An integrated benefit–risk analysis aims to give guidance in decision situations where benefits do not clearly prevail over risks, and explicit weighing of benefits and risks is thus indicated. The article identifies commonalities and differences in benefit–risk analysis between the Food and Nutrition field and other fields, namely Medicines, Food Microbiology, Environmental Health, Economics and Marketing–Finance, and Consumer Perception. From this, ways forward are characterized for benefit–risk analysis in Food and Nutrition. Integrated ben- efit–risk analysis in Food and Nutrition may advance in the following ways: Increased engagement and communication between assessors, managers, and stakeholders; more pragmatic problem-oriented fram- ing of assessment; accepting some risk; pre- and post-market analysis; explicit communication of the assessment purpose, input and output; more human (dose–response) data and more efficient use of human data; segmenting populations based on physiology; explicit consideration of value judgments in assessment; integration of multiple benefits and risks from multiple domains; explicit recognition of the impact of consumer beliefs, opinions, views, perceptions, and attitudes on behaviour; and segment- ing populations based on behaviour; the opportunities proposed here do not provide ultimate solutions; rather, they define a collection of issues to be taken account of in developing methods, tools, practices and policies, as well as refining the regulatory context, for benefit–risk analysis in Food and Nutrition and other fields. Thus, these opportunities will now need to be explored further and incorporated into ben- efit–risk practice and policy. If accepted, incorporation of these opportunities will also involve a paradigm shift in Food and Nutrition benefit–risk analysis towards conceiving the analysis as a process of creating shared knowledge among all stakeholders.

Looking beyond the borders:Integrating best practices in benefit-risk analysis into the field of food and nutrition,

POTO, Margherita
2012-01-01

Abstract

An integrated benefit–risk analysis aims to give guidance in decision situations where benefits do not clearly prevail over risks, and explicit weighing of benefits and risks is thus indicated. The article identifies commonalities and differences in benefit–risk analysis between the Food and Nutrition field and other fields, namely Medicines, Food Microbiology, Environmental Health, Economics and Marketing–Finance, and Consumer Perception. From this, ways forward are characterized for benefit–risk analysis in Food and Nutrition. Integrated ben- efit–risk analysis in Food and Nutrition may advance in the following ways: Increased engagement and communication between assessors, managers, and stakeholders; more pragmatic problem-oriented fram- ing of assessment; accepting some risk; pre- and post-market analysis; explicit communication of the assessment purpose, input and output; more human (dose–response) data and more efficient use of human data; segmenting populations based on physiology; explicit consideration of value judgments in assessment; integration of multiple benefits and risks from multiple domains; explicit recognition of the impact of consumer beliefs, opinions, views, perceptions, and attitudes on behaviour; and segment- ing populations based on behaviour; the opportunities proposed here do not provide ultimate solutions; rather, they define a collection of issues to be taken account of in developing methods, tools, practices and policies, as well as refining the regulatory context, for benefit–risk analysis in Food and Nutrition and other fields. Thus, these opportunities will now need to be explored further and incorporated into ben- efit–risk practice and policy. If accepted, incorporation of these opportunities will also involve a paradigm shift in Food and Nutrition benefit–risk analysis towards conceiving the analysis as a process of creating shared knowledge among all stakeholders.
2012
1
73
92
Benefit-risk analysis; European regulatory framework; case study
MARGHERITA POTO
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Benefit risk article.pdf

Accesso aperto

Tipo di file: POSTPRINT (VERSIONE FINALE DELL’AUTORE)
Dimensione 1.36 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.36 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2318/153297
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 19
social impact