet Development released by China Internet Network Information Center (CNNIC), by December 2020, China’s online takeout users had reached 419 million. Ele.me takeout, Meituan takeout, Baidu takeout, and other catering O2O platforms also poured into the catering O2O field. However, with the wholly-owned acquisition of Ele.me takeout by Alibaba, the competition among takeout industries is becoming more and more fierce, and food safety problems have been quickly exposed [2, 3]. For example, the takeout packaging is plastic bags, the additives used do not meet the standard, and the food is deteriorated, which has attracted the extensive attention of the society and consumers.The catering O2O distribution link is related to the “safety on the tip of the tongue” of consumers and the “last mile” of food safety. Therefore, identifying and evaluating the possible risks in the catering O2O distribution link and taking risk prevention and control measures will help to promote the healthy development of catering O2O.


## 2. Literature Review

As for food safety in catering O2O distribution, many domestic and foreign scholars have analyzed the current situation of online food safety from different perspectives [4–7]. Some scholars also conducted a detailed analysis on specific problems existing in online food safety [8, 9] and some related studies on online food safety guarantee measures [10–12]. In view of the food safety problems in catering O2O distribution link, scholars generally believe that the food safety risks in the catering O2O distribution link are caused by the problems of deliverers [13], distribution box [14], traffic safety [15], and distribution mode [16]. Based on the grounded theory, Sheng and Qing [17] tried to find out various factors affecting takeaway food safety, such as takeaway platform, takeaway business, government regulation, and media supervision. Hua et al. [18] explored the evolution mechanism of Internet ordering regulatory countermeasures from the perspective of ordering platforms. In current studies on food safety risks, some scholars also use system dynamics theory to analyze consumers’ perception of food safety risks [19], but there is no relevant research on food safety risks in the catering O2O distribution link. Therefore, combined with the theory of system dynamics, this paper attempts to analyze the risks faced by multiple participants in food safety in catering O2O distribution from a systematic perspective, further explore the causes of risk impact and the mechanism of interaction, and finally put forward relevant suggestions.Based on scholars’ relevant research on food safety risk in catering O2O distribution [20, 21], this paper divides it into five risk factors: O2O catering enterprise’s own risk, logistics distribution team’s distribution risk, O2O catering platform supervision risk, user supervision risk, and government department supervision risk.


### 2.1. Risks of Food Products of O2O Catering Enterprises

The risks formed by the food products of O2O catering enterprises mainly come from two aspects: the production and processing risks of food products and the packaging risks of food products. Among them, the risks of food production and processing include inadequate cleaning of overalls, inadequate disinfection of utensils, inadequate cleaning of food materials, unreasonable use of food additives, and insufficient attention of chefs to the order notes of orders. For example, Article 33 of China’s food safety law mentions that food merchants should pay attention to personal hygiene and wear overalls. However, chefs who make meals will inevitably come into contact with bacteria at work. Therefore, if the overalls are not cleaned or disinfected for a long time, there will be more and more pollutants on the clothes, which will pose risks to the safety of meals. Disanto et al. [22] also believe that food safety largely depends on the behavior of catering personnel, such as food handlers. However, the risk of food packaging comes from poor food packaging materials and no label on the packaging box.The positive feedback of O2O catering enterprises’ own risks includes irregular production and processing of food products, unreasonable use of food additives, and irregular packaging of food products, which are the reasons for increasing their own risks. The negative feedback includes standardizing the production and processing process of food products, using food additives appropriately and rationally, and using standardized and qualified packaging.


### 2.2. Distribution Risk of Logistics Distribution Team

In the process of catering O2O distribution, there are risks in distribution personnel, distribution packaging, distribution tools, and distribution methods, leading to distribution risks in the whole logistics and distribution team. The risks of delivery personnel pointed out here include the health status of delivery personnel and professional quality of delivery personnel, and the use of delivery tools, namely, delivery boxes and delivery vehicles, will also affect the safety of food. Due to the particularity of food delivery, distribution personnel should choose equipment with good insulation performance and freshness, such as an EPP incubator existing in the market. Through investigation, Ni et al. [23] learned that microplastics were found in all takeout containers, and people who order takeout 4–7 times a week may ingest 12-203 microplastics through containers. In addition, the distribution box is not clean or disinfected, which will breed bacteria and bring food safety risks.The positive feedback factors of the distribution risk of logistics distribution team include the unqualified health status of distribution personnel, the poor professional quality of distribution personnel, the nonstandard and poor hygiene of distribution box, and nonstandard distribution methods, while the negative feedback includes ensuring the health of distribution personnel, improving the professional quality of distribution personnel, standardizing the use of distribution boxes, and improving the hygiene of distribution boxes.


