Communication of risks andbenefits of food

James Ramsay

Head of Communication Unit

13 June 2019

Summer School 2019Parma, 13 June 2019

1.Risk communications at EFSA

2.Risk communications in practice

3.Risk / benefit examples

4.Reflections

OUTLINE

2

RiskCommunications

at EFSA

3

FROM A MANDATE TO AN OPINION

4

EFSA’s scientists evaluate, assess, advise

EU CommissionEU

ParliamentEFSA selfmandate

Member States

EFSA receives a question

Adoption andcommunication

WHAT EFSA DOES NOT DO

5

LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK: Risk Communications

6

Regulation (EC) No178/2002, Article 40

• Communicate on its own initiative

• Objective, reliable, easilyaccessible information to publicand interested parties

• Collaboration with Commission andMS to ensure coherence

• Cooperation with MS with regardsto public information campaigns

GUIDING PRINCIPLES

7

RISK PERCEPTION

8

RiskCommunications

in practice

9

WHO?

POLICY MAKERS

CONCERNEDINDIVIDUALS

STAKEHOLDERS

SCIENTIFICCOMMUNITY

RISK MANAGERS

RISK ASSESSORS

MEDIAPARTNERS

efsa

HOW?

11

EFSA JOURNAL

12

SOCIAL MEDIA

13

MULTIMEDIA @ EFSA

14

Multimedia @ efsa (not just videos!)

MULTIMEDIA @ EFSA

15

Multimedia @ efsa (not just videos!)

MULTIMEDIA @ EFSA

16

Multimedia @ efsa (not just videos!)

MEDIA

Risk/BenefitExamples

18

EFSA balanced the consumerrisks from nitrate invegetables with the benefits ofa balanced diet high invegetables and fruit

Beneficial effects of eating vegoutweigh risk to health fromexposure to nitrates

Average consumer eating400g of mixed fruit and vegwould not exceed ADI

Nitrates in vegetables: benefits vs risks (2008)

19

EFSA addressed the benefits offish/seafood consumption – usingpolyunsaturated fatty acids as anexample of a beneficial substance– compared to the risks ofmethylmercury in fish/seafood

Some population groups reachedTWI for methylmercury beforeintake levels that broughtnutritional benefits.

Benefits of fish should be met byconsuming certain species low inm/mercury

Difficulties in generalising acrossall EU

Fish consumption: benefits vs risks (2015)

20

Reflections

21

Literature on risk/benefit communications limited

Fundamental principles of risk communications apply Openness and transparency

Timeliness

Clarity in language

Acknowledging and communicating uncertainty

Responding to audience needs – social science & riskperception

REFLECTIONS

22

Stay connectedStay connected

www.efsa.europa.eu/en/engage/careers

www.efsa.europa.eu/en/rss

Subscribe to

Engage with careers

Follow us on Twitter@efsa_eu@plants_efsa@methods_efsa

www.efsa.europa.eu/en/news/newsletters

23