and of risk ranking in the food chain amongst risk and ...€¦ · belgian federal agency for the...

Belgian Federal Agency for the Safety of the Food Chain

Needs and expectations of risk ranking in the food chain:

results of a survey amongst risk managers and stakeholders

N. Speybroeck (UCL, SciCom FASFC), P. Depoorter (FASFC),

X. Van Huffel (FASFC), B. Devleesschauwer (UGent, UCL),

C. Saegerman (Ulg, SciCom FASFC)

& FASFC Working Group

November 2013


Outline

Introduction

Materials and Methods

Results

Discussion

Preliminary conclusions

http://www.google.be/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=F1vO4edHX61gUM&tbnid=2mmGP8s41vZAmM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http://blog.smallbusinessadvocate.com/management-fundamentals/seeking-the-essence-of-entrepreneurship&ei=IsGRUuvdO7O10QXY-4H4AQ&bvm=bv.56988011,d.d2k&psig=AFQjCNHlt0IwCBnQkUaf5Nrda8yGfg9KEA&ust=1385370217649429


Introduction

Risk ranking (RR) used to make choices,

important when resources limited .

RR in food safety?

Food safety policy & sound scientific evidence.

Interaction between risk assessors & managers

important (stressed by e.g., EFSA,2012).

http://www.google.be/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=Lk11arApAjfoOM&tbnid=trrO37DNphRvvM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http://www.ntt-security.com/blog/pci-dss/15/assign-a-risk-ranking-to-newly-discovered-security-vulnerabilities/&ei=iJZ4UuDMB47bsgb47ICwDg&bvm=bv.55980276,d.bGE&psig=AFQjCNEixbo3ettDcjFSIuE1KEzKW0xSsw&ust=1383720861627264


Public Health

Science Consumer Confidence

Politics

Trade

Food Safety

Ethics


Introduction

Risk ranking (RR) used to make choices,

important when resources limited .

RR in food safety?

Food safety policy & sound scientific evidence.

Interaction between risk assessors & managers

important (stressed by e.g., EFSA,2012) .


Materials and Methods

Online questionnaire: 179 food chain

stakeholders & decision makers.

4 different types of RR questions:

Personal information.

Needs.

Expectations.

Methodological issues.



Results (I): Profile

51 respondents (until now)

Profile: Business operators: 4; Decision makers: 34;

Scientists: 3; Sector representatives: 8

Field of competency: animal: 10; food: 35; crops: 6

Years of experience, median= 14.5



Years of experience

Field of competency


RR experience?

Results (II): RR


RR performed?

Examples: Fruits and vegetables; Organizing

inspections, ….

When?

< 1 month ago : 13

< 1 year ago : 19

> 1 year ago : 3

Mostly at national level: 84% (32/38)

RR not conducted… 38 % because no knowledge


Results (III): Methods

Training? Read reports?


71% of the respondents did encounter

data collection problems

Which problems?


45 % of the respondents did encounter

data sharing problems

Why no sharing?


Recommendations…

Interaction decision makers -- scientists?

Two way interactions, workshops, communication,

risk ranking as a joint exercise, develop diagnostic

tools for data-collection,….

Interaction stakeholders -- scientists &

stakeholders -- decision makers….


Discussion (I)

Insights concerning RR needs & expectations of

decision makers and stakeholders active in food

chain: Training, Communication,….

Interaction decision makers – scientists!

No p-values, uncertainty, but alternatives….

Consequences of action or inaction…

Transparency on what is not known…



Discussion (II)

More knowledge needed on presenting RR results.

Researchers to understand policy mechanisms & structures.

“Policy-free” evidence is common.

Timing….

Methods appropriate to problems, resources & context.

Harmonization of RR…. Global level e.g., FERG (WHO)?


Preliminary Conclusions

RR is conducted in the different fields: animal, food,

crops….

Improvements possible:

Interaction between key-players.

Training needs: 1. lack of knowledge reason for no RR and

2. key-players use RR but do not have training.

Data Collection and Sharing are not optimal but

important elements in a RR.


Thank you


Literature consulted Anders S. & Schmidt C. (2011). Journal of Risk

Research, 14, 215-239.

EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ) (2012).

EFSA Journal, 10, 2724.

Hoffmann S. (2010). Risk Analysis, 30, 711-714.

Petticrew et al. (2004). Journal of Epidemiology

and Community Health, 58, 811-816

WHO/FAO (2000). Report of a WHO Expert

Consultation, 26 pp. Kiel, Germany.


and of risk ranking in the food chain amongst risk and ...€¦ · belgian federal agency for the...

Documents