Published: 8 April 2026
The EU Library gathers guidance documents related to food safety and produced by EU national competent organisations and risk assessors.
The EU Library includes entries collected by members of EFSA’s Advisory Forum with the support of the national Focal Points. It will be updated at least annually to ensure the inclusion of any new guidance and updates of existing ones.
Showing 19 documents
Original title:Valutazione del benessere animale e della biosicurezza dell'allevamento della bovina da latte: manuale di autocontrollo-ClassyFarm
Food Domain: Animal Health; Animal Welfare; Biological Hazards
Abstract/Summary:"ClassyFarm is an IT platform of the Italian Ministry of Health, developed by the Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale della Lombardia e dell'Emilia Romagna ""Bruno Ubertini"" (IZSLER), with the aim to categorise livestock farms based on their risk in animal welfare, biosecurity, and antimicrobial use. Within this platform, several data are inserted: in relation to Animal Welfare and Biosecurity in dairy cows, a guidance and two checklists (for both loose-housed and tie-stalls housing systems) have been developed for on-farm risk assessment to be run by a farm veterinarian (private practitioner). To guarantee a uniform collection of management-based, resource-based, and animal-based indicators, this guidance has been developed.
The indicators are based on current European and Italian animal welfare legislation and international scientific references, such as the Welfare Quality protocol (2009) and several EFSA Opinions and Guidelines. For each indicator (question), three possible answers have been identified according to three levels of risk:
- Level 1 - High risk: unacceptable or non-compliant condition; some animals may be in stressful situations and exposed to hazards.
- Level 2 - Controlled Risk: compliant condition, where animals benefit at least from the five animal welfare freedoms.
- Level 3 - Low risk: optimal condition, above minimum law requirements, which allows animals to have rewarding positive experiences.
Once the farm veterinarian submits aswers to the Classyfarm Platfor, the system provides scores for non-animal-based and animal-based indicators, breaking them down into three assessment areas (on a 0-100% scale scoring system):
- Area A: Farm management and staff training
- Area B: Facilities and equipment
- Area C: Animal-based measures
- along with a final total score for overall Animal Welfare (0-100%).
For more info: https://www.classyfarm.it/index.php/en/what-en"
https://www.bfr.bund.de/cm/364/guideline-for-the-assessment-of-health-risks.pdf
Original title:Leitfaden für die Bewertung gesundheitlicher Risiken
Food Domain: Contaminants; Biological Hazards; Veterinary…
Abstract/Summary:The German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) has the legal mandate to estimate and assess the risks to human health presented by food and animal feed, substances, microorganisms, products and procedures. The BfR also provides information about potential, identified and assessed risks, and recommends measures necessary for risk mitigation or avoidance. In certain circumstances, it is also necessary to assess the benefits of substances, products and procedures. The assessment process is documented and explained in
full. By providing a comprehensive and understandable presentation of the scientific basis of its assessments, the BfR makes an important contribution to risk communication. One aspect of risk communication, among other things, is the exchange of information and scientific opinion concerning risks between all target groups, which include consumers, government, research and public institutions, industry bodies, non-governmental organisations and the media. As a result of this independent scientific assessment, research and clear-cut communication of health risks the BfR actively contributes to the safety of food and feed, products and chemicals. The present ‘Guideline for the assessment of health risks’ serves to implement the theoretical principles mentioned in practice and, therefore, assure the quality of risk assessments and other health statements published by the BfR.
Original title:Valutazione della biosicurezza negli allevamenti di suini semibradi ad alta capacità-Manuale per i Controlli Ufficiali- Classyfarm
Food Domain: Animal Health; Biological Hazards
Abstract/Summary:"ClassyFarm is an IT platform of the Italian Ministry of Health, developed by the Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale della Lombardia e dell'Emilia Romagna ""Bruno Ubertini"" (IZSLER), with the aim to categorise livestock farms based on their risk in animal welfare, biosecurity, and antimicrobial use.
Within this platform, several data are inserted: in relation to Biosecurity in pig farming, a guidance and a checklist for high-capacity semi-free-range system have been developed for on-farm risk assessment to be run by the Official Veterinarian.
