Advertisement

Overview of the General Framework

  • A. Ely
  • A. Stirling
  • M. DreyerEmail author
  • O. Renn
  • E. Vos
  • F. Wendler
Chapter
Part of the Risk, Governance and Society book series (RISKGOSO, volume 15)

Frameworks for food safety governance have evolved through a variety of forms since the mid-late twentieth century, and it is useful to reflect on these developments prior to introducing the General Framework adopted in this book. The simplistic technocratic model, wherein objective science is seen to directly inform policy making (shown in Fig. 2.1), gave way in the late twentieth century to the less naïve decisionist model (shown in Fig. 2.2).1 This model, which corresponds closely to that illustrated by the National Research Council’s (NRC) “Red Book” (NRC 1983), recognised that policy making required inputs other than science in order to inform decisions, and that other legitimate factors (such as those relating to socio-political and economic objectives) needed to be taken into account in addressing risks. The Red Book in 1983 established the division between the scientific aspects (risk assessment) and political aspects (risk management) within the overall process of risk analysis. This division, and several other aspects of the Red Book model, have been adopted across a wide variety of risk management fields (Omenn 2003).2

Keywords

Food Safety Precautionary Principle Governance Process Governance Framework General Food 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Ely
    • 1
  • A. Stirling
    • 2
  • M. Dreyer
    • 3
    Email author
  • O. Renn
    • 4
  • E. Vos
    • 5
  • F. Wendler
    • 6
  1. 1.SPRU-Science and Technology Policy ResearchUniversity of SussexAfrica, China, Europe and the USA
  2. 2.Director of Science at SPRU-Science and Technology Policy ResearchUniversity of SussexUnited Kingdom
  3. 3.DIALOGIKNon-Profit Institute for Communication and Cooperation ResearchStuttgartGermany
  4. 4.University of StuttgartDepartment for Sociology of Technology and EnvironmentStuttgartGermany
  5. 5.European University InstituteFlorenceItaly
  6. 6.Political Science from the University of GöttingenGermany

Personalised recommendations