### 2.3. Supervision Risk of O2O Catering Platform

O2O catering platform needs to strictly examine and supervise the settled merchants and food delivery personnel. If the O2O catering platform fails to put its responsibilities and obligations in place, then it will bring risks to food safety.The O2O catering platform’s inadequate qualification examination of settled merchants and safety management of takeout distribution is the positive feedback of risks, while the O2O catering platform’s strict examination of settled merchants’ qualification and effective implementation of safety management of settled merchants and takeout distribution is the negative feedback of risks.


### 2.4. User Supervision Risk

The risk of user supervision is mainly analyzed from two aspects: the situation of user-rights protection and the way users participate in supervision. In the process of Internet catering consumption, users purchase goods or services to generate income for businesses, so they have the right to supervise O2O catering businesses and O2O catering platforms. However, in fact, due to the lack of effective complaint or feedback channels, users cannot directly supervise the catering O2O platform, and can only reflect the food safety problems existing in the catering O2O or the problems in the distribution process through reports, thus further indicating that the O2O catering platform has lax supervision and other phenomena. Li [24] found that online food safety has great hidden dangers, including the difficulty of safeguarding users’ rights.Generally speaking, users are in a relatively weak position. The positive feedback factors of this kind of risk include the weak awareness of users’ rights protection, the poor channels of users’ rights protection, and the single way of users’ participation in supervision, while the negative feedback factors include enhancing the users’ awareness of rights protection, broadening channels of users’ rights protection, and increasing users’ participation in supervision.


### 2.5. Supervision Risks of Government Departments

The risks formed by government departments in supervision mainly come from three aspects: the lack of supervision awareness, the lack of supervision basis, and the poor implementation ability of government departments. Among them, the factors affecting the regulatory risks of government departments are divided into positive feedback factors and negative feedback factors. Positive feedback factors will increase the emergence of regulatory risks of government departments, mainly including the failure of government departments to perform their responsibilities, the failure of postrectification to truly implement regulatory awareness, the content of existing laws and regulations is not detailed, and the regulatory methods are backward. Negative feedback factors will reduce the emergence of supervision risks of government departments, including improving the regulatory awareness of government departments, improving relevant laws and regulations, and innovating regulatory methods.Among them, positive feedback factors and negative feedback factors can be transformed into each other, and when the positive feedback factors in the system are greater than the negative feedback factors, risks will occur.


## 2.1. Risks of Food Products of O2O Catering Enterprises

The risks formed by the food products of O2O catering enterprises mainly come from two aspects: the production and processing risks of food products and the packaging risks of food products. Among them, the risks of food production and processing include inadequate cleaning of overalls, inadequate disinfection of utensils, inadequate cleaning of food materials, unreasonable use of food additives, and insufficient attention of chefs to the order notes of orders. For example, Article 33 of China’s food safety law mentions that food merchants should pay attention to personal hygiene and wear overalls. However, chefs who make meals will inevitably come into contact with bacteria at work. Therefore, if the overalls are not cleaned or disinfected for a long time, there will be more and more pollutants on the clothes, which will pose risks to the safety of meals. Disanto et al. [22] also believe that food safety largely depends on the behavior of catering personnel, such as food handlers. However, the risk of food packaging comes from poor food packaging materials and no label on the packaging box.The positive feedback of O2O catering enterprises’ own risks includes irregular production and processing of food products, unreasonable use of food additives, and irregular packaging of food products, which are the reasons for increasing their own risks. The negative feedback includes standardizing the production and processing process of food products, using food additives appropriately and rationally, and using standardized and qualified packaging.


## 2.2. Distribution Risk of Logistics Distribution Team

In the process of catering O2O distribution, there are risks in distribution personnel, distribution packaging, distribution tools, and distribution methods, leading to distribution risks in the whole logistics and distribution team. The risks of delivery personnel pointed out here include the health status of delivery personnel and professional quality of delivery personnel, and the use of delivery tools, namely, delivery boxes and delivery vehicles, will also affect the safety of food. Due to the particularity of food delivery, distribution personnel should choose equipment with good insulation performance and freshness, such as an EPP incubator existing in the market. Through investigation, Ni et al. [23] learned that microplastics were found in all takeout containers, and people who order takeout 4–7 times a week may ingest 12-203 microplastics through containers. In addition, the distribution box is not clean or disinfected, which will breed bacteria and bring food safety risks.The positive feedback factors of the distribution risk of logistics distribution team include the unqualified health status of distribution personnel, the poor professional quality of distribution personnel, the nonstandard and poor hygiene of distribution box, and nonstandard distribution methods, while the negative feedback includes ensuring the health of distribution personnel, improving the professional quality of distribution personnel, standardizing the use of distribution boxes, and improving the hygiene of distribution boxes.


## 2.3. Supervision Risk of O2O Catering Platform

O2O catering platform needs to strictly examine and supervise the settled merchants and food delivery personnel. If the O2O catering platform fails to put its responsibilities and obligations in place, then it will bring risks to food safety.The O2O catering platform’s inadequate qualification examination of settled merchants and safety management of takeout distribution is the positive feedback of risks, while the O2O catering platform’s strict examination of settled merchants’ qualification and effective implementation of safety management of settled merchants and takeout distribution is the negative feedback of risks.


