Indicatie economische gevolgen fipronilaffaire voor de pluimveesector : Op basis van beschikbare informatie voor zover bekend op 22 september 2017

Horne, Peter van; Meulen, Harold van der; Wisman, Arjan

doi:10.18174/425036

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It might have been helpful early 2017, to have supplemented the scientific RA, focused on public health, with an assessment of the political, reputational, regulatory and commercial aspects, since the risk for public health was very low and the economic losses for the poultry sector were immense. An economic assessment of the management options was performed only in a later stage of the incident, indicating that the fipronil case had cost the entire Dutch poultry production chain €65–75 million (Horne et al., 2017 ) or a loss of €369,000 per poultry farm involved (Sok, Horne, & Meuwissen, 2020 ). Even though the human health risk was low, measures to manage the risk were still needed since—in the second half of 2017—it turned out that 26% of retail samples contained fipronil residues exceeding the MRL (Rijksoverheid, 2017 ) while fipronil is prohibited to be used for all food‐producing animals in the EU (EC, 2017 , August 10).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interactions between risk assessors and risk managers during three major food incidents in Europe

Focker

Borne

Fischer

et al. 2021

Journal of Food Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Risk analysis consists of risk assessment (RA), risk management (RM), and risk communication (RC). In most countries, RA and RM of food safety are separated to achieve a high scientific integrity, and typically occur in sequential order. However, in case of a food safety incident, even though being separate processes, RA and RM are performed simultaneously due to great time pressure and expected high impacts. The aim of this study was to analyze and evaluate the observed interactions between RA and RM processes, during three major food incidents in Europe, and to provide suggestions for possible improvement. Based on the differences observed between the three cases, strengths and weaknesses of each system have been identified. The enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli (EHEC) crisis in 2011 in Germany, the horsemeat scandal in 2013 in Ireland, and the fipronil incident in 2017 in the Netherlands were used as case studies. Timelines of these incidents and crisis management procedures in place in each of the three countries provided the basis for further analysis. First, results showed that details of the communication processes between RA and RM bodies were frequently lacking in crisis management protocols. Second, RA, RM, and RC processes differed for each incident, due to differences in estimated risk for public health, but also due to differences in the organization within a country. Based on our results, we recommend that crisis management protocols should contain a section on communication between RA, RM, and on communication between member states in the EU.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%