Revisiting EFSA@EXPO: Advancing scientific risk assessment in the area of food safety – what needs to be done?

New technologies and methodologies

The emergence of new kinds of scientific information created by new technologies and new methodologies, as well as information provided by the public, creates a new and highly dynamic environment for risk assessment A specialised field of applied science that involves reviewing scientific data and studies in order to evaluate risks associated with certain hazards. It involves four steps: hazard identification, hazard characterisation, exposure assessment and risk characterisation. How can this treasure trove of information be used in the regulatory context? Global harmonisation of scientific approaches and collaboration between international players appear to be part of the answer.

Clear problem formulation The process of defining the specific problem being addressed in, for example, an environmental risk assessment. It involves articulating a question and defining how it may be answered (e.g. by identifying the endpoints to be measured)

Discussing the interplay between risk assessment and risk management The management of risks which have been identified by risk assessment. It includes the planning, implementation and evaluation of any resulting actions taken to protect consumers, animals and the environment, panellists agreed that this relationship should be a reiterative process. They stressed the need for a good problem formulation at the outset of scientific risk assessment. A clear identification of needs leads to risk assessment that is fit-for-purpose.

Open and transparent risk communication The interactive exchange of information and opinions throughout the risk analysis process, including the explanation of risk assessment findings and the basis of risk management decisions. The levels of interactive exchange include: the dissemination of public information about risks to consumers or other affected groups; the dialogue within and between risk assessment and risk management; engagement with interested parties affected by risk analysis outcomes.

The panellists also discussed risk communications and called for increased efforts to communicate openly, clearly and to put risk in perspective. Transparency was a hotly debated issue, with everyone agreeing it is a fundamental element in regulatory risk assessment.

The panellists for the final session were: Elke Anklam (European Commission, DG Joint Research Centre), Panagiotis Daskaleros (European Commission, DG Health and Food Safety), Hubert Deluyker (EFSA), Martin Dermine (Pesticide Action Network), Samuel Godefroy (University Laval), Tony Hardy (EFSA), Patrick Hau (Ministry of Health, Luxembourg), Euros Jones (European Crop Protection Association), Derek Knight (European Chemicals Agency), and Angelika Tritscher (WHO). The session was facilitated by Barbara Serra, a journalist for Al-Jazeera. 

• Final Plenary session: Conference conclusions