## 2.4. User Supervision Risk

The risk of user supervision is mainly analyzed from two aspects: the situation of user-rights protection and the way users participate in supervision. In the process of Internet catering consumption, users purchase goods or services to generate income for businesses, so they have the right to supervise O2O catering businesses and O2O catering platforms. However, in fact, due to the lack of effective complaint or feedback channels, users cannot directly supervise the catering O2O platform, and can only reflect the food safety problems existing in the catering O2O or the problems in the distribution process through reports, thus further indicating that the O2O catering platform has lax supervision and other phenomena. Li [24] found that online food safety has great hidden dangers, including the difficulty of safeguarding users’ rights.Generally speaking, users are in a relatively weak position. The positive feedback factors of this kind of risk include the weak awareness of users’ rights protection, the poor channels of users’ rights protection, and the single way of users’ participation in supervision, while the negative feedback factors include enhancing the users’ awareness of rights protection, broadening channels of users’ rights protection, and increasing users’ participation in supervision.


## 2.5. Supervision Risks of Government Departments

The risks formed by government departments in supervision mainly come from three aspects: the lack of supervision awareness, the lack of supervision basis, and the poor implementation ability of government departments. Among them, the factors affecting the regulatory risks of government departments are divided into positive feedback factors and negative feedback factors. Positive feedback factors will increase the emergence of regulatory risks of government departments, mainly including the failure of government departments to perform their responsibilities, the failure of postrectification to truly implement regulatory awareness, the content of existing laws and regulations is not detailed, and the regulatory methods are backward. Negative feedback factors will reduce the emergence of supervision risks of government departments, including improving the regulatory awareness of government departments, improving relevant laws and regulations, and innovating regulatory methods.Among them, positive feedback factors and negative feedback factors can be transformed into each other, and when the positive feedback factors in the system are greater than the negative feedback factors, risks will occur.


## 3. Research Method

This paper uses the method of system dynamics to analyze the risk formation principle in the process of food safety control in the catering O2O distribution link and establishes a system dynamics model of food safety risk in the catering O2O distribution link, thus providing a certain theoretical basis for the protection of food safety in the catering O2O distribution link.


### 3.1. Construction of Food Safety Risk Index System in Catering O2O Distribution Link

According to the previous analysis, the five types of risks are further refined, a risk index system including primary risk factors and secondary risk factors is constructed, and each factor in the table is weighted by analytic hierarchy process. The specific weight results are shown in Table1 below.Table 1
Food safety risk types and incentives in the catering O2O distribution link.
Risk typePrimary risk factorSecondary risk factorCodeO2O Catering Enterprise Food Self-risk (A) 0.1458Food production and processing risk (A1) 0.7500Work clothes are not clean in place 0.0500U1Disinfection of appliances is not in place 0.1413U2Food cleaning is not in place 0.3993U3Rationality of food additive use 0.3139U4The chef did not pay enough attention to the order remarks 0.0955U5Food packaging risk (A2) 0.2500Food packaging material 0.8333U6There is no label on the packing box 0.1667U7Logistics Distribution Team Distribution Risk (B) 0.1043Risk of delivery personnel (B1) 0.5396Health status of delivery personnel 0.6667U8Professional quality of distribution personnel 0.3333U9Risk of delivery tools (B2) 0.2970Normalization of distribution box 0.2385U10Sanitary status of distribution box 0.6250U11Potential safety hazard of distribution vehicles 0.1365U12Delivery Method Risk (B3) 0.1634Delivery timeliness 0.6667U13Standardization of distribution mode 0.3333U14O2O Catering Platform Regulatory Risk (C) 0.2819Platform Audit Risk (C1) 0.6667The platform’s qualification examination of settled merchants 0.7500U15The sampling situation of the platform on the settled merchants 0.2500U16Platform Regulatory Risk (C2) 0.3333The safety management of the platform to the settled merchants 0.6667U17Management of external sales and distribution of the platform 0.3333U18User Regulatory Risk (D) 0.0560User Rights Protection (D1) 0.2500User’s awareness of safeguarding rights 0.6667U19User rights protection channel 0.3333U20User Supervision Mode (D2) 0.7500User supervision feedback business situation 0.6250U21User supervision platform situation 0.1365U22User supervision of logistics distribution team 0.2385U23Government Regulatory Risk (E) 0.4120Lack of supervision awareness of government departments (E1) 0.1365Performance of duties by government departments 0.5396U24Post-event rectification of government departments 0.1634U25The rectification strength of the regulatory authorities 0.2970U26Lack of regulatory basis for government departments (E2) 0.2385There are fewer laws related to online ordering 0.6144U27The existing legal content is not detailed 0.2684U28Information asymmetry between government departments, users and platforms 0.1172U29Poor implementation ability of government departments (E3) 0.6250The supervision mode lags behind 0.5396U30Lack of professionalism in supervision 0.2970U31Lack of Supervisors 0.1634U32


