Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

European Food Law and the Precautionary Principle: Paradoxical Effects of the EU’s Precautionary Food Policies

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Regulating and Managing Food Safety in the EU

Part of the book series: Economic Analysis of Law in European Legal Scholarship ((EALELS,volume 6))

Abstract

The precautionary principle has been invoked to support stringent European food law. By its nature, the principle is particularly relevant to food security. This chapter discusses how precaution has been applied in EU food law generally, and finds that its application has been both controversial and selective. We then turn to two specific cases in which the precautionary principle played a prominent role: antibiotic residues in food and micronutrient malnutrition. On this basis, we revisit the precautionary principle’s role in EU food law. We conclude that the precautionary principle is best understood as a political tool, rather than an intellectual concept.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety, OJ L31, 1.2.2002, p. 1.

  2. 2.

    Article 2, Regulation 178/2002.

  3. 3.

    Article 1(3), Regulation 178/2002.

  4. 4.

    Article 1(1), Regulation 178/2002.

  5. 5.

    Reform the CAP, http://www.reformthecap.eu/issues/policy-objectives/food-security-in-the-eu.

  6. 6.

    Rome Declaration on World Food Security (1996).

  7. 7.

    Article 130R(2), Maastricht Treaty.

  8. 8.

    See also the Rio Declaration from 1992; Graham (2001).

  9. 9.

    GC, case T-74/00, Artegodan GmbH v. Commission, ECLI:EU:T:2002:283.

  10. 10.

    Article 7(1), Regulation 178/2002. See also Szajkowska (2010).

  11. 11.

    Raffensperger and Tickner (1999).

  12. 12.

    Wiener, The Reality of Precaution 2011.

  13. 13.

    European Commission, Directorate-General Health and Food Safety, http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/health_food-safety/about_us/who_we_are_en.htm.

  14. 14.

    See e.g. Hanekamp et al. (2003).

  15. 15.

    Sien (2007); Council Directive 96/22/EC.

  16. 16.

    Forrester and Hanekamp (2006).

  17. 17.

    SCVPH (1998); Council Decision 2009/121/EC.

  18. 18.

    See Vogel (2012).

  19. 19.

    Bergkamp and Kogan (2013).

  20. 20.

    TTIP: what to expect from EU/U.S. regulatory convergence? Enhanced Compatibility, maybe, https://blog.coleurope.eu/2015/04/20/ttip-what-to-expect-from-euu-s-regulatory-convergence-enhanced-compatibility-maybe/.

  21. 21.

    Susan Cohen Jehoram, 6 things you need to know about the TTIP, 13 May 2016, http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/news/Blogs/makingwaves/6-things-about-ttip/blog/56429/.

  22. 22.

    Carrique-Mas et al. (2003), Quaglia et al. (2008), Dominguez et al. (2009) and Oliver et al. (2009).

  23. 23.

    De Vries (1997).

  24. 24.

    Ames et al. (1990).

  25. 25.

    See further Hanekamp (2015).

  26. 26.

    MRLs are set forth in the now defunct Annex IV of Council Regulation EEC No 2377/90.

  27. 27.

    Directive 2001/82/EC of 6 November 2001 on the Community Code relating to veterinary medicinal products, OJ L 311, 28.11.2001, p. 1.

  28. 28.

    Calabrese and Baldwin (2003) and The Health Council of the Netherlands (2010).

  29. 29.

    Hanekamp and Bast (2007).

  30. 30.

    Pagnotti et al. (2011).

  31. 31.

    Hanekamp et al. (2003), Hanekamp and Kwakman (2004) and Hanekamp and Calabrese (2007).

  32. 32.

    Regulation No 470/2009 of 6 May 2009 laying down Community procedures for the establishment of residue limits of pharmacologically active substances in foodstuffs of animal origin, repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 2377/90 and amending Directive 2001/82/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council, OJ L 152/11 (16.6.2009).

  33. 33.

    EFSA (2013).

  34. 34.

    Hanekamp and Bast (2015).

  35. 35.

    Hanekamp et al. (2003).

  36. 36.

    Berendsen et al. (2010) and Berendsen et al. (2013).

  37. 37.

    Hanekamp and Kwakman (2009).

  38. 38.

    James et al. (1999).

  39. 39.

    Allen et al. (2006).

  40. 40.

    Ames (2005).

  41. 41.

    Ames (2005).

  42. 42.

    See Expert Group on Vitamins and Minerals (2003).

  43. 43.

    Hanekamp (2015).

  44. 44.

    Coase (1960).

  45. 45.

    Wildavsky (1997).

  46. 46.

    Bast et al. (2013).

  47. 47.

    EFSA (2010).

  48. 48.

    Cartwright (2011).

  49. 49.

    Cartwright (2011) and Cartwright and Hardie (2012).

  50. 50.

    Leamer (1983).

  51. 51.

    Bast et al. (2013).

  52. 52.

    Harremoës et al. (2001), p. 170.

  53. 53.

    Heaney (2008), pp. 1591–1595.

  54. 54.

    See further Hanekamp et al. (2015).

  55. 55.

    Treich (2001).

  56. 56.

    Kysar (2006)

  57. 57.

    Purnhagen (2014).

  58. 58.

    Gollier et al. (2000).

  59. 59.

    Bergkamp (2014).

  60. 60.

    Furedi (2009).

  61. 61.

    Hanekamp (2015).

  62. 62.

    Majone (2002).

  63. 63.

    Bradford (2012), Smyth and Phillips (2014) and Park et al. (2011).

  64. 64.

    Turvey and Mojduszka (2005).

  65. 65.

    Otsuki et al. (2001).

  66. 66.

    Turvey and Mojduszka (2005).

    See further Bast and Hanekamp (2017).

  67. 67.

    Munthe (2011).

  68. 68.

    Furedi (2009).

  69. 69.

    Viscusi (2015).

  70. 70.

    Viscusi and Aldy (2003).

  71. 71.

    Tengs et al. (1995).

  72. 72.

    Viscusi and Aldy (2003).

  73. 73.

    See Keeney (1994, 1997).

  74. 74.

    Ames et al. (1990).

  75. 75.

    Rolston III (1988).

  76. 76.

    District Court of The Hague, judgment of 24 June 2015, Urgenda versus State of The Netherlands; Hanekamp and Bergkamp (2016) and Bergkamp and Hanekamp (2015).

  77. 77.

    Mckinney and Hammer Hill (2000).

  78. 78.

    Likewise, prescribed minimum doses will tend to be on the low side.

  79. 79.

    Mckinney and Hammer Hill (2000).

  80. 80.

    Bramwell (1989), Veldman (1994), Sjöberg (2000) and Hanekamp et al. (2005); see further Hanekamp (2015).

  81. 81.

    Baggini (2002), pp. 181–182.

  82. 82.

    The information on food supplements may not create the impression that a normal balanced diet does not provide the necessary nutