Since various crises concerning food safety in the European Union (EU), institutional reforms have been designed to regain public confidence in regulatory decisions and their expert basis. By Europeanising advisory expertise, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) was also intended to help harmonise ‘science-based regulation’ and thus facilitate EU decisions. In evaluating agri-biotech products during 2003 – 05, however, the EFSA procedure extended previous expert disagreements rather than overcome them. The EFSA was designed to demonstrate that expert advice would be ‘independent, objective, and transparent’; yet tensions arose between expert experience versus independence, between transparency versus objectivity, and between harmonisation versus precaution. These conflicts have been shaped by the dominant problem diagnosis, which favours a narrow expert consensus within a specific policy view. Alternative problem diagnoses suggest that expertise should instead be pluralised, so that norms and uncertainties become more explicit. Pressure for EU reform manifests tensions between the dominant and alternative problem diagnoses.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Note: All EFSA documents are normally cited as ‘EFSA’ but in the list below we distinguish between documents from a specific Panel (EFSA GMO Panel), from EFSA per se, and from its Executive Director (Podger, 2004). ‘CEC’ denotes a Commission view, while ‘EC’ denotes a statutory decision binding on the European Union
BallantineB, 2003, “Improving the quality of risk management in the European Union: risk communication” EPC Working Paper 05, European Policy Centre, Brussels, http://www.theepc.be
4.
BarryA, 2001Political Machines: Governing a Technological Society (Athlone Press, London)
5.
BEUC, 2004, “BEUC lodges a complaint to the European Ombudsman”BEUC in Brief476
2002b, “Towards a strategic vision of biotechnology and life sciences: progress report and future orientations”, 5 March, http://ec.europa.eu/comm/biotechnology
2006, “EC proposes practical improvements to the way the European GMO legislative framework is implemented”, 12 April
15.
ChristoforouT, 2003, “The precautionary principle and democratising expertise: a European legal perspective”Science and Public Policy30205–213
16.
DratwaJ, 2004, “Social learning with the precautionary principle at the European Commission and the Codex Alimentarius”, in Decision Making Within International Organizations Eds ReinaldaBVerbeekB (Routledge, London) pp 215–229
17.
EC, European Commission, Brussels
18.
1997, “Commission Decision of 23 July 1997 setting up scientific committees in the field of consumer health and food safety”Official Journal of the European CommunitiesL23718–23, 28 August
19.
2001, “European Parliament and Council Directive 2001/18/EC of 12 March on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms and repealing Council Directive 90/220/EEC”Official Journal of the European CommunitiesL1061–38
20.
2002, “Regulation 178/2002 of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority, and laying down procedures in matters of food safety”Official Journal of the European CommunitiesL311–23
21.
2003, “Regulation 1829/2003 of 22 September 2003 on genetically modified food and feed”Official Journal of the European CommunitiesL2681–23, 18 October
22.
EFSA, 2004, “EFSA issues opinion on new GM maize [MON 863 x MON 810]”, 19 April European Food Safety Authority, Brussels
23.
EFSA, 2006, “Transparency in risk assessment carried out by EFSA: guidance document on procedural aspects”, European Food Safety Authority, Brussels, http://www.efsa.europa.eu
24.
EFSA GMO Panel, 2003, Scientific Panel on GMOs, minutes of 2 October meeting, http://www.efsa.europa.eu
25.
EFSA GMO Panel, 2004a, “Opinion on the use of antibiotic resistance genes as marker genes in GM plants”, 2 April, http://www.efsa.europa.eu (see under Scientific Panel on GMOs)
26.
EFSA GMO Panel, 2004b, “Guidance document of the Scientific Panel on genetically modified organisms for the risk assessment of genetically modified plants and derived food and feed”, September, http://www.efsa.europa.eu (see under Scientific Panel on GMOs)
27.
EP, 2000Report on the Commission Communication on the Precautionary Principle: European Parliament, Brussels, http://www.europarl.europa.eu
28.
EU Council, 2000, “Council Resolution on the Precautionary Principle”, European Council, Nice
1999, “EU Environment Council adopts de facto moratorium on GMOs”FoEE Biotech Mailout5(5) 31 July, 1–4
32.
2004Throwing Caution to the Wind: A Review of the European Food Safety Authority and Its Work on Genetically Modified Foods and CropsFriends of the Earth Europe Biotechnology Programme, Brussels, http://www.foeeurope.org/GMOs/publications/EFSAreport.pdf
FuntowiczSShepherdIWilkinsonDRavetzJ, 2000, “Science and governance in the European Union: a contribution to the debate”Science and Public Policy23327–336
38.