### 3.2. Flow Diagram of System Model of the Food Safety Risk Formation Mechanism in Catering O2O Distribution Link

Based on the index system of influencing factors of food safety risks in the catering O2O distribution link, a system dynamics model of food safety risks in the catering O2O distribution link is constructed, as shown in Figure1. Among them, the production of food products in O2O catering enterprises is the source of risks; the risks caused by the distribution process of the logistics distribution team are the foundation, and the regulatory risks of government departments occupy the core position. It not only collects the regulatory information of users but also bears the risks brought by the supervision of the O2O catering platform and the distribution of the logistics distribution team.Figure 1
Flow diagram of system model of the food safety risk formation mechanism in the catering O2O distribution link.


### 3.3. Determination of Parameters and Boundary Risk Factor Values

#### 3.3.1. Initial Assignment of Model Simulation Variables

As can be seen from Figure1, there are mainly 32 boundary points, of which some simulation variables and assignment processes and methods are shown in Table 2 below, while the remaining unlisted variables are determined by the expert scoring method. In the equations of system dynamics, A: auxiliary equation, L: horizontal equation, R: rate equation, N: initial value equation, and C: constant equation.Table 2
Assignment table of model simulation variables.
Variable nameVariable typeAssignmentInitial data source and processing methodO2O Catering Enterprises’ Food Products’ Own Risks (initial value)L0.5Evaluate the current situation of food risk management in O2O catering enterprises and determine the conversion by combining expert scoring method with the analytic hierarchy processDistribution Risk of Logistics Distribution Team (initial value)L0.4On-the-spot interview, data investigation, and finally through expert scoring method, a conversion is determinedRegulatory Risk of O2O Catering Platform (initial value)L0.6Evaluate the current situation of the risk management of O2O catering platform, and determine the conversion by combining expert scoring method with analytic hierarchy processUser Supervision Risk (initial value)L0.2On-the-spot interview, data investigation, and finally through expert scoring method, a conversion is determinedRegulatory Risks of Government Departments (initial value)L0.7Evaluate the current situation of risk management in government departments, combine expert scoring method with analytic hierarchy process, and convert and determineRationality of the use of food additivesC0.0317Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determineFood packaging materialsC0.0255Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determineUser rights protection channelsC0.0155Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determineUsers supervise and feedback the business situationC0.0112Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determineUser monitoring platform situationC0.0151Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determineUsers supervise the logistics distribution teamC0.0146Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determinePerformance of duties by government departmentsC0.0306Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determineRectification of government departments after the eventC0.0178Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determineThe rectification efforts of the regulatory authoritiesC0.0244Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determine


#### 3.3.2. System Dynamics Equation Based on Index Weight

According to the index weight calculated by the analytic hierarchy process and combined with the modeling principle of system dynamics, the system dynamics equation of each risk factor is further determined. Because the five first-order risk factors are not only affected by their subrisk factors but also interact with each other to produce risk. Therefore, it is necessary to adjust the weight based on the previous calculation. The dynamic equation of some factors is taken as an example:(1)
Food risk = 0.75 ∗ production and processing risk + 0.25 ∗ Food packaging risk.(2)
risk of distribution mode = 0.6667 ∗ timeliness of the distribution mode + 0.3333 ∗ standardization of the distribution mode.(3)
User participation supervision mode = 0.625 ∗ User supervision feedback merchant situation + 0.1365 ∗ User supervision platform situation + 0.2385 ∗ User supervision logistics distribution team situation.(4)
Platform supervision risk = 0.6667 ∗ platform’s safety management of settled merchants + 0.3333 ∗ platform’s management of external sales and distribution − 0.07 ∗ government department supervision risk.(5)
regulatory risk of government departments = 0.14 ∗ Lack of regulatory awareness of government departments + 0.24 ∗ Lack of regulatory basis of government departments + 0.62 ∗ Poor implementation ability of government departments + 0.056 ∗ User regulatory risk + 0.1043 ∗ Logistics distribution team distribution risk + 0.2819 ∗ Platform regulatory risk + 0.1458 ∗ Food self-risk.


