1 / 25

SAFEFOODERA Stakeholder Group meeting with industry Copenhagen, 14 - 15 December 2006 Objectives of the meeting

SAFEFOODERA Stakeholder Group meeting with industry Copenhagen, 14 - 15 December 2006 Objectives of the meeting . 20 08 “A European platform for protecting consumers against food health risks”. The Staircase to the Future. Transnational Activities. External communication.

lorenzo
Download Presentation

SAFEFOODERA Stakeholder Group meeting with industry Copenhagen, 14 - 15 December 2006 Objectives of the meeting

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. SAFEFOODERA Stakeholder Group meeting with industry Copenhagen, 14 - 15December 2006 Objectives of the meeting

  2. 2008“A European platform for protecting consumers against food health risks” The Staircase to the Future Transnational Activities External communication External communication Joint Activities External communication Strategic Activities External communication Information Exchange 2004 ERA-NET SAFEFOODERA

  3. Information exchange and regions Questionnaires Food safety projects/activities Management activities Emerging risks

  4. Provisional topics

  5. Emerging risks

  6. The 1st objective of the meeting To improve the process of launching future SAFEFOODERA calls Discuss the roadmap (RM)used by SAFEFOODERA to selecttopics for the first pilot calls. 2. What are your suggestions for an improved roadmap for future calls?

  7. The provisional strategic topics were selected byFunders and decribed byScientists 1. Emerging risks- A potential food or feed borne or diet-related hazard that may become a risk for human health in the (near) future. 2. Risk analysis in food safety-Methodologies in protecting the consumers against health risks and misleading information, including crisis management, consumer perception and risk/benefit analysis. 3. Contaminants- Health risks from natural- and environmental contaminants in the food chain. 3.1 Process induced risk- Health risks from chemical pollution formed during processing of foods. 4. Traceability - Documented and harmonised routines for recall of food products from the value chain - Development of reliable traceability methods and systems. 5. Pathogens- Pathogen free production systems - From reactive to preventive and predictive actions. Roadmapfor selection of topics for pilot calls.

  8. Roadmap for selection of topics for pilot calls. Funders and Scientists Funders Funders Funders

  9. Roadmapfor selection of topics for pilot calls. Evaluation criteria used by Funders : Step 1 to Step 3 - going from 70 to 12 topics 1) Relevance of society 2) Interest of stakeholders 3) Real or potential food safety problem 4) Need for SAFEFOODERA coordination 5) Community interest

  10. Shortlist A containing priority themes with high project or activity frequency Shortlist B containing priority themes with low project or activity frequency Analytical tools (1033) Pathogen free production chains (42) Standardisation (500) Fraud reduction (77) Data management & exchange (300) Foodborne viruses (23) Zoonosis (221) Emerging risks (50) Persistent organic pollutants (200) Risk assessment (102) Food allergens (87) Mycotoxins (127) Roadmapfor selection of topics for pilot calls. Topics selection by Funders: Step 1 to Step 3 - going from 70 to 12 topics

  11. Roadmapfor selection of topics for pilot calls. The 12 topics of the short list were further describedin short documents byFundersin cooperation withScientistsunder the followingcommon headings: 1) Identification of problems 2) Formulation of the knowledge question 3) Strategic interest as a Pan-European project 4) Approach proposed to the problems

  12. Roadmapfor selection of topics for pilot calls. Funders / Scientists Funders Funders Funders Scientists Funders Funders

  13. Roadmapfor selection of topics for pilot calls. Evaluation criteria used by Funders: Step 3 to Step 4 - going from 12 to 3 topics 1) National/ Regional relevance 2) Risk reduction at European level 3) Risk reduction at National/ Regional level 4) Cost/benefit ratio 5) Knowledge management / Research capacity

  14. Priority theme Short-list Sum of scores (the lower score the better) Countries with possibilities to participate in writing call text Zoonosis A 52 18 Emerging Risk B 59 16 Pathogen free production systems B 62 12 Food allergens B 78 13 Persistent organic pollutants A 79 13 Risk Assessment B 90 11

  15. Roadmapfor selection of topics for pilot calls. Groups composed of Scientists from countries with possibilities to participate in writing the call text further developed the selected topics. One group for each topic Finally, the Funders accepted the call text before the call was officially launched

  16. WS2: The 2nd objective of the meeting What is the optimal Research Infrastructure in Emerging Risks from industry/funders point of view, to improve food safety research and to delivereffectiveeducation and training.