To guarantee a uniform collection of management-based, resource-based, and animal-based indicators, this guidance has been developed, and it is integrated into the official animal welfare checklist, which is structured in sections to verify compliance with current regulatory requirements. The data collected is further combined with information from the National Data Bank, ClassyFarm checklists from farm veterinarians, and return data from slaughterhouses, all contributing to the assessment of the farm's risk level, which can be compared at provincial, regional, and national levels.
The indicators are based on current European and Italian animal welfare legislation and international scientific references, such as the Welfare Quality protocol (2009) and several EFSA Opinions and Guidelines. For each indicator (question), three possible answers have been identified according to three levels of risk:
- Level 1 - High risk: unacceptable or non-compliant condition; some animals may be in stressful situations and exposed to hazards.
- Level 2 - Controlled Risk: compliant condition, where animals benefit at least from the five animal welfare freedoms.
- Level 3 - Low risk: optimal condition, above minimum law requirements, which allows animals to have rewarding positive experiences.
Once the Official Veterinarian submits aswers to the Classyfarm Platfor, the system provides a
document that will contain:
- the critical points found (criteria with non-compliant or insufficient evaluation),
- the overall risk level of the herd, calculated from the ratio of “non-compliant - insufficient, “compliant - acceptable” and “compliant - optimal” observations,
- the risk level for each area (Area A: Farm management and staff training; Area B: Facilities and equipment; Area C: Animal-based measures), expressed according to the observations noted (non-compliant, compliant, optimal, insufficient, improvable).
-any measures and prescriptions adopted,
-the final result of the inspection, along with the owner's or keeper's right to defense.
For more info: https://www.classyfarm.it/index.php/en/what-en""
Original title:Valutazione della biosicurezza negli allevamenti di suini stabulati a bassa capacità-Manuale per i Controlli Ufficiali- Classyfarm
Food Domain: Animal Health; Biological Hazards
Abstract/Summary:"ClassyFarm is an IT platform of the Italian Ministry of Health, developed by the Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale della Lombardia e dell'Emilia Romagna ""Bruno Ubertini"" (IZSLER), with the aim to categorise livestock farms based on their risk in animal welfare, biosecurity, and antimicrobial use.
Within this platform, several data are inserted: in relation to Biosecurity in pig farming, a guidance and a checklist for low-capacity housed system have been developed for on-farm risk assessment to be run by the Official Veterinarian.
To guarantee a uniform collection of management-based, resource-based, and animal-based indicators, this guidance has been developed, and it is integrated into the official animal welfare checklist, which is structured in sections to verify compliance with current regulatory requirements. The data collected is further combined with information from the National Data Bank, ClassyFarm checklists from farm veterinarians, and return data from slaughterhouses, all contributing to the assessment of the farm's risk level, which can be compared at provincial, regional, and national levels.
The indicators are based on current European and Italian animal welfare legislation and international scientific references, such as the Welfare Quality protocol (2009) and several EFSA Opinions and Guidelines. For each indicator (question), three possible answers have been identified according to three levels of risk:
- Level 1 - High risk: unacceptable or non-compliant condition; some animals may be in stressful situations and exposed to hazards.
- Level 2 - Controlled Risk: compliant condition, where animals benefit at least from the five animal welfare freedoms.
- Level 3 - Low risk: optimal condition, above minimum law requirements, which allows animals to have rewarding positive experiences.
Once the Official Veterinarian submits aswers to the Classyfarm Platfor, the system provides a
document that will contain:
- the critical points found (criteria with non-compliant or insufficient evaluation),
- the overall risk level of the herd, calculated from the ratio of “non-compliant - insufficient, “compliant - acceptable” and “compliant - optimal” observations,
- the risk level for each area (Area A: Farm management and staff training; Area B: Facilities and equipment; Area C: Animal-based measures), expressed according to the observations noted (non-compliant, compliant, optimal, insufficient, improvable).
-any measures and prescriptions adopted,
-the final result of the inspection, along with the owner's or keeper's right to defense.
For more info: https://www.classyfarm.it/index.php/en/what-en""
Original title:Valutazione della biosicurezza negli allevamenti di suini semibradi a bassa capacità-Manuale per i Controlli Ufficiali- Classyfarm
Food Domain: Animal Health; Biological Hazards
Abstract/Summary:"ClassyFarm is an IT platform of the Italian Ministry of Health, developed by the Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale della Lombardia e dell'Emilia Romagna ""Bruno Ubertini"" (IZSLER), with the aim to categorise livestock farms based on their risk in animal welfare, biosecurity, and antimicrobial use.
