This page is dedicated to those who are concerned with the ever-increasing problems of WATER, FOOD and ENVIRONMENT and their impacts on the humanity. In this page, distinction between local and global problems is completely irrelevant and absurd.

Monday, October 17, 2011

Uncertainty and choice: A reflection on World Food Day

Uncertainty and choice: A reflection on World Food Day


Budi Widianarko, Semarang | Mon, 10/17/2011
Opinion - The Jakarta Post

A | A | A |

In 2011, the most threatening food safety crisis has been the outbreak of a nasty strain of Escherichia coli that began in Europe. The crisis is clear proof that food safety is an arena full of uncertainties. And it can be forecast that we will witness more of such similar crises in the future.

It will be difficult, if not impossible, to infer what the outcome might have been had this crisis occurred in this country, where the consumption of fresh – and yet raw – fruits and vegetables is part of the eating culture. Even worse, the fruits and vegetables supply chains are still not well documented here, resulting in very limited traceability.

It was the enterohemorragic E. coli (EHEC) which shocked the European food safety system in mid-2011. The outbreak killed more than 30 persons and infected more than 3,000. The EHEC bacteria can cause a wide range of illnesses, from bloody diarrhea, and hemorrhagic colitis to renal damages leading to the life threatening conditions of hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS) and thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP).

The German food emergency system was branded too bureaucratic and disorganized – fragmented in each state. As a result, the process to locate the source of the infection took a long time and raised confusion about who was in charge. The EU even pressured Germany to ask for international assistance.

Naturally, Germany’s reputation as one of world’s most advanced countries was at stake. Even Der Spiegel (Aug. 6, 2011) called German government’s slow handling of the EHEC case a disgrace to the country.

In the midst of uncertainty, the German government told the citizens to avoid consuming cucumbers, lettuces and tomatoes. The announcement instantly cut vegetable sales across Europe, because of the cross-border interconnectedness of the European food supply chain. Victims were not only limited to German farmers, they also extended to farmers in other European countries.

Spanish farmers suffered the most damage after German officials prematurely accused Spanish cucumbers to be the source of the bacteria. This accusation prompted consumers to stop buying Spanish cucumbers.

As reported by Der Spiegel (Aug. 6, 2011), John Dalli, Commissioner for Health ands Consumer Policy of the EU, warned Germany of the accusation. He said that information released to the public must be proven scientifically.

In front of the European Parliament, he said: “It is crucial that national authorities don’t rush to give information on the source of infection when it’s not justified by the science. That creates fears and problems for our food producers. We must be careful not to make premature conclusions”.

Furthermore, Dagmar Roth-Behrendt, a European MP from Germany’s Social Democrat Party accused the German government of creating communication chaos.

From the European food safety crisis, it is clear that consumers have the right to informed choice. Without information transparency, consumers would not be able to be actively involved in a food safety system filled with uncertainty. Consumer empowerment is therefore the main pillar of food safety governance – i.e. the most recent food safety paradigm.

As food consumers, the public increasingly demands transparency because since the birth of food industry, food production processes have became longer and more complicated. Humans, as consumers, become more and more distanced physically from food production.

This complication contributed to the birth of what is called Food Control. The most popular Food Control concept right now is “the integrated farm-to-table concept” or also known as “from land to mouth”.

Informed choice as an element of the consumer awareness movement has surfaced in Indonesia.

It was started by the Bogor Institute of Agriculture (IPB) research report in 2008 that stated that 22.73 percent of 22 formula milk samples on the market were contaminated by Enterobacter sakazakii. The samples were collected in the market, from 2003 to 2006. On the basis of that information, a citizen named David ML Tobing sued IPB, the National Food and Drug Control Agency (BPOM), and the Health Ministry for not disclosing the brands of the contaminated formula milk.

In the latest development, the Supreme Court rejected the appeal by IPB, BPOM and the Minister of Health related to the suit. As a consequence, those three institutions should disclose the brands of the contaminated milk. Unfortunately, so far the three institutions have failed to do so.

This failure has prevented efforts to uncover the source of the contamination. This can be seen as a violation of the precautionary principle, a pillar of food safety system. This lack of transparency shuts down consumers’ opportunity to make informed choices in the midst of risk uncertainty (see Frewer et.al, 2002).

Empowering consumers to be able to understand risk uncertainty is very important. Ideally, consumers need to be empowered so that they can select and choose safe and quality food based on sufficient knowledge (informed choice).

It could be that when the three state institutions refused to disclose the names of the contaminated baby milk brands, it assumed that the public was unable to process the information about the uncertainty of risk. This assumption is indeed typical of conservative food safety regimes, which unfortunately have been discarded by food authorities in many countries.

If the Indonesian food authority sticks to its adopted food control principles – “land to mouth”, risk analysis and transparency – it should welcome the existences of consumer groups who championed informed choice. In the modern era of food control regimes, it is not the safety certainty that is managed, but rather the risk of uncertainty. The abundance of easily available information by every individual requires the food authority – as the risk manager – to adapt.

Thompson in the editorial of the journal Human and Ecological Risk Assessment (2002) said that in the era of risk management, effective communication was a critical factor in consumer health protection. Consumers must be empowered so they can choose the best decision based on the information they have. They also need to be provided the knowledge of risk uncertainty.

Food safety authorities who only disclose good news and deny bad news will lose credibility and be abandoned by consumers. The good news that formula milk circulating in Indonesia is free of E. sakazakii, as announced by the authorized institution in early July 2011, won’t reduce consumers’ suspicions because the bad news was presented without transparency. Instead of making smart decisions, consumers are actually struggling with preconceptions.

The writer is a professor who teaches Risk Analysis and Food Safety at Soegijapranata Catholic University, Semarang.

No comments:

Popular Posts