## 3.1. Construction of Food Safety Risk Index System in Catering O2O Distribution Link

According to the previous analysis, the five types of risks are further refined, a risk index system including primary risk factors and secondary risk factors is constructed, and each factor in the table is weighted by analytic hierarchy process. The specific weight results are shown in Table1 below.Table 1
Food safety risk types and incentives in the catering O2O distribution link.
Risk typePrimary risk factorSecondary risk factorCodeO2O Catering Enterprise Food Self-risk (A) 0.1458Food production and processing risk (A1) 0.7500Work clothes are not clean in place 0.0500U1Disinfection of appliances is not in place 0.1413U2Food cleaning is not in place 0.3993U3Rationality of food additive use 0.3139U4The chef did not pay enough attention to the order remarks 0.0955U5Food packaging risk (A2) 0.2500Food packaging material 0.8333U6There is no label on the packing box 0.1667U7Logistics Distribution Team Distribution Risk (B) 0.1043Risk of delivery personnel (B1) 0.5396Health status of delivery personnel 0.6667U8Professional quality of distribution personnel 0.3333U9Risk of delivery tools (B2) 0.2970Normalization of distribution box 0.2385U10Sanitary status of distribution box 0.6250U11Potential safety hazard of distribution vehicles 0.1365U12Delivery Method Risk (B3) 0.1634Delivery timeliness 0.6667U13Standardization of distribution mode 0.3333U14O2O Catering Platform Regulatory Risk (C) 0.2819Platform Audit Risk (C1) 0.6667The platform’s qualification examination of settled merchants 0.7500U15The sampling situation of the platform on the settled merchants 0.2500U16Platform Regulatory Risk (C2) 0.3333The safety management of the platform to the settled merchants 0.6667U17Management of external sales and distribution of the platform 0.3333U18User Regulatory Risk (D) 0.0560User Rights Protection (D1) 0.2500User’s awareness of safeguarding rights 0.6667U19User rights protection channel 0.3333U20User Supervision Mode (D2) 0.7500User supervision feedback business situation 0.6250U21User supervision platform situation 0.1365U22User supervision of logistics distribution team 0.2385U23Government Regulatory Risk (E) 0.4120Lack of supervision awareness of government departments (E1) 0.1365Performance of duties by government departments 0.5396U24Post-event rectification of government departments 0.1634U25The rectification strength of the regulatory authorities 0.2970U26Lack of regulatory basis for government departments (E2) 0.2385There are fewer laws related to online ordering 0.6144U27The existing legal content is not detailed 0.2684U28Information asymmetry between government departments, users and platforms 0.1172U29Poor implementation ability of government departments (E3) 0.6250The supervision mode lags behind 0.5396U30Lack of professionalism in supervision 0.2970U31Lack of Supervisors 0.1634U32


## 3.2. Flow Diagram of System Model of the Food Safety Risk Formation Mechanism in Catering O2O Distribution Link

Based on the index system of influencing factors of food safety risks in the catering O2O distribution link, a system dynamics model of food safety risks in the catering O2O distribution link is constructed, as shown in Figure1. Among them, the production of food products in O2O catering enterprises is the source of risks; the risks caused by the distribution process of the logistics distribution team are the foundation, and the regulatory risks of government departments occupy the core position. It not only collects the regulatory information of users but also bears the risks brought by the supervision of the O2O catering platform and the distribution of the logistics distribution team.Figure 1
Flow diagram of system model of the food safety risk formation mechanism in the catering O2O distribution link.


## 3.3. Determination of Parameters and Boundary Risk Factor Values

### 3.3.1. Initial Assignment of Model Simulation Variables

As can be seen from Figure1, there are mainly 32 boundary points, of which some simulation variables and assignment processes and methods are shown in Table 2 below, while the remaining unlisted variables are determined by the expert scoring method. In the equations of system dynamics, A: auxiliary equation, L: horizontal equation, R: rate equation, N: initial value equation, and C: constant equation.Table 2
Assignment table of model simulation variables.
Variable nameVariable typeAssignmentInitial data source and processing methodO2O Catering Enterprises’ Food Products’ Own Risks (initial value)L0.5Evaluate the current situation of food risk management in O2O catering enterprises and determine the conversion by combining expert scoring method with the analytic hierarchy processDistribution Risk of Logistics Distribution Team (initial value)L0.4On-the-spot interview, data investigation, and finally through expert scoring method, a conversion is determinedRegulatory Risk of O2O Catering Platform (initial value)L0.6Evaluate the current situation of the risk management of O2O catering platform, and determine the conversion by combining expert scoring method with analytic hierarchy processUser Supervision Risk (initial value)L0.2On-the-spot interview, data investigation, and finally through expert scoring method, a conversion is determinedRegulatory Risks of Government Departments (initial value)L0.7Evaluate the current situation of risk management in government departments, combine expert scoring method with analytic hierarchy process, and convert and determineRationality of the use of food additivesC0.0317Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determineFood packaging materialsC0.0255Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determineUser rights protection channelsC0.0155Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determineUsers supervise and feedback the business situationC0.0112Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determineUser monitoring platform situationC0.0151Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determineUsers supervise the logistics distribution teamC0.0146Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determinePerformance of duties by government departmentsC0.0306Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determineRectification of government departments after the eventC0.0178Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determineThe rectification efforts of the regulatory authoritiesC0.0244Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determine