Within this platform, several data are inserted: in relation to Biosecurity in pig farming, a guidance and a checklist for low-capacity semi-free-range system have been developed for on-farm risk assessment to be run by the Official Veterinarian.
To guarantee a uniform collection of management-based, resource-based, and animal-based indicators, this guidance has been developed, and it is integrated into the official animal welfare checklist, which is structured in sections to verify compliance with current regulatory requirements. The data collected is further combined with information from the National Data Bank, ClassyFarm checklists from farm veterinarians, and return data from slaughterhouses, all contributing to the assessment of the farm's risk level, which can be compared at provincial, regional, and national levels.
The indicators are based on current European and Italian animal welfare legislation and international scientific references, such as the Welfare Quality protocol (2009) and several EFSA Opinions and Guidelines. For each indicator (question), three possible answers have been identified according to three levels of risk:
- Level 1 - High risk: unacceptable or non-compliant condition; some animals may be in stressful situations and exposed to hazards.
- Level 2 - Controlled Risk: compliant condition, where animals benefit at least from the five animal welfare freedoms.
- Level 3 - Low risk: optimal condition, above minimum law requirements, which allows animals to have rewarding positive experiences.
Once the Official Veterinarian submits aswers to the Classyfarm Platfor, the system provides a
document that will contain:
- the critical points found (criteria with non-compliant or insufficient evaluation),
- the overall risk level of the herd, calculated from the ratio of “non-compliant - insufficient, “compliant - acceptable” and “compliant - optimal” observations,
- the risk level for each area (Area A: Farm management and staff training; Area B: Facilities and equipment; Area C: Animal-based measures), expressed according to the observations noted (non-compliant, compliant, optimal, insufficient, improvable).
-any measures and prescriptions adopted,
-the final result of the inspection, along with the owner's or keeper's right to defense.
For more info: https://www.classyfarm.it/index.php/en/what-en"
Original title:Valutazione della biosicurezza negli allevamenti di suini stabulati ad alta capacità-Manuale per i Controlli Ufficiali- Classyfarm
Food Domain: Animal Health; Biological Hazards
Abstract/Summary:"ClassyFarm is an IT platform of the Italian Ministry of Health, developed by the Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale della Lombardia e dell'Emilia Romagna ""Bruno Ubertini"" (IZSLER), with the aim to categorise livestock farms based on their risk in animal welfare, biosecurity, and antimicrobial use.
Within this platform, several data are inserted: in relation to Biosecurity in pig farming, a guidance and a checklist for high-capacity housed system have been developed for on-farm risk assessment to be run by the Official Veterinarian.
To guarantee a uniform collection of management-based, resource-based, and animal-based indicators, this guidance has been developed, and it is integrated into the official animal welfare checklist, which is structured in sections to verify compliance with current regulatory requirements. The data collected is further combined with information from the National Data Bank, ClassyFarm checklists from farm veterinarians, and return data from slaughterhouses, all contributing to the assessment of the farm's risk level, which can be compared at provincial, regional, and national levels.
The indicators are based on current European and Italian animal welfare legislation and international scientific references, such as the Welfare Quality protocol (2009) and several EFSA Opinions and Guidelines. For each indicator (question), three possible answers have been identified according to three levels of risk:
- Level 1 - High risk: unacceptable or non-compliant condition; some animals may be in stressful situations and exposed to hazards.
- Level 2 - Controlled Risk: compliant condition, where animals benefit at least from the five animal welfare freedoms.
- Level 3 - Low risk: optimal condition, above minimum law requirements, which allows animals to have rewarding positive experiences.
Once the Official Veterinarian submits aswers to the Classyfarm Platfor, the system provides a
document that will contain:
- the critical points found (criteria with non-compliant or insufficient evaluation),
- the overall risk level of the herd, calculated from the ratio of “non-compliant - insufficient, “compliant - acceptable” and “compliant - optimal” observations,
- the risk level for each area (Area A: Farm management and staff training; Area B: Facilities and equipment; Area C: Animal-based measures), expressed according to the observations noted (non-compliant, compliant, optimal, insufficient, improvable).
-any measures and prescriptions adopted,
-the final result of the inspection, along with the owner's or keeper's right to defense.
