我國食品風險分析法制之研究
—以歐盟食品安全局風險評估之法制為借鏡

觀察我國歷年來之食品消費爭議事件，可以發現，政府為達到保障食品安全之目的，其所採取之對策通常為提高對不肖食品業者的罰鍰，藉由重罰的手段，以達成目的。但是政府以事後處罰行為人的手段，是否有助於保障國民食的安全之目的，從食品安全衛生管理法的修法過程及我國對食品消費爭議事件之相關判決，以塑化劑事件之判決為例，直至最高法院之判決結果，仍採取衛生福利部的意見，若塑化劑之攝取量不大，不致對人體產生損害，必須對人體產生具體損害之結果為必要。由此可知，消費者因食品所受到之損害，並無法透過加重罰則，獲得實質上的幫助，所以，透過提高罰則的手段並不能有效遏止食品消費爭議事件的發生，也無法達成保障國民食品安全之目的，也因為如此，所以食安法於2013年6月19日，立法修正，將風險分析體系明文納入食安法當中。風險分析體系之運作，分為三大部分，依序為風險評估、風險管理與風險溝通，以風險評估作為開啟風險分析之運作，以達成預防食安風險發生之目的，但截至目前為止，食品消費爭議事件之發生從不間斷。當食安風險的發生，對國民健康之影響層面廣泛，然而，為何我國已經明文立法規定風險分析體系，但仍不能有效事先防止食安風險的發生，有待於探討我國風險分析體系之運作，是有何缺失之處。所以，在面臨現今可能對人體健康所產生的食安風險，除了採取風險管理決策，提前管理食安風險產生實際損害之前，更有待於完備的風險評估制度，因為人體所受到的健康損害非能為立即證明與問題食品具有直接關係，利用風險分析下之風險評估，正是預先以現今的科學技術之評估方式，預先使風險具體化，以科學評估之結論作為風險管理決策執行依據，並在風險評估的過程中與相關利害關係人，例如消費者、食品業者等做雙向之風險溝通，將其意見及反應納入風險評估的運作中，可使專家的科學意見與利害關係人間的認知上之差距減少，而這種互動式的溝通模式，可以使接下來風險管理決策更為適當、貼近民眾的感受。本文，將從人民對飲食上的安全需求開始，到探討我國的風險評估機關與民眾間的風險溝通之立法、體系制度面，以全球現階段而言，歐盟對於食品安全的維護是相當完備，其將風險評估所需遵守的原則明文規定於歐盟178/2002號規章，透過完善的體系制度及各項聲明加以落實，並在風險評估運作過程中落實與利害關係人間的風險溝通，本文將以歐盟食品安全局的制度運作，作為我國風險評估制度之參考對象。

關鍵字

食品安全；食品消費爭議事件；風險評估；風險溝通；歐盟食品安全局

並列摘要

Observing the food consumption disputes in over the past years, we can find that the government's countermeasures for the purpose of ensuring food safety are usually to increase the penalty for those who are unscrupulous, and to achieve the goal by means of heavy punishment. However, whether the government's means of punishing the perpetrators afterwards helps to ensure the safety of the national food, from the revision process of the Food Safety and Health Management Law and the relevant judgments on the food consumption disputes in China, the judgment of the plasticizer incident is For example, until the judgment of the Supreme Court, the Ministry of Health and Welfare still used the statement that if the plasticizer intake is not large enough to cause damage to the human body, it is necessary to produce specific damage to the human body. It can be seen that consumers are unable to obtain substantial assistance through the aggravation of penalties for damage caused by food. Therefore, the means of raising penalties cannot effectively curb the occurrence of food consumption disputes, and it is impossible to guarantee the safety of national food. The purpose of this is also because the Food Safety Law was amended on June 19, 2013, and the risk analysis system was explicitly included in the Food Safety Law. The operation of the risk analysis system is divided into three parts, namely risk assessment, risk management and risk communication, and risk assessment as the operation to start the risk analysis to achieve the purpose of preventing food safety risks, but so far, food The occurrence of consumer disputes has never stopped. When the risk of food safety occurs, the impact on national health is extensive. However, why China has clearly stipulated the risk analysis system, but it is still unable to effectively prevent the occurrence of food safety risks. It is necessary to discuss the operation of risk analysis system. What is missing. Therefore, in the face of the risk of food safety that may be caused to human health today, in addition to taking risk management decisions and managing the actual damage to food safety risks in advance, it is more important to have a complete risk assessment system. And, we have explicit legislative precautionary principle is one of the principles for ensuring food safety in our country, so we need more complete risk assessment system. The health damage suffered can’t be directly proved related to the food problem. The risk assessment of the risk analysis is based on the current scientific and technological assessment method, and the risk is embodied in advance. The risk management make decision is according to the conclusion of the scientific assessment. The basis of decision-making in the process of risk assessment, it conducts two-way risk communication with relevant stakeholders, such as consumers and food industry, and incorporates their opinions and reactions into the operation of risk assessment, which can make the scientific opinions and interests of experts. The cognitive gap between the people is reduced, and this interactive communication model can make the next risk management decision more appropriate and close to the people's feelings. This article begins with the people's demand for food safety, and discusses the legislation and system of risk assessment agencies and risk communication between the people in our country. At the current global stage, the EU's maintenance of food safety is quite complete. It clearly stipulates the principles to be followed in the risk assessment in EU Regulation No. 178/2002, implements it through a sound system and various statements, and implements risk communication with stakeholders during the risk assessment operation. The system operation of the EU Food Safety Authority serves as a reference for our risk assessment system of food safety.