Objective
To improve consumer decision making, the results of risk assessments on food, feed, consumer products or chemicals need to be communicated not only to experts but also to non-expert audiences. The present study draws on evidence from literature reviews and focus groups with diverse stakeholders to identify content to integrate into an existing risk assessment communication (Risk Profile).
Methods
A combination of rapid literature reviews and focus groups with experts (risk assessors (n = 15), risk managers (n = 8)), and non-experts (general public (n = 18)) were used to identify content and strategies for including information about risk assessment results in the “Risk Profile” from the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment. Feedback from initial focus groups was used to develop communication prototypes that informed subsequent feedback rounds in an iterative process. A final prototype was validated in usability tests with experts.
Results
Focus group feedback and suggestions from risk assessors were largely in line with findings from the literature. Risk managers and lay persons offered similar suggestions on how to improve the existing communication of risk assessment results (e.g., including more explanatory detail, reporting probabilities for individual health impairments, and specifying risks for subgroups in additional sections). Risk managers found information about quality of evidence important to communicate, whereas people from the general public found this information less relevant. Participants from lower educational backgrounds had difficulties understanding the purpose of risk assessments. User tests found that the final prototype was appropriate and feasible to implement by risk assessors.
Conclusion
An iterative and evidence-based process was used to develop content to improve the communication of risk assessments to the general public while being feasible to use by risk assessors. Remaining challenges include how to communicate dose-response relationships and standardise quality of evidence ratings across disciplines.
Logistics as the link between the different stages of the food supply chain can, due to its complexity, provide multiple opportunities for food / feed contamination along global commodity flows. Considering comprehensive international food safety regulations, such as the Regulation (EU) 2019/1381, risk assessment in the field of consumer health protection requires specific approaches determining the impact of logistics on food safety. To identify critical dimensions and corresponding critical factors for food safety in global commodity flows and map complex interactions, we conducted a case study on mycotoxin contamination of agricultural commodities. Accordingly, we interviewed 24 stakeholders directly or indirectly involved in the European and global purchasing and logistics sector of agricultural commodities. Based on the outcome of the interviews, the most relevant dimensions are Logistical processes, Food safety measures, Human factor, Disruptions and shifts, Logistics related conditions, Cooperation, Main Characteristics of the procurement sector and Port characteristics. Food safety risks along global commodity flows are not solely attributable to the logistics sector per se. In particular, Food safety measures (e.g. Quality management and Sampling) that are not adapted to the logistics sector, as well as varying Logistics related conditions (e.g. Infrastructure and Standards) have proven to be major food safety challenges. By providing an overall picture of global commodity flows, the study contributes to reduce current uncertainties in risk assessment. The identified food safety challenges in the logistics sector need to be addressed holistically throughout the entire supply chain and in cooperation with food safety authorities.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.