### 3.3.2. System Dynamics Equation Based on Index Weight

According to the index weight calculated by the analytic hierarchy process and combined with the modeling principle of system dynamics, the system dynamics equation of each risk factor is further determined. Because the five first-order risk factors are not only affected by their subrisk factors but also interact with each other to produce risk. Therefore, it is necessary to adjust the weight based on the previous calculation. The dynamic equation of some factors is taken as an example:(1)
Food risk = 0.75 ∗ production and processing risk + 0.25 ∗ Food packaging risk.(2)
risk of distribution mode = 0.6667 ∗ timeliness of the distribution mode + 0.3333 ∗ standardization of the distribution mode.(3)
User participation supervision mode = 0.625 ∗ User supervision feedback merchant situation + 0.1365 ∗ User supervision platform situation + 0.2385 ∗ User supervision logistics distribution team situation.(4)
Platform supervision risk = 0.6667 ∗ platform’s safety management of settled merchants + 0.3333 ∗ platform’s management of external sales and distribution − 0.07 ∗ government department supervision risk.(5)
regulatory risk of government departments = 0.14 ∗ Lack of regulatory awareness of government departments + 0.24 ∗ Lack of regulatory basis of government departments + 0.62 ∗ Poor implementation ability of government departments + 0.056 ∗ User regulatory risk + 0.1043 ∗ Logistics distribution team distribution risk + 0.2819 ∗ Platform regulatory risk + 0.1458 ∗ Food self-risk.


## 3.3.1. Initial Assignment of Model Simulation Variables

As can be seen from Figure1, there are mainly 32 boundary points, of which some simulation variables and assignment processes and methods are shown in Table 2 below, while the remaining unlisted variables are determined by the expert scoring method. In the equations of system dynamics, A: auxiliary equation, L: horizontal equation, R: rate equation, N: initial value equation, and C: constant equation.Table 2
Assignment table of model simulation variables.
Variable nameVariable typeAssignmentInitial data source and processing methodO2O Catering Enterprises’ Food Products’ Own Risks (initial value)L0.5Evaluate the current situation of food risk management in O2O catering enterprises and determine the conversion by combining expert scoring method with the analytic hierarchy processDistribution Risk of Logistics Distribution Team (initial value)L0.4On-the-spot interview, data investigation, and finally through expert scoring method, a conversion is determinedRegulatory Risk of O2O Catering Platform (initial value)L0.6Evaluate the current situation of the risk management of O2O catering platform, and determine the conversion by combining expert scoring method with analytic hierarchy processUser Supervision Risk (initial value)L0.2On-the-spot interview, data investigation, and finally through expert scoring method, a conversion is determinedRegulatory Risks of Government Departments (initial value)L0.7Evaluate the current situation of risk management in government departments, combine expert scoring method with analytic hierarchy process, and convert and determineRationality of the use of food additivesC0.0317Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determineFood packaging materialsC0.0255Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determineUser rights protection channelsC0.0155Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determineUsers supervise and feedback the business situationC0.0112Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determineUser monitoring platform situationC0.0151Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determineUsers supervise the logistics distribution teamC0.0146Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determinePerformance of duties by government departmentsC0.0306Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determineRectification of government departments after the eventC0.0178Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determineThe rectification efforts of the regulatory authoritiesC0.0244Data investigation, through expert scoring method, and then take the average value to determine


## 3.3.2. System Dynamics Equation Based on Index Weight

According to the index weight calculated by the analytic hierarchy process and combined with the modeling principle of system dynamics, the system dynamics equation of each risk factor is further determined. Because the five first-order risk factors are not only affected by their subrisk factors but also interact with each other to produce risk. Therefore, it is necessary to adjust the weight based on the previous calculation. The dynamic equation of some factors is taken as an example:(1)
Food risk = 0.75 ∗ production and processing risk + 0.25 ∗ Food packaging risk.(2)
risk of distribution mode = 0.6667 ∗ timeliness of the distribution mode + 0.3333 ∗ standardization of the distribution mode.(3)
User participation supervision mode = 0.625 ∗ User supervision feedback merchant situation + 0.1365 ∗ User supervision platform situation + 0.2385 ∗ User supervision logistics distribution team situation.(4)
Platform supervision risk = 0.6667 ∗ platform’s safety management of settled merchants + 0.3333 ∗ platform’s management of external sales and distribution − 0.07 ∗ government department supervision risk.(5)
regulatory risk of government departments = 0.14 ∗ Lack of regulatory awareness of government departments + 0.24 ∗ Lack of regulatory basis of government departments + 0.62 ∗ Poor implementation ability of government departments + 0.056 ∗ User regulatory risk + 0.1043 ∗ Logistics distribution team distribution risk + 0.2819 ∗ Platform regulatory risk + 0.1458 ∗ Food self-risk.


