View
219
Download
1
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
Evolution of Science to Policy: Applications in
Food and Nutrition
Helen H. Jensen, Professor of Economics
Center for Agricultural and Rural Development
Iowa State University
hhjensen@iastate.edu http://www.card.iastate.edu/
November 2012
Learning Outcomes
Context of science and policy decisions Making Sense of Science in Policy and
Politics Case examples: fortification and food safety The role of economics in evaluation
Changes in consumer market
Declining share of expenditures on food U.S. consumers spend on average $0.11 of each $1 of income
on food
Increase in marketing share of food expenditures Marketing bill now 79% of food expenditures
Increasing value of time and demand for convenience in foods
Increase in demand for nutrition, food quality and food safety Proposed legislation for warning labels on products
Similar trends throughout the world (developed and developing countries)
Prevalence* of Self-Reported Obesity Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 2011*Prevalence reflects BRFSS methodological changes in 2011, and these estimates should not be compared to previous years.
15%–<20% 20%–<25% 25%–<30% 30%–<35% ≥35%
New Scientific Findings – the Science Context
Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2010 Food Plate
Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs), Institute of Medicine 2000 – present IOM Committee on sodium IOM review of vitamin D and calcium
Food Safety Technologies – irradiation, packaging Production – organic vs. conventional practices Food handling and distribution practices
Science, Policy and Politics
The obesity “epidemic” While rates for many diseases are decreasing,
increased rates of obesity and overweight Food vs supplements and fortification Production methods (e.g., Michael Pollan) Food safety outbreaks
Peanuts and salmonella, 2009, 2012 E-coli and spinach, 2006 E-coli and salmonella contamination of meats
Making Sense of Science in Policy and Politics
The “Pure Scientist” The “Science Arbitrator” The “Issue Advocate” The “Honest Broker of Policy Alternatives”
Ref. The Honest Broker: Making Sense of Science in Policy and Politics, R. Pielke, Jr. 2007
Making Sense of Science in Policy and Politics
The scientific application is not independent of policy and politics
Based on behavioral and communications sciences
Science, Policy and Politics
Science: the systematic pursuit of knowledge Policy: a decision Politics: bargaining and negotiation
Conditions for science offering “objective” knowledge Decision maker narrows choices Low rate of uncertainty
Policy Decisions and Market Influence Science
Who conducts research? What resources are available? Who has rights to the results?
Patent protection, publication policy Market influence on scientific development
R&D, innovation, orphan drugs Induced policy innovation
ref. Hayami and Ruttan
Case Example: Fortification with Folic Acid
Health problem: Spina bifida and anencephaly are birth defects
related to neural tube closure Affected children die shortly after birth
(anencephaly) and have permanent neurological deficits (spina bifida)
Scientific evidence: Folic acid supplementation lowers risk of neural
tube defects ( NTD) (reduce cases by 50-75%)
Case example:Fortification with Folic Acid 1992 US recommends all women of
childbearing age consume folic acid supplements
Consider fortification in the US To reach more women of child bearing age Evidence: 50% of live births are unplanned
1996 Folic acid fortification mandated FDA required manufacturers to fortify enriched
ceral-grain products with 140 ug of folic acid per 100 g cereal product
Ex ante: Folic Acid FortificationStudy NTD
Cases Averted
Cases Neuro. Damage
Benefit NTD Pre $ million
Fortific. Costs $ million
Adverse Health Costs ($)
Net Benefit$ million
FDA 116 (4.6%)
0 651-786 27 NA 624-759
California(1991)
304(10.5%)
500 121.5 11.5 16.4m 93.6
CDC(1993)
89(2.3%)
89 16.1 11 350,000 4.7
Source: Grosse, Waltzman, Romano, Mulinare, Am J Pub Health, 2005
Ex post: Folic Acid Fortification
NTD No. NTDs Averted
Total Cost/NTD Birth (Direct), $
Total Benefit, $ million
Net Benefit (minus $3 mil cost)