For more info: https://www.classyfarm.it/index.php/en/what-en""
Guidelines and procedure for the collection of samples from the encephalon stem surveillance of transmissible spongiform encephalopathies in bovines, buffalo, sheep, goats and deer
Original title:Linea guida e procedura per il prelievo dei campioni di tronco encefalico sorveglianza delle encefalopatie spongiformi trasmissibili in bovini, bufalini, ovini, caprini e cervi
Food Domain: Animal Health; Biological Hazards - EUSR TSE
Abstract/Summary:These guidelines provide useful guidance to Local Health Authority veterinarians regarding brainstem sampling procedures, surveillance for bovine, sheep/goat and cervid TSEs, and biosecurity measures in compliance with the regulatory framework.
Original title:Linee guida per la lotta alle encefalopatie spongiformi trasmissibili (TSE) negli allevamenti ovini e caprini
Food Domain: Animal Health; Biological Hazards - EUSR TSE
Abstract/Summary:"The following Guidelines are intended to be a tool that can facilitate the application of the complex regulations governing the management of TSEs in sheep and goats. In the
specific attention has been paid to the surveillance and management of outbreaks.
It should be noted that collaboration with the breeder must always be promoted for the purpose of the prompt reporting, to the competent Local Health Authority, of all cases of animal death and possible finding of clinical symptoms and behavioral alterations referable to the disease. Failure to report the death constitutes a violation of the provisions of Art. 6 of Legislative Decree 136/2022 and therefore the sanctioning measures provided for in by Article 23, paragraph 1 of the same Legislative Decree 136/2022, as explained by the note of the Ministry of Health 0005173-23/02/2023-DGSAF-MDS-P.
Anything not expressly defined in the following guidelines shall be implemented pursuant to current national and European Union regulations."
Original title:Intégration de l’exposome dans les travaux de l’Anses
Food Domain: Animal Health; Animal Welfare; Biological Hazards…
Abstract/Summary:The ANSES guidance “Intégration de l’exposome dans les activités de l’Anses” (2022-METH-0197) explores how the exposome concept—which encompasses the full array of environmental, chemical, biological, physical, psychosocial, and socio-economic influences over an individual’s life—can be integrated into the Agency’s risk assessment and health evaluation activities. The report surveys existing definitions, data sources, methods, and tools relevant to exposome research, and identifies challenges in applying them in regulatory or public health contexts. It emphasizes the need for holistic exposure tracking (multiple sources, multiple pathways, temporal dynamics), incorporation of inter- and intra-individual variability, and dealing with mixtures of stressors. The guidance proposes a roadmap for operationalizing exposome approaches within ANSES: selecting priorities, developing or adapting measurement and modelling tools, ensuring data interoperability, and embedding these approaches in expert assessments. Overall, the document aims to modernize risk evaluation by shifting from single-agent, single-pathway assessments toward more integrated, realistic representations of human exposures over life.
https://www.bfr.bund.de/cm/349/guidance-on-uncertainty-analysis-in-exposure-assessment.pdf
Original title:Leitfaden zur Unsicherheitsanalyse in der Expositionsschätzung
Food Domain: Contaminants; Biological Hazards; Veterinary…
Abstract/Summary:This guidance document delineates the procedure recommended by the BfR Committee for Exposure Assessment and Exposure Standardisation and the BfR Committee on Evidence-
based Methods in Risk Assessment for recording, describing and evaluating uncertainties in connection with public health related scientific statements. It primarily refers to the application
of uncertainty analysis in the field of exposure assessment. Since exposure assessment is an essential part of risk assessment, it is recommended that the outlined principles should also
be applied to the risk assessment process as a whole. In principle, this guidance follows the previously published guidance documents of EFSA (EFSA Scientific Committee et al., 2018; IPCS & IOMC, 2008). The development of standardised procedures for uncertainty analysis, especially in the area of hazard characterisation, is currently subject to intensive discussion and considerable collaborative efforts at the international level, so that an update of this guidance may be necessary in the future. The primary purpose of uncertainty analysis is to increase transparency regarding all elements of risk assessment and exposure estimation. In particular, uncertainty analysis should enable consumers, decision-makers and stakeholders to better understand risk assessments and to make their own decisions on a well-founded basis. Therefore, the uncertainty analysis should include the subject and question of the assessment, as well as the definition of the required protection goal. Deficits in knowledge about scenarios, models and parameters must also be described in an appropriate manner. This ensures that risk assessments contribute to informed decision-making under conditions of uncertainty.
Original title:Valutazione del benessere animale e della biosicurezza dell'allevamento della capra da latte: manuale di autocontrollo-ClassyFarm
Food Domain: Animal Health; Animal Welfare; Biological Hazards
Abstract/Summary:"ClassyFarm is an IT platform of the Italian Ministry of Health, developed by the Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale della Lombardia e dell'Emilia Romagna ""Bruno Ubertini"" (IZSLER), with the aim to categorise livestock farms based on their risk in animal welfare, biosecurity, and antimicrobial use.
Within this platform, several data are inserted: in relation to Animal Welfare and Biosecurity in dairy goat, a guidance and a checklist have been developed for on-farm risk assessment to be run by a farm veterinarian (private practitioner). To guarantee a uniform collection of management-based, resource-based, and animal-based indicators, this guidance has been developed.
The indicators are based on current European and Italian animal welfare legislation and international scientific references, such as the Welfare Quality protocol (2009) and several EFSA Opinions and Guidelines. For each indicator (question), three possible answers have been identified according to three levels of risk:
- Level 1 - High risk: unacceptable or non-compliant condition; some animals may be in stressful situations and exposed to hazards.
- Level 2 - Controlled Risk: compliant condition, where animals benefit at least from the five animal welfare freedoms.
- Level 3 - Low risk: optimal condition, above minimum law requirements, which allows animals to have rewarding positive experiences.
Once the farm veterinarian submits aswers to the Classyfarm Platfor, the system provides scores for non-animal-based and animal-based indicators, breaking them down into three assessment areas (on a 0-100% scale scoring system):
- Area A: Farm management and staff training
- Area B: Facilities and equipment
- Area C: Animal-based measures
- along with a final total score for overall Animal Welfare (0-100%).
For more info: https://www.classyfarm.it/index.php/en/what-en"
Food Domain: Biological Hazards; Contaminants; Food Contact…
Abstract/Summary:The document provides a comprehensive framework for assessing health risks from environmental chemical and microbiological exposures. It follows international standards, including EFSA, WHO, and Codex Alimentarius methodologies. Risk assessment steps include hazard identification, hazard characterization, exposure assessment, and risk characterization. It covers both microbiological (e.g., pathogens in food and water) and toxicological (e.g., heavy metals, pesticides) risks. Special topics include endocrine disruptors, nanomaterials, genotoxicity, and non-testing methods like QSAR and TTC. Practical examples include risk assessments for lead and atrazine in drinking water, PAHs in food, and nickel from cookware. The document emphasizes the importance of data quality, transparency, and multidisciplinary collaboration. It provides tools and models for predictive microbiology and chemical exposure estimation. Regulatory frameworks from the EU and international bodies are integrated throughout the guidelines. The aim is to standardize national approaches, improve assessment quality, and support public health protection.
Original title:Linee guida in materia di igiene delle carni di selvaggina selvatica
Food Domain: Biological Hazards
Abstract/Summary:The game meat sector has shown a constant increase in supply and demand in recent years. In particular, the preparation of game meat-based dishes in public catering is increasingly found even outside the traditionally dedicated areas. At the same time, there is a significant increase in the number of certain wild animal populations, particularly ungulates. Most of this game can be hunted in accordance with the sector regulations and some species are subject to specific numerical control plans, which may involve different parties, as provided for by Law 157/92 and Law 394/91. Furthermore, in some periods of the year, there is the availability of large quantities of small game meat, both furred and feathered, killed during hunting. Finally, the movements of wild game carcasses or meat carried out directly by hunters, within the EU or outside the EU, must be considered. In such a context of wide availability of game meat, killed by hunting or as part of containment plans implemented by the competent bodies, and of great demand from consumers and restaurateurs, it is necessary to share the reference guidelines for the hygienic production of game meat and for the methods of official control of the same. The special rules on the protection of warm-blooded fauna and animal health are reserved. Since wild game, like other wild animals, is an important tool for assessing the prevalence of parasites and other zoonotic agents, it is also possible to proceed with regular checks on animals classified as indicators. The results of the monitoring carried out on the fauna will be included in the annual report in accordance with Directive 2003/99/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council. As is known, Regulation (EC) No 853/2004, which establishes specific rules on the hygiene of food of animal origin, in Annex III, Section IV, defines precise requirements regarding the placing on the market of wild game meat. The regulation does not apply to primary production for private domestic use as well as "to hunters who supply small quantities of wild game or wild game meat directly to the final consumer or to laboratories attached to retail or local catering establishments supplying the final consumer" (art. 1, co-signature 3, letter e of regulation (EC) 853/2004). The regulation of this last aspect, in application of the principle of subsidiarity, is delegated to the individual Member States. Italy has partially implemented this last provision through the agreement between the Ministry of Health, the Regions and the autonomous Provinces of 9/2/2006, lastly updated and modified with the agreement between the Government, the Regions and the autonomous Provinces relating to "Application guidelines of Regulation no. 852/2004/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the hygiene of food products" (Rep. Atti no. 59/CSR of 29 April 2010). These guidelines aim to harmonise the indications relating to the hygiene of the production of wild game meat, as defined in points I and 5 of Annex I to Regulation (EC) no. 853/2004, as well as the related official control activities on the national territory. These guidelines do not apply to farmed game as defined in Annex I, point 1.6 of Regulation (EC) no. 853/2004.
