In order to prevent food safety incidents from becoming a crisis, a good crisis management structure is essential. The aim of the current study was to compare and evaluate the national food incident response plans of 2 neighboring EU Member States: Germany and the Netherlands. This revealed that the structure of these plans is comparable, starting with initial alerting, assessment of the problem, upscaling, an execution phase and finally an evaluation of the crisis management. However, the German communication structure is more complex than the Dutch one and cross-border communication between both countries is currently limited. In general, the presence of national response plans does not guarantee a good and swift response to a food safety incident as this is often hampered by difficulties in tracing the source of the problem as well as difficulties in communication between organizations involved in crisis management. A timely detection can be improved through the development of fast screening and detecting systems and through combining various data sources using computer software systems. Mutual cooperation and communication can be improved through joint exercises or projects. This will help to streamline communication toward consumers and trade partners. Such communication should be transparent relaying not only the facts but also the uncertainties in a crisis in order to gain consumer trust and safeguard international trade.

The objective of this research approach is to analyse in which ways crisis management measures against Classical Swine Fever (CSF) can be improved by a public private cross border model. A core activity contains the analysis of information and communication systems: In a case study it has been empirically analysed if a sufficient supply of public and private information enables crisis managers at both sides of the Dutch-German border area to take decisions about CSF control more efficient. At the end of this approach a new crisis management model had been developed. One of the most important aspects thereby is the assessment of data: (1) within private quality management systems in normal times according to the benefit for public management tasks in times of crisis and (2) within public crisis management systems according to the benefit for cross-border CSF-control activities. To this effect two different methodological approaches have been combined within the model: (1) a method to identify and illustrate public actors and their options in crisis management decision making and (2) a system of communication and information exchange between public and private as well as Dutch and German actors (engage & exchange model) which permit to collect and to evaluate data in addition for a predefined time period are activated.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract