Food safety has significant influence on food markets and is of great societal importance since it primary protects human health and life. The Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement of the World Trade Organization determines which evidence is accepted in non-tariff trade restrictions, including the scientific risk assessment as a major part of the state-of-the-art practice for risk analysis in food safety. Most literature assumes that the presence or absence of food safety can be assessed in an objective way based on data from natural sciences and might be further interpreted and perceived in different ways. However, there is a missing consensus on the definition of food safety. Further, disputes on its determination within the scientific community and an increasing public discourse show that there might be no generally accepted definition of what is “safe” or “unsafe”. Therefore, a framework is introduced that describes food safety in a broader sense by identifying different evidence practices via collection and classification of criteria from different research fields. Evidence is hereby defined as socially accepted knowledge. Furthermore , the analysis shows questions that arise in the determination of these criteria.
For the study, the case of plant protection products is chosen, as it shows a high complexity in scientific and public risk assessments. C riteria are collected in a systematic and integrative literature review, considering literature from the fields of risk assessment in natural science and (socio-) economics, risk perception and regulatory practices. Further, the systematic of Jabareen (2009) is applied, which offers a method for building frameworks in cases linked to multidisciplinary bodies of knowledge.
It can be concluded that a generalized definition for food safety is not possible. Results rather show a determination by criteria on different tiers – science based criteria on a “knowledge tier” and an “evaluation tier” resulting in “standards”; criteria used by consumers on an “assessment tier” and an “evaluation tier” resulting in “action”. A better understanding of food safety criteria might show deficits in current risk analysis processes and lead to solutions for more consistent regulations - resulting in constant market conditions and higher acceptance in consumer public.