## 4. Result and Discussion

### 4.1. The Influence of Single Risk Factor Changes on Risk Output Variables

In this model, the food safety risk in catering O2O distribution is mainly composed of five subrisk factors and their subdivided risk factors. Therefore, if the size of any of the subdivided factors is changed, other risks will also change. Taking the effective management of the O2O catering platform’s external sales and distribution as an example, the risk sizes of the effective management of the O2O catering platform’s external sales and distribution are set to be 0.8 and 0.2, respectively. Line 1 indicates that the regulatory risk of the O2O catering platform is 0.8, and Line 2 indicates that the regulatory risk of the O2O catering platform is 0.2. And because the relationship between the risk subsystems in this model is a positive correlation, the greater the effective management value of the O2O catering platform for external sales and distribution, the more unstable its value is, and the greater the impact on risk assessment. The result is shown in Figure2.Figure 2
Simulation results of effective management changes of the O2O catering platform for external sales and distribution to different risk factors.As the effective management of outbound sales and distribution on the O2O catering platform drops from 0.8 to 0.2, the risks of the five subjects all show a trend of rising at the beginning and then gradually flattening out. With the reduction of risk factors, the regulatory risks of government departments and O2O catering platforms have been significantly controlled compared to the original, while the risk changes of the other three subjects are not obvious. This also indicates to some extent that when risks in the system keep rising, the supervision of government departments and O2O catering platforms plays an extremely important role in timely controlling the expansion of risks.


### 4.2. The Influence of Different Risk Factors on the Same Risk Output Variable

This paper will take the effectiveness of the O2O catering platform’s external distribution management (ME) and the influence of the same proportional change of the distribution personnel’s professional quality (PQDP) on the distribution risk output of the logistics distribution team as an example. Set the effectiveness risk of the O2O catering platform’s distribution management for external sales to be 0.2 and 0.8, respectively, and the risk of professional quality of distribution personnel to be 0.2 and 0.8, respectively. The change of distribution risk of logistics distribution team affected by it is observed. Table3 shows the simulation result data in detail, and Figure 3 is an intuitive embodiment of it.Table 3
Comparison of the impact of the effectiveness of catering platform sales distribution management and the professional quality of distribution personnel on the distribution risk of logistics distribution team.
Interval (Year)Initial value12345678910ME 0.80.40.78021.19961.66372.17792.74733.37644.06964.83055.66226.5675ME 0.20.40.78021.19961.66322.17612.74283.36764.05444.80675.62756.5191PQDP 0.80.40.86421.36761.91552.51333.16593.87794.65335.49606.40927.3956PQDP 0.20.40.75621.15161.59132.08032.62323.22443.88774.61665.41416.2826Figure 3
Risk simulation results of management effectiveness (a) and professional quality of distribution personnel (b) on distribution personnel of logistics distribution team.
(a)(b)It can be seen from Table3 and Figure 3 that when the effectiveness of the O2O catering platform's outbound distribution management and the professional quality of distribution personnel rise from 0.2 to 0.8, respectively, the risk of distribution personnel of logistics distribution team changes to varying degrees.


## 4.1. The Influence of Single Risk Factor Changes on Risk Output Variables

In this model, the food safety risk in catering O2O distribution is mainly composed of five subrisk factors and their subdivided risk factors. Therefore, if the size of any of the subdivided factors is changed, other risks will also change. Taking the effective management of the O2O catering platform’s external sales and distribution as an example, the risk sizes of the effective management of the O2O catering platform’s external sales and distribution are set to be 0.8 and 0.2, respectively. Line 1 indicates that the regulatory risk of the O2O catering platform is 0.8, and Line 2 indicates that the regulatory risk of the O2O catering platform is 0.2. And because the relationship between the risk subsystems in this model is a positive correlation, the greater the effective management value of the O2O catering platform for external sales and distribution, the more unstable its value is, and the greater the impact on risk assessment. The result is shown in Figure2.Figure 2
Simulation results of effective management changes of the O2O catering platform for external sales and distribution to different risk factors.As the effective management of outbound sales and distribution on the O2O catering platform drops from 0.8 to 0.2, the risks of the five subjects all show a trend of rising at the beginning and then gradually flattening out. With the reduction of risk factors, the regulatory risks of government departments and O2O catering platforms have been significantly controlled compared to the original, while the risk changes of the other three subjects are not obvious. This also indicates to some extent that when risks in the system keep rising, the supervision of government departments and O2O catering platforms plays an extremely important role in timely controlling the expansion of risks.


## 4.2. The Influence of Different Risk Factors on the Same Risk Output Variable

This paper will take the effectiveness of the O2O catering platform’s external distribution management (ME) and the influence of the same proportional change of the distribution personnel’s professional quality (PQDP) on the distribution risk output of the logistics distribution team as an example. Set the effectiveness risk of the O2O catering platform’s distribution management for external sales to be 0.2 and 0.8, respectively, and the risk of professional quality of distribution personnel to be 0.2 and 0.8, respectively. The change of distribution risk of logistics distribution team affected by it is observed. Table3 shows the simulation result data in detail, and Figure 3 is an intuitive embodiment of it.Table 3
Comparison of the impact of the effectiveness of catering platform sales distribution management and the professional quality of distribution personnel on the distribution risk of logistics distribution team.
Interval (Year)Initial value12345678910ME 0.80.40.78021.19961.66372.17792.74733.37644.06964.83055.66226.5675ME 0.20.40.78021.19961.66322.17612.74283.36764.05444.80675.62756.5191PQDP 0.80.40.86421.36761.91552.51333.16593.87794.65335.49606.40927.3956PQDP 0.20.40.75621.15161.59132.08032.62323.22443.88774.61665.41416.2826Figure 3
Risk simulation results of management effectiveness (a) and professional quality of distribution personnel (b) on distribution personnel of logistics distribution team.
(a)(b)It can be seen from Table3 and Figure 3 that when the effectiveness of the O2O catering platform's outbound distribution management and the professional quality of distribution personnel rise from 0.2 to 0.8, respectively, the risk of distribution personnel of logistics distribution team changes to varying degrees.


