Food Risk Analysis: Towards a Better Understanding of “Hazard” and “Risk” in EU Food Legislation

For risk communication, it is important to understand the difference between “hazard” and “risk”. Definitions can be found in Codex Alimentarius and the European Union (EU) General Food Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002. The use of these terms as synonyms or their interchange is a recurrent issue in the...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Foods Vol. 12; no. 15; p. 2857
Main Authors: Cioca, Ana-Andreea, Tušar, Livija, Langerholc, Tomaž
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: Switzerland MDPI AG 27.07.2023
MDPI
Subjects:
Animal welfare
Climate change
Codex Alimentarius
Communication
computer software
Consistency
Emission standards
European Union
Food
Food law
food regulation
Food safety
Food science
hazard
Laws, regulations and rules
Legislation
Regulation
Regulations
risk
Risk analysis
Risk assessment
Risk communication
Safety
Safety and security measures
Safety regulations
Software
Terminology
Translations
Romania
Slovenia
food safety
risk
food regulation
hazard
risk communication
risk analysis
ISSN:2304-8158, 2304-8158
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:For risk communication, it is important to understand the difference between “hazard” and “risk”. Definitions can be found in Codex Alimentarius and the European Union (EU) General Food Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002. The use of these terms as synonyms or their interchange is a recurrent issue in the area of food safety, despite awareness-raising messages sent by EFSA (European Food Safety Authority) and other interested entities. A quick screening of the EU’s food regulations revealed several inconsistencies. Hence, it was considered necessary to further investigate if regulations could act as a source for this problem. A software tool was developed to support the detection and listing of inconsistent translations of “hazard” and “risk” in certain EU food regulations. Subsequently, native-speaking experts working in food safety from each EU country were asked to provide their individual scientific opinion on the prepared list. All data were statistically analysed after applying numerical scores (1–5) describing different levels of consistency. Results showed that the most common problem was the interchange of “hazard” with “risk” and vice versa. This lack of consistency can create confusion that can further translate into misjudgments at food risk assessment and communication levels.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
ISSN:2304-8158
2304-8158
DOI:10.3390/foods12152857