  17. The SAFEFOODERA platform -*Country expansion EU Information exchange database *The virtual transnational food safety programme of Europe > 2300 projects registered topics known - content unknown • Emerging risks • Pathogens • Chemical contaminats • *Diet&health • *National experts EFSA Strategic activities Need for tailored information *Optimal conditions for Training *Optimal conditions for Research Joint activities The food safety conference ”The food safety journal” Transnational activities Transnational calls Joint activities Harmonised food safety training

  18. Definition of Research Infrastructures • Research infrastructures are tools,“single-sited”, “distributed” or “virtual””, that provide essential services to the scientific community: • Communication networks, databases, biological archives, libraries, research vessels……… • Research infrastructure play a key role in the creation of knowledge, in the diffusion of knowledge and its application and exploitation. • Research infrastructure could be an established link between stakeholders to facilitate pan-European dissemination and exploitation of food safety results. • Optimal use of research infrastructures of pan-European interest is one of the priorities of the Standing Committee for Agricultural Research(SCAR).

  19. Research infrastructures must provide a range of unique support services for researchthat are critical to delivery: • unique data management • interpretation and handling capacities • ‘knowledgemanagement infrastructures’ (such as statistics, design technologies,epidemiology, risk assessment expertise, data archives,and ‘social science’infrastructures) • unique support facilities (such as high-levelcontainment and experimental/housing facilities and expert trained support personnel).

  20. An infrastructure of pan-European interest may be defined as having one or • several of the following characteristics: • it is required for research of high added value at the European level • it is expensive in terms of investment and/or running costs • it is required in the long term • it is required at the European level, but not justified at a national one • it is required by several fields of research • it is required for an efficient use of common resources

  21. Five research infrastructures seems presentlyto be insufficiently taken in • account at a European level: • Long term experiments and observatories • Technological centres for process studies • Facilities to study animal diseases • Human nutrition research centres • Infrastructures that support research and deliver training

  22. Consider the issue of research infrastructures of European added value in the context of future coordination of food safety research, education and training. • What are the main field of research infrastructures that are needed to improve food safety research, education and training? • What are the main existing research infrastructuresfacilities capable of • improving the European capacity in food safety research, education and training? • What are the main obstacles to share research infrastructures in food safety research, education and training at the European level? • What are your suggestions for a better or optimal common use of these research infrastructures? • 5. Will future food safety research, education and training have a demand for networking of distributed facilities, “virtual”centres and clusters of expertise, and therefore for management?

  23. Future co-operation of Pan-European Networks in Food Sciences, Safety and Technology: Beyond SAFEFOODERA Network of national and EU Funders All EU MS and AMS + Network of scientific research institutes and universities members in all EU MS and AMS + Funders (bureacrats) Scientists Optimal conditions for Research and Training The Retail and Food service sector Consumers Industry CIAA

  24. Group A Industry: Marino PETRACCO ILLY Hans Elbek PEDERSEN DANISCO Willy GEERAERTS BARRY-CALLEBAUT Geoff THOMPSON DANONE Gunna WÜRTZEN SRA Beate KETTLITZ CIAA (C) Safefoodera: Philippe Verger INRA Maria Landgren VINNOVA Hartmut Waldner BVL Harmen Hofstra SAFECONSORTIUM (R) Oddur Gunnarsson NICE Mads Peter Schreiber NICE Group B Industry: Lisbeth MUNKSGAARD LMN (C) Herwig BERNAER BARRY-CALLEBAUT Miroslav KOBERNA Czech Federation Sue O’HAGAN UNILEVER Roon VAN HOOIJDONK CAMPINA Richard STADELER NESTLE Safefoodera: Alisdair Wotherspoon FSA (R) Boris Antunovic CROATIAN FOOD AGENCY Marcel Mengelers VWA Sabine Bonniek BVL Ola Eide NICE

More Related