## 5. Conclusion

Aiming at the different subjects involved in the process of catering O2O distribution, this paper identifies the possible risks faced by different subjects in the process of catering O2O distribution and determines five risk factors: O2O catering enterprise’s own risk, logistics distribution team’s distribution risk, O2O catering platform supervision risk, user supervision risk, and government department supervision risk. In addition, this paper analyzes the correlation between these five risk factors by means of the system dynamics principle, constructs the food safety risk system analysis flow diagram of catering O2O distribution link, and carries out computer simulation experiments. The following conclusions are drawn:(1)
The simulation results of the first experiment show that the five risk factors of food safety risk in catering O2O distribution constitute a feedback relationship with each other. When the risk occurs, the government regulatory risk and O2O catering platform regulatory risk will rapidly expand the risk of the whole system. Therefore, government departments and the O2O catering platform should do a good job in daily supervision, rather than wait until the risk rises or causes serious impact before taking measures, which can also reduce the risks faced by the other three subjects to a certain extent.(2)
According to the results of the second experimental simulation, it is found that changing a certain risk influencing factor or changing different risk influencing factors in the same proportion will have a different impact on different risk subjects. Therefore, when a certain risk occurs in the system, the proportion of risk factors can be changed so as to understand its impact on the risks of different subjects and then formulate countermeasures.


### 5.1. Theoretical Contributions

Firstly, this paper enriches the literature on food safety risks in catering O2O distribution. On the one hand, there are few studies on the food safety risk of catering O2O [25, 26]. Through literature reading, this research divides the possible risks of food safety in catering O2O distribution into five risk factors: O2O catering enterprise’s own food risk, logistics distribution team distribution risk, O2O catering platform supervision risk, user supervision risk, and government department supervision risk, which improves the research on catering O2O food safety risk. On the other hand, this research further enriches the research methods of food safety risk. According to the theory of system dynamics, the occurrence of risk is not independent, but the interaction of various subjects is involved. However, at present, few literature research the risks faced by food safety in catering O2O distribution from a systematic perspective [27]. Therefore, the research results of this paper are a response and supplement to the existing literature.


### 5.2. Managerial Implications

This research also provides some practical enlightenment for the supervision and management of government departments, catering O2O platform, and enterprises. Through the research, it is found that the food safety risk in catering O2O distribution is not only from the quality of O2O catering enterprises but also closely related to the production, processing, packaging, and distribution of the catering O2O food. It is a relatively complex system. Therefore, all participants should consider risks from a systematic perspective and clarify their respective responsibilities and obligations. For example, O2O catering enterprises should strengthen the control of kitchen hygiene and personnel, and the platform should strictly review the entry qualification of enterprises so as to minimize the occurrence of food risks and to truly promote the orderly and healthy development of online catering services in China [28].


## 5.1. Theoretical Contributions

Firstly, this paper enriches the literature on food safety risks in catering O2O distribution. On the one hand, there are few studies on the food safety risk of catering O2O [25, 26]. Through literature reading, this research divides the possible risks of food safety in catering O2O distribution into five risk factors: O2O catering enterprise’s own food risk, logistics distribution team distribution risk, O2O catering platform supervision risk, user supervision risk, and government department supervision risk, which improves the research on catering O2O food safety risk. On the other hand, this research further enriches the research methods of food safety risk. According to the theory of system dynamics, the occurrence of risk is not independent, but the interaction of various subjects is involved. However, at present, few literature research the risks faced by food safety in catering O2O distribution from a systematic perspective [27]. Therefore, the research results of this paper are a response and supplement to the existing literature.


## 5.2. Managerial Implications

This research also provides some practical enlightenment for the supervision and management of government departments, catering O2O platform, and enterprises. Through the research, it is found that the food safety risk in catering O2O distribution is not only from the quality of O2O catering enterprises but also closely related to the production, processing, packaging, and distribution of the catering O2O food. It is a relatively complex system. Therefore, all participants should consider risks from a systematic perspective and clarify their respective responsibilities and obligations. For example, O2O catering enterprises should strengthen the control of kitchen hygiene and personnel, and the platform should strictly review the entry qualification of enterprises so as to minimize the occurrence of food risks and to truly promote the orderly and healthy development of online catering services in China [28].



---

*Source: 2778209-2021-11-26.xml*