• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Regulating risk in the eu science, policy and precaution q&a
 

Regulating risk in the eu science, policy and precaution q&a

on

  • 188 views

http://www.eu-academy.eu/freeresources/regulating-risk-in-the-eu-science-policy-and-precaution/ ...

http://www.eu-academy.eu/freeresources/regulating-risk-in-the-eu-science-policy-and-precaution/

The rapid growth of EU regulations dealing with Pharma, Food, Chemicals and beyond
Advocacy opportunities in risk regulation
The nature, politics and the law of the Precautionary Principle

Statistics

Views

Total Views
188
Views on SlideShare
188
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Regulating risk in the eu science, policy and precaution q&a Regulating risk in the eu science, policy and precaution q&a Document Transcript

    • Regulating Risk in the EU: Science, Policy and PrecautionRegulating Risk in the EU: Science, Policy and PrecautionThe following document contains the answers to the questions from the participants at the free webinar on EUpublic affairs held by the European Training Academy and Bursoninformation purposes only.Q: When it comes to substances like BPA, why arent they just banned?A: This would not be a reasonable approach. Should public authorities ban any substance suspected ofcausing adverse effects, very few agents would remain on the market. The paradox is that even whenwe know for sure about the hazardous character of certain ssociety might decide to accept it.Q: You talked about US - EU trade. How about the Canada EU tradblock there is GMOs. Do you know anything about these negotiations and the regulatory apthe EU to this issue vis-a-vis Canada.A: I sense that many of the issues that will be at the centre of the TTIP willCETA. Yet the answer remains the same: the two sides should agremethods of risk assessment, commonsectoral areas, such as GMOs.Q: Risk regulation, in public health or consumer protection, whether rto stop the innovation. On opposite, it may foster green innovation. Dont you think so?A: No, should public authorities focus their limitedsubstantiated by evidence, we would run the risk as a society to invest badly invest its liWe should rather tackle real risks and make sure that ourthan impose costs.Q: Don’t you think that science is being used toaffecting negatively to the trend of giving more weight to it in theother inputs?A: While I agree on the risk of manipulating science for political purposes, scientific knowledge isto stay and should be the first input into the policymakmanagers could (and in the EU should) also consider non scienttraditional considerations, when decide whether and how to regulate a given risk.Regulating Risk in the EU: Science, Policy and PrecautionWebinar – May 08, 2013Regulating Risk in the EU: Science, Policy and PrecautionQ&AThe following document contains the answers to the questions from the participants at the free webinar on EUheld by the European Training Academy and Burson-Marsteller on 08 May 2013. It is intended forWhen it comes to substances like BPA, why arent they just banned?This would not be a reasonable approach. Should public authorities ban any substance suspected ofausing adverse effects, very few agents would remain on the market. The paradox is that even whenwe know for sure about the hazardous character of certain substances, such nicotineEU trade. How about the Canada EU trade agreement (CETA)? A stumblingblock there is GMOs. Do you know anything about these negotiations and the regulatory apvis Canada.I sense that many of the issues that will be at the centre of the TTIP will also be highly controversial inCETA. Yet the answer remains the same: the two sides should agree on some horizontal approachescommon authorisation systems, etc) before coming to theRisk regulation, in public health or consumer protection, whether real or perceived, does not haveopposite, it may foster green innovation. Dont you think so?No, should public authorities focus their limited resources on regulating perceived risks that aresubstantiated by evidence, we would run the risk as a society to invest badly invest its liWe should rather tackle real risks and make sure that our regulatory efforts will attainyou think that science is being used to demonstrate one theory and the opposite, and this isto the trend of giving more weight to it in the policy making process in favourWhile I agree on the risk of manipulating science for political purposes, scientific knowledge isto stay and should be the first input into the policymaking process. This does not exclude thatmanagers could (and in the EU should) also consider non scientific factors, such as societal,traditional considerations, when decide whether and how to regulate a given risk.Regulating Risk in the EU: Science, Policy and PrecautionThe following document contains the answers to the questions from the participants at the free webinar on EU2013. It is intended forThis would not be a reasonable approach. Should public authorities ban any substance suspected ofausing adverse effects, very few agents would remain on the market. The paradox is that even whennicotine in cigarettes,e agreement (CETA)? A stumblingblock there is GMOs. Do you know anything about these negotiations and the regulatory approach ofalso be highly controversial ine on some horizontal approaches (e.g.tems, etc) before coming to the discussion ofeal or perceived, does not haveopposite, it may foster green innovation. Dont you think so?on regulating perceived risks that are notsubstantiated by evidence, we would run the risk as a society to invest badly invest its limited resources.regulatory efforts will attain more benefitsy and the opposite, and this ispolicy making process in favour ofWhile I agree on the risk of manipulating science for political purposes, scientific knowledge is thereess. This does not exclude that riskific factors, such as societal, economic,