Original title:Valutazione del benessere animale e della biosicurezza dell'allevamento del bovino da carne: manuale di autocontrollo- ClassyFarm
Food Domain: Animal Health; Animal Welfare; Biological Hazards
Abstract/Summary:"ClassyFarm is an IT platform of the Italian Ministry of Health, developed by the Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale della Lombardia e dell'Emilia Romagna ""Bruno Ubertini"" (IZSLER), with the aim to categorise livestock farms based on their risk in animal welfare, biosecurity, and antimicrobial use.
Within this platform, several data are inserted: in relation to Animal Welfare and Biosecurity in beef cattles, a guidance and a checklists have been developed for on-farm risk assessment to be run by a farm veterinarian (private practitioner). To guarantee a uniform collection of management-based, resource-based, and animal-based indicators, this guidance has been developed.
The indicators are based on current European and Italian animal welfare legislation and international scientific references, such as the Welfare Quality protocol (2009) and several EFSA Opinions and Guidelines. For each indicator (question), three possible answers have been identified according to three levels of risk:
- Level 1 - High risk: unacceptable or non-compliant condition; some animals may be in stressful situations and exposed to hazards.
- Level 2 - Controlled Risk: compliant condition, where animals benefit at least from the five animal welfare freedoms.
- Level 3 - Low risk: optimal condition, above minimum law requirements, which allows animals to have rewarding positive experiences.
Once the farm veterinarian submits aswers to the Classyfarm Platfor, the system provides scores for non-animal-based and animal-based indicators, breaking them down into three assessment areas (on a 0-100% scale scoring system):
- Area A: Farm management and staff training
- Area B: Facilities and equipment
- Area C: Animal-based measures
- along with a final total score for overall Animal Welfare (0-100%).
For more info: https://www.classyfarm.it/index.php/en/what-en"
Original title:Vadlīnijas antimikrobiālās rezistences attīstības ierobežošanai lauksaimnieciskās ražošanas posmā un veterinārmedicīnas praksē Latvijā
Food Domain: Biological Hazards - EUSR zoonoses and AMR
Abstract/Summary:This Latvian guidance document focuses on limiting the development of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in agriculture and veterinary practice. It was developed under the AgroBioRes project and integrates international recommendations with national research findings. The document outlines the causes and spread of AMR, emphasizing the risks of improper antibiotic use, such as overuse, incorrect dosing, and lack of diagnosis. It highlights the environmental impact of antibiotic residues and the role of food in transmitting resistant microorganisms. The "One Health" approach is central, recognizing the interconnectedness of human, animal, and environmental health. The guidance provides principles for responsible antibiotic use, including avoiding routine group treatments, ensuring proper animal welfare, and implementing disease prevention strategies. It also discusses the roles of veterinarians, animal owners, and regulators, and includes classifications of antibiotics, resistance mechanisms, and global efforts to combat AMR. The document aims to promote sustainable practices and reduce reliance on antibiotics to preserve their effectiveness for both human and animal health.*
OPINION of the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health Safety regarding the update of the guidelines for the evaluation of guides to good hygiene practices and the application of HACCP principles
Original title:AVIS de l’Agence nationale de sécurité sanitaire de l’alimentation, de l’environnement et du travail relatif à l’actualisation des lignes directrices pour l’évaluation des guides de bonnes pratiques d’hygiène et d’application des principes HACCP (GBPH)
Food Domain: Biological Hazards; Contaminants; Allergens
Abstract/Summary:This ANSES guidance document updates the evaluation framework for guides to good hygiene practices and the application of HACCP principles in the food sector. It aims to ensure that these guides remain aligned with current scientific knowledge, regulatory requirements, and practical realities in food production. The document outlines criteria for assessing the relevance, clarity, and effectiveness of hygiene guides, emphasizing their role in supporting food business operators in managing risks and complying with food safety regulations. It also provides methodological recommendations for drafting and reviewing the guides.
