Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Kommunikation av osäkerhet i EFSAs livsmedelsbedömningar

Mirsa, Berivan LU (2023) MVEM03 20221
Studies in Environmental Science
Centre for Environmental and Climate Science (CEC)
Abstract
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) is an EU agency, providing scientific
advice and standards surrounding risk assessment in order to maintain food safety in Europe. The aim of this study was to investigate how EFSA communicates uncertainty in conditions of their assessment and if the recommended guidelines by EFSA 2019 is fulfilled. 15 Randomly picked scientific articles produced during the period 2020-2022 were analyzed from following sources: Plant Health (PLH), Animal Health and Animal Welfare (AHAW) and contaminants in the food chain (CONTAM).
The main findings obtained showed that in all five assessments from PLH contained a quantitative description of uncertainty in their conclusions. Two assessments from AHAW contained a... (More)
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) is an EU agency, providing scientific
advice and standards surrounding risk assessment in order to maintain food safety in Europe. The aim of this study was to investigate how EFSA communicates uncertainty in conditions of their assessment and if the recommended guidelines by EFSA 2019 is fulfilled. 15 Randomly picked scientific articles produced during the period 2020-2022 were analyzed from following sources: Plant Health (PLH), Animal Health and Animal Welfare (AHAW) and contaminants in the food chain (CONTAM).
The main findings obtained showed that in all five assessments from PLH contained a quantitative description of uncertainty in their conclusions. Two assessments from AHAW contained a quantitative description of uncertainty in their conclusion, two assessments contained a qualitative description of uncertainty in their conclusions and one assessment mentioned no uncertainty in the conclusion. Two out of five assessments from CONTAM contained a qualitative description of uncertainty in their conclusions, one assessment contained a quantitative description of uncertainty, while two assessments mentioned no uncertainty in their conclusions. This study shows that none of the selected scientific assessments use combinations of quantitative and verbal expressions. This makes it challenging to answer whether the experts stick to the probability scale when describing the uncertainty. The journey to implement new principles for analysis and communication of uncertainty is advancing, therefore, this study has given a closer look at diverse scientific assessments during this process. (Less)
Popular Abstract (Swedish)
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) är en EU myndighet med uppdrag att göra
riskbedömningar för att stödja arbete med att upprätthålla livsmedelssäkerhet i EU. I denna studie undersöks hur EFSA kommunicerar osäkerhet i slutsatser från några av deras vetenskapliga bedömningar och om de följer den rekommenderade guiden som antogs av EFSA 2019 för kommunikation av osäkerhet. I studien har 15 stycken vetenskapliga bedömningar från perioden 2020 till 2022 inom område växtskydd (PLH, plant health), djurs hälsa och välbefinnande (AHAW, Animal health and animal welfare) och föroreningar i livsmedel (CONTAM, Contaminants in the food chain) slumpmässigt valts ut. Resultatet visar att samtliga fem bedömningar från PLH innehöll en kvantitativ... (More)
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) är en EU myndighet med uppdrag att göra
riskbedömningar för att stödja arbete med att upprätthålla livsmedelssäkerhet i EU. I denna studie undersöks hur EFSA kommunicerar osäkerhet i slutsatser från några av deras vetenskapliga bedömningar och om de följer den rekommenderade guiden som antogs av EFSA 2019 för kommunikation av osäkerhet. I studien har 15 stycken vetenskapliga bedömningar från perioden 2020 till 2022 inom område växtskydd (PLH, plant health), djurs hälsa och välbefinnande (AHAW, Animal health and animal welfare) och föroreningar i livsmedel (CONTAM, Contaminants in the food chain) slumpmässigt valts ut. Resultatet visar att samtliga fem bedömningar från PLH innehöll en kvantitativ beskrivning av osäkerhet i deras slutsatser, medan två bedömningar från AHAW beskrev osäkerhet på ett kvalitativt sätt, två bedömningar uttryckte osäkerhet på ett kvalitativt sätt och en bedömning nämnde inget osäkerhet i sin slutsats. Utav de fem vetenskapliga bedömningar från CONTAM, utrycktes osäkerhet i slutsatser kvalitativt i två bedömningar och kvantitativt i en bedömning, medan två inte uttryckte någon osäkerhet alls i slutsatsen av deras bedömningar. Studien visar att ingen av de valda vetenskapliga bedömningar använder kombinationer av kvantitativa och verbala uttryck, därför går det inte att svara på frågeställningen om experterna följer sannolikhetsskalan när de beskriver osäkerhet. Arbetet med att implementera nya principer för analys och kommunikation av osäkerhet går framåt och denna studie har tittat närmare på några vetenskapliga bedömningar under denna processens gång. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Mirsa, Berivan LU
supervisor
organization
course
MVEM03 20221
year
type
H1 - Master's Degree (One Year)
subject
keywords
EFSA, livsmedels, säkerhet, kommunikation, osäkerhet, bedömningar
language
Swedish
id
9108514
date added to LUP
2023-01-25 13:12:25
date last changed
2023-01-25 14:25:12
@misc{9108514,
  abstract     = {{The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) is an EU agency, providing scientific
advice and standards surrounding risk assessment in order to maintain food safety in Europe. The aim of this study was to investigate how EFSA communicates uncertainty in conditions of their assessment and if the recommended guidelines by EFSA 2019 is fulfilled. 15 Randomly picked scientific articles produced during the period 2020-2022 were analyzed from following sources: Plant Health (PLH), Animal Health and Animal Welfare (AHAW) and contaminants in the food chain (CONTAM).
The main findings obtained showed that in all five assessments from PLH contained a quantitative description of uncertainty in their conclusions. Two assessments from AHAW contained a quantitative description of uncertainty in their conclusion, two assessments contained a qualitative description of uncertainty in their conclusions and one assessment mentioned no uncertainty in the conclusion. Two out of five assessments from CONTAM contained a qualitative description of uncertainty in their conclusions, one assessment contained a quantitative description of uncertainty, while two assessments mentioned no uncertainty in their conclusions. This study shows that none of the selected scientific assessments use combinations of quantitative and verbal expressions. This makes it challenging to answer whether the experts stick to the probability scale when describing the uncertainty. The journey to implement new principles for analysis and communication of uncertainty is advancing, therefore, this study has given a closer look at diverse scientific assessments during this process.}},
  author       = {{Mirsa, Berivan}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Kommunikation av osäkerhet i EFSAs livsmedelsbedömningar}},
  year         = {{2023}},
}