Scientific Advice and Public Decisions Recent Institutional Responses in France. Philippe Hubert, Head of Risk Assessment and Management Department, Institute for Protection and Nuclear Safety (IPSN), B.P. 6, F-92265 Fontenay-aux-Roses Cedex, France, telephone 33.1.46.54.79.44, fax 33.1.46.54.88.29, e-mail philippe.hubert@ipsn.fr
The need to formalize risk assessment procedures has been recognized long ago. The 1983 report of the US Academy of Science played a key role in this process by raising many issues that are still discussed. Where are the boundaries between assessment and management? Between analysis and decisions? What are the roles of authorities, scientific institutions, expert bodies, industry, elected representatives and so on?
In France, in the last two years, numerous changes have taken place and many are still underway in the field of food risk, environmental health issues, risk from medical products, nuclear industry and radiation risk. Laws have been adopted and governmental or parliamentary reports have been issued which provide an interesting material that illustrates how the above questions have been answered in those areas.
For example, in nuclear safety it was recognized that a national institute for expertise was needed, independent both from the operators and from a regulatory agency, agency which responds to the department in charge of such affairs. In food safety, an agency was created, whose role is limited to assessment, including assessment of the action of the administration. Regarding the safety of products used in medical practices (drugs but also prostheses...) an agency was also created, whose actions encompass regulatory decisions, and where individual experts are called upon to participate to commissions.
On the basis of an outline of the various functions associated with regulation, assessment and industrial production, a comparative analysis is performed. It illustrates that different institutional schemes can be set up which all of them have positive and negative aspects. The factors that led to such differences are searched for. This comparative approach is useful when looking at the possible improvements of institutional responses.
Go to . . .
1999 SRA-Europe Table of Contents
1999 SRA-Europe Author Index
Main Abstracts Menu Page
RiskWorld Home Page