Total Direct Cost, $ million
Cost Savings (minus $3 mil cost)
Spina bifida
520 636,000(279,000)
331 145
Anen-cephaly
92 1,020,000(6000)
94 1
Both 612 425 $422 mil 146 $143 m
Source: Grosse, Waltzman, Romano, Mulinare, Am J Pub Health, 2005
Ex post: Folic Acid Fortification
Surveillance: Reduction in NTD 20-30% Reasons for the large decrease:
Higher folic acid intake Larger dose response No evidence of harm (effect on B12 deficiency)
Higher benefit cost ratio, cost effectiveness
The Debate: UK Fortification
Should Folic Acid Fortification be Mandatory? YES
Delay not justified Voluntary efforts inadequate Evidence supports
NO Evidence not strong, weigh other risks Folate in foods may differ from fortification Level of exposure important (low vs. high)
The Debate: Fortification
Risk analysis: the “precautionary principle” Approach 1. The “selective approach”
No fortification unless a documented need Iodine in salt; iron for targeted population
Approach 2. The Non-selective approach” Food manufacturers -- voluntary
Science, Policy and Politics
Cost benefit analysis Cost effectiveness analysis
Disability adjusted life years (DALY) Analysis and assumptions
Effectiveness and efficacy Cost Vehicle and exposure Related behaviors
Consumer choice
Science, Policy and Politics: Food Safety
Improved science (+) Changes in production practices, distribution (+,-) Increased trade and imports (-) Tracing food safety problems (+) Public Regulation
US Dept of Agriculture: meats and poultry US Food and Drug Administration: seafood, eggs, imports,
processed, drugs, supplements, fresh fruits & vegetables Environmental Protection Agency (drinking water, pesticides, toxic
substances) State and local health authorities
Food Safety in the US
Estimated 76 million cases of foodborne illness in the US Only about 20% are attributed to specific food
Meats: Improvements since mid 1990s Seafood Produce: New problems in raw produce Imports
Food Marketing InstituteTrends Survey 2009
Slide from Gale Price
Consumer Confidence in Food Safety Somewhat & Completely Confident
Source: U.S. Grocery Shopper Trends 2009
85% 82%
66%
43%
81%
65%
83%
68%
Slide from Gale Price
Food Is as Safe or SaferThan Five Years Ago
CompletelyDisagree
15%15% 8%8%10%10%
27%27%41%41%
SomewhatDisagree
CompletelyAgree
SomewhatAgree
Neutral
CompletelyDisagree
23%23%10%10%
10%10%
18%18%
39%39%
SomewhatDisagree
CompletelyAgree
SomewhatAgree
Neutral
Source: U.S. Grocery Shopper Trends 2009
Food Is Less Safe Than Five Years Ago
Slide from Gale Price
Health Risks Perceived as “Serious”
13%
17%
19%
19%
21%
22%
25%
36%
39%
41%
43%
45%
47%
53%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% 55%
Eating food past the Best-by date
Eating food past the Sell-by date
Additives and preservatives
Eating food past the Use-by date
Food handling in supermarkets
Irradiated foods
Foods produced by biotechnology and GMOs
Antibiotics and hormones used on poultry or livestock
Avian influenza
Terrorist tampering
Pesticide and herbicide residues
Product tampering
BSE (Mad Cow Disease)
Confirmation by bacteria or germs
Source: U.S. Grocery Shopper Trends 2009 Slide from Gale Price
Shoppers’ Comfort Level with Foods Grown/ Produced In and Outside the United States
Source: U.S. Grocery Shopper Trends 2009
27%
63%
37%
9%
40%
2%
18%
5%
Slide from Gale Price
Questions…
Does economics play a key role in the implementation of proper food safety and sanitation practices in the food industry?
How much food safety is “enough”? Public policy and public health Private industry
What would a market for food safety look like?
Price
Quantity – food safety
Supply
Demand
Food Safety has Value
To individuals avoidance of suffering risk reduction greater for those at higher risk
To society health care costs loss of productivity
Key question: How much are consumers (or is society) willing to pay for safer food?
What is the cost of a “food safe” hamburger?
Would you be willing to pay double the price for a completely safe hamburger? (100% tax)
How about 20%? What is the producer obligation? Should there be a “law” that requires
producers to produce a safe burger? Should there be a choice?
Raw oysters? Fresh cider?