HilgartnerS, 2003Science on Stage: Expert Advice as Public Drama (Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA)
JasanoffS, 1997, “Civilisation and madness: the great BSE scare of 1996”Public Understanding of Science6221–232
41.
JasanoffS, 2005, “Judgment under siege: the three-body problem of expert legitimacy”, in Democratization of Expertise? Exploring Novel Forms of Scientific Advice in Political Decision-making Eds MaasenSWeingartP (Springer, Berlin) pp 209–224
42.
JoergesC, 1997, “Scientific expertise in social regulation and the European Court of Justice”, in Integrating Scientific Expertise into Regulatory Decision-making: National Traditions and European Innovations Eds JoergesCLadeurK-HVosE (Nomos, Baden-Baden) pp 295–323
43.
JoergesC, 1999, “‘Good governance’ through comitology”, in EU Committees: Social Regulation, Law and Politics Eds JoergesCVosE (Hart, Portland, OR) pp 311–338
44.
LevidowLMarrisC, 2001, “Science and governance in Europe: lessons from the case of agri-biotech”Science and Public Policy28345–360
45.
LevidowLCarrSWieldD, 2000, “Genetically modified crops in the European Union: regulatory conflicts as precautionary opportunities”Journal of Risk Research3189–208
LiberatoreA (rapporteur), 2001, “Democratising expertise and establishing scientific reference systems”, Report of the Working Group 1b, Broadening and Enriching the Public Debate on European Matters, White Paper on Governance, http://ec.europa.eu/comm/governance/areas/group2/index_en.htm
48.
MajoneG, 1996Regulating Europe (Routledge, London)
NowotnyH, 2003, “Democratising expertise and socially robust knowledge”Science and Public Policy30(3) 151–156
53.
OXERA, 2000Policy, Risk and Science: Securing and Using Scientific AdviceOxford Economic Research Associates Ltd, contract research report for Health and Safety Executive, http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/crr_pdf/2000/crr00295.pdf
54.
PerkinsRNeumayerE, 2004, “Europeanisation and the uneven convergence of environmental policy: explaining the geography of EMAS”Environmental and Planning C: Government and Policy22881–897
55.
PodgerG, 2004, “Letter replying to FoEE and Global 2000”, from European Food Safety Authority Executive Director, Brussels, 30 June
56.
RaynerS, 2003, “Democracy in the age of assessment: reflections on the roles of expertise and democracy in public-sector decision making”Science and Public Policy30163–181
57.
RoqueploP, 1995, “Scientific expertise among political powers, administrations and public opinion”Science & Public Policy22175–182
58.
SetbonM (Ed.), 2001Risques et Sécurité SanitaireComité National de Sécurité Sanitaire (CNRS, Paris)
59.
SkogstadG, 2001, “The WTO and food safety regulatory policy innovation in the European Union”Journal of Common Market Studies39485–505
60.
SmithEMarsdenTFlynnAPercivalA, 2004, “Regulating food risks: rebuilding confidence in Europe's food?”Environmental and Planning C: Government and Policy22543–567
61.
SSC, 2003a, “Report on the Future of Risk Assessment in the European Union: Second Report on the Harmonisation of Risk Assessment Procedures”, Scientific Steering Committee, http://ec.europa.eu/comm/food/fs/sc/ssc/out361_en.pdf
62.
SSC, 2003b, “Guidance document for the risk assessment of genetically modified plants and derived food and feed”, Joint WG on Novel Foods and GMOs, 6 – 7 March, Scientific Steering Committee, http://ec.europa.eu/comm/food/fs/sc/ssc/out327_en.pdf
63.
StirlingA, 1999, “On science and precaution in the management of technological risk”, SPRU, Sussex (based on contributions from O Renn, A Rip, A Salo), Final Report for EC Forward Studies Unit, ftp://ftp.jrc.es/pub/EURdoc/eur19056en.pdf
64.
VosE, 1997, “Market building, social regulation and scientific expertise: an introduction”, in Integrating Scientific Expertise into Regulatory Decision-making Eds JoergesCLadeurK-HVosE (Nomos, Baden-Baden) pp 127–139
65.
WatertonCWynneB, 2004, “Knowledge and political order in the European Environment Agency”, in States of Knowledge: The Co-production of Science and Social Order Ed. JasanoffS (Routledge, London) pp 87–108
66.
WealeA, 1999, “European environmental policy by stealth: the dysfunctionality of functionalism”Environmental and Planning C: Government and Policy1737–51
67.
WynneB, 1992, “Uncertainty and environmental learning: reconceiving science and policy in the preventive paradigm”Global Environmental Change2(2) 111–127
68.
ZitoA, 2001, “Epistemic communities, European Union governance and the public voice”Science and Public Policy28465–476
