Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Commentaries on the Revised General Framework1

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Food Safety Governance

Part of the book series: Risk, Governance and Society ((RISKGOSO,volume 15))

  • 1120 Accesses

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    It is important to note that the report version that was subjected to commenting (Dreyer et al. 2007a) did neither include the chapter on risk communication, nor the chapter presenting the case study on genetically modified maize. These two chapters have only been added to the present volume (Chaps. 8 and 9). The four invited commentaries, therefore, do not relate to them. Neither were the chapters part of the documentation that was used during the series of workshops with key actors in food safety governance. Hence, they did not form part of the feedback and review process.

  2. 2.

    Cp. www.food.gov.uk/multimedia.pdfs/fsa060207.pdf. Accessed 31 January 2008.

  3. 3.

    Large federations cannot be expected to reflect the interests of all food sectors in each EU country.

  4. 4.

    Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy.

  5. 5.

    General Food Law Regulation (EC) 178/2002.

  6. 6.

    Regulation (EC) 1829/2003 on genetically modified food and feed, Article 7.

  7. 7.

    Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points.

References

  • Dreyer, M., Renn, O., Ely, A., Stirling, A., Vos, E., & Wendler, F. (2007). A General Framework for the Precautionary and Inclusive Governance of Food Safety, for the EC Framework Programme 6 Integrated Project ‘SAFE FOODS’, Interim Report of Subproject 5, 4 May 2007. Stuttgart: DIALOGIK .

    Google Scholar 

  • Food Standards Agency (2006). Annual Report of the Chief Scientist 2006/07. www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/board/fsa071005a.pdf. Accessed 30 January 2008.

  • The Royal Society & Food Standards Agency (2005). Social Science Insights for Risk Assessment: Findings of a Workshop held by the Royal Society and the Food Standards Agency on 30 September 2005. www.royalsoc.ac.uk/downloaddoc.asp?id = 2797. Accessed 30 January 2008.

  • World Health Organisation (WHO) & Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO) (2006). Food Safety Risk Analysis. A Guide for National Food Safety Authorities (FAO Food and Nutrition Paper 87). www.who.int/foodsafety/publications/micro/riskanalysis06.pdf. Accessed 30 January 2008.

  • Abels, G. (2002). Experts, citizens, and eurocrats – towards a policy shift in the governance of biopolitics in the EU. European Integration Online Papers, 6(19). http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/2002–019a.htm. Accessed 15 January 2008.

  • Bal, R., Bijker, W. E., & Hendriks, R. (2004). Democratisation of scientific advice. British Medical Journal, 329, 1339–1341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Codex Alimentarius (2007). Working Principles for Risk Analysis for Food Safety for Application by Governments. CAC/GL 62/2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission of the European Communities (2000a). Communication from the Commission on the Precautionary Principle, COM 1 final, 2 February 2000. Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission of the European Communities (2000b). First Report of the Scientific Steering Committee’s Working Group on the Harmonisation of Risk Assessment Procedures. Brussels: Health and Consumer Protection Directorate-General.

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission of the European Communities (2001). European Governance. A White Paper, COM 428 final, 25 July 2001. Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission of the European Communities (2003). The Future of Risk Assessment in the European Union. Europe: Scientific Steering Committee.

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission’s DG SANCO (2005). Maximising the Contribution of Science to European Health and Safety. Brussels: DG SANCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Hollander, A. E. M. & Hanemaaijer, A. H. (Eds.) (2003). Coping Rationally with Risks. RIVM rapport 251701047 (pp 1–52). Bilthoven, The Netherlands: National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dietrich, H., & Schibeci, R. (2003). Beyond public perceptions of gene technology: community participation in public policy in Australia. Public Understanding of Science, 12, 381–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EFSA’s Scientific Committee 2006 Transparency in Risk Assessment carried out by EFSA. EFSA Journal 353 1 16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frewer, L. J., Lassen, J., Kettlitz, B., Scholderer, J., Beekman, V., & Berdal, K. G. (2004). Societal aspects of genetically modified foods. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 42, 1191–1193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Funtovicz, S., Shepherd, I., Wilkinson, D., & Ravetz, J. (2000). Science and governance in the European Union: a contribution to the debate. Science and Public Policy, 27(5), 327–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaskell, G. (2004). Science policy and society: the British debate over GM agriculture. Current Opinion in Biotechnology, 15, 241–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoppe, R. (2005). Rethinking the science-policy nexus: from knowledge utilization and science technology studies to types of boundary arrangements. Poiesis and Praxis: International Journal of Technology Assessment and Ethics of Science, 3(3), 199–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoppe, R. (2007). Scientic Expertise and the Policy Process: Boundary Workers’ Perspectives, Paper for Interpretive Policy Analysis Conference. Amsterdam: Free University Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, S., & Garrick, B. J. (1981). On the quantitative definition of risk. Risk Analysis, 1, 11–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klinke, A., & Renn, O. (2002). A new approach to risk evaluation and management: risk- based, precaution-based and discourse-based strategies. Risk Analysis, 22, 1071–1094.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klinke, A., Dreyer, M., Renn, O., Stirling, A., & van Zwanenberg, P. (2006). Precautionary risk regulation in European governance. Journal of Risk Research, 4(9), 373–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levidow, L., Carr, S., & Wield, D. (2005). European Union regulation of agri-biotechnology: precautionary links between science, expertise and policy. Science and Policy, 27, 261–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, G., Paldam Folker, A., Bagger Jørgenson, R., Krayer von Krauss, M., Sandøe, P., & Tveit, G. (2005). The factualisation of uncertainty: Risks, politics, and genetically modified crops–a case of rape. Agriculture and Human Values, 22, 235–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mumpower, J. L. & Stewart, T. R. (1996). Expert judgement and expert disagreement. Thinking and Reasoning, 2(2–3), 191–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn, O. (2004). Deliberative Approaches to Manage Systemic Risks, Presentation at the Euroscience Open Forum (ESOF). Stockholm: ESOF. http://www.esof2004.org/pdf_ppt/session_material/ortwin_renn_2.ppt. Accessed 15 January 2008.

  • Stirling, A. (2007). Risk, precaution and science: towards a more constructive policy debate. EMBO reports, 8(4), 309–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vos, E., & Wendler, F. (Eds.). (2006). Food Safety Regulation in Europe: A Comparative Institutional Analysis (Series Ius Commune). Antwerp: Intersentia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Codex Alimentarius Commission (2007). Working Principles for Risk Analysis for Food Safety for Application by Governments. CAC/GL 62–2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission of the European Communities (CEC) (2000). White Paper on Food Safety, COM (1999) 719 final, 12 January 2000, Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Chief Scientist Team at the UK’s Food Standards Agency, Manchester University, Manchester, England

    David Atkins (Dr)

Authors
  1. David Atkins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Julie Norman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

    Rights and permissions

    Reprints and permissions

    Copyright information

    © 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

    About this chapter

    Cite this chapter

    Atkins, D., Norman, J. (2009). Commentaries on the Revised General Framework1 . In: Renn, O., Dreyer, M. (eds) Food Safety Governance. Risk, Governance and Society, vol 15. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-69309-3_13

    Download citation

    • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-69309-3_13

    • Published:

    • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

    • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-69308-6

    • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-69309-3

    • eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsEconomics and Finance (R0)

    Publish with us

    Policies and ethics

    Search

    Navigation