ANSES methodological guide for the planning of expert assessments, uncertainty analysis, literature review, and evaluation of the weight of evidence
Original title:Guide méthodologique de l’Anses pour la planification des expertises, l’analyse d’incertitude, la revue de la littérature et l’évaluation du poids des preuves
Food Domain: Animal Health; Animal Welfare; Biological Hazards…
Abstract/Summary:This methodological report by ANSES (GT ACCMER) aims to operationalize previous recommendations from GT MER by adapting them into a pragmatic framework for internal use. It offers guidance on planning expert assessments, conducting literature reviews, evaluating the weight of evidence, and analyzing uncertainties systematically in risk evaluation contexts. The document also provides decision criteria for choosing methods proportionate to the complexity, data availability, and stakes of each expertise. Key features include standardized review protocols, dual independent assessments, structured integration of evidence lines, transparent justification of methodological choices, and graded expression of confidence or uncertainty. By embedding these processes into the organisational practices of ANSES and allowing iterative refinement during pilot implementation, the report seeks to enhance consistency, rigour, reproducibility and transparency across the Agency’s expert assessments.
Original title:Prise en compte de l’incertitude en évaluation des risques : revue de la littérature et recommandations pour l’Anses
Food Domain: Animal Health; Animal Welfare; Biological Hazards…
Abstract/Summary:This ANSES guidance (Prise en compte de l’incertitude en évaluation des risques) reviews scientific concepts and methodologies for treating uncertainty within risk assessment, and offers recommendations tailored to ANSES practices. It begins by defining types and sources of uncertainty (e.g. data gaps, model assumptions, variability) and reviews methods (probabilistic models, sensitivity analysis, scenario analysis, expert elicitation, qualitative approaches). It proposes a structured workflow: planning the uncertainty analysis, identifying and characterizing uncertainties in each assessment step, propagating uncertainties through the model, and communicating them transparently. The document emphasizes distinguishing uncertainty from variability, documenting assumptions and choices, expressing confidence levels or degrees of uncertainty, and using both quantitative and qualitative approaches when appropriate. In its annex (“illustrations and updates”), the working group recommends explicitly integrating uncertainty analysis and weight-of-evidence elements into assessments. Overall, the guidance seeks to improve robustness, clarity and consistency in how ANSES deals with uncertainty in scientific assessments.
Evaluation of the weight of evidence at ANSES: critical review of the literature and recommendations at the hazard identification stage
Original title:Évaluation du poids des preuves à l’Anses: revue critique de la littérature et recommandations à l’étape d’identification des dangers
Food Domain: Animal Health; Animal Welfare; Biological Hazards…
Abstract/Summary:This guidance report by ANSES critically reviews existing literature on the “weight of evidence” (WoE) approach as applied in the hazard identification phase of risk assessment, and makes methodological recommendations to harmonize internal practices. It defines key concepts (e.g. line of evidence, WoE, systematic review), proposes a four-step framework (planning, establishment of evidence lines, integration, expression of conclusions), and evaluates ~25 methods from the literature according to criteria of directionality, relevance, and feasibility. The report then compares these with current practices at ANSES and formulates concrete recommendations to improve transparency, reproducibility and consistency in expert assessments. Recommendations include use of formal reading grids, dual independent review, meta-analysis or multicriteria methods where possible, explicit justifications of choices, and graded expression of evidence strength. The document aims to strengthen the credibility and robustness of scientific expertise within ANSES.