Market Failure
Neither producers nor consumers may know if the product is safe
Costly to measure, test Contamination or control can take place
throughout food chain
Food Safety Policy
Government is involved because markets “fail” to allocate food safety (get the “right” amount)
New approaches - Shared responsibility for food safety throughout
food chain by government, industry and consumers
Development and implementation of risk-based approaches to regulation
Recent legislation – risk based Food Quality Protection Act (1996) Seafood HACCP regulation for all seafood
processors (1997) Pathogen reduction/HACCP for meat
implemented 1998 and fully implemented 2000 (1996)
Fruits and vegetables juice HACCP (1998) Egg safety Action Plan (2000);
implementation of final rule (2010)
FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, Jan (2011)
Preventive controls Move from response to outbreaks to system designed to prevent outbreaks.
Requires food facilities to evaluate, implement, monitor hazards FDA to establish science-based standards for safe production and harvest of
fruits & vegetables New ability to hold companies accountable
Inspection and Compliance – risk-based system Imported Food Safety – system enhanced Response – provides FDA with mandatory
recall authority Enhanced Partnerships
FDA shuts down New Mexico peanut butter plant – Nov 2012 Outbreak: 41 people ill in 20 states Traced to peanut butter from NM plant and
sold through Trader Joe’s Use 2011 FDA authority to halt operations:
“suspend registration” because of reasonable probability of causing serious health problems
FDA will require implementation of preventive measures before allowing plant to ship
Agency has found unclean equipment, improper handling, uncovered trailers, etc.
Economic Analysis of Regulations for Health and Safety
Compare benefits of regulation to costs Measure the reduction in the level of risk
of illness and death for large populations (i.e. benefits) to the costs
Note, the benefits are not the value to an individual
Estimated Benefits and Costs of HACCP Rule
Benefit Scenario Low High Low HighBillion dollars (1995)
Preliminary FSIS 1995 proposal 8.4 42.1 2.32 2.3Low-range benefits estimates 1.9 9.3 1.1 1.3Mid-range benefits estimates I 4.7 23.4 1.1 1.3High-range benefits estimates 47.2 171.8 1.1 1.3
Benefits Costs
Source: USDA Economic Research Service
Responsibility for Making SureFood Is Safe
Source: U.S. Grocery Shopper Trends 2009
55%
32%28%
32%
22%25%
8%12%
55%
33%
Myself asan individual
7% 8%
Foodprocessors
Government Institutions
Foodstores
Consumergroups
Farmers
Slide from Gale Price
Where Do You Think Food Safety Problems Are Most Likely to Occur?
At food processing plants 30 32 45 53 57
While stored in a warehouse awaiting distribution 11 10 9 9 9
At restaurants 20 18 11 9 8
On the farm 1 1 6 5 5
At home 18 16 9 5 4
In grocery stores 5 9 3 4 3
During transportation 5 4 3 3 3
Source: U.S. Grocery Shopper Trends 2009
2005 2006 20072008 2009
% % % %%
Slide from Gale Price
Regulatory Approaches for Least Cost Compliance
Legal liability forces investment but limited incentives if costs of
identification are high Other incentives based approaches
shift risky activity to where returns are highest Performance standards
allow firms flexibility in compliance Process standards
specify particular ways to reduce risk Nature of risk determines what is feasible
Peanut Butter 2009
Source: CDC 030609 Slide from Gale Price
Peanut Butter 2009
Source: CDC 030609
Slide from Gale Price
PCA Peanut Product Related RecallsJan 10 – Mar 31, 2009
0
10
20
30
40
10-Jan
17-Jan
24-Jan
31-Jan
7-Feb
14-Feb
21-Feb
28-Feb
7-Mar
14-Mar
21-Mar
28-Mar
Recalls
Slide from Gale Price
MN HD
State of TX Orders Recall
~ 500 Recalls Involving > 3,900 Products as of 3/31, 9 Deaths
Other Food Companies Recalls
PCA Recall
PCA Expands Recall
Role for Scientists in Policy
How do scientists relate their work to needs of decision makers?
1. Is the decision context characterized by consensus on values and low uncertainty?
Role for science advisor or pure scientist
2. Is there concern about consensus on values and high uncertainty?
Need to narrow scope of choice
Role for Honest broker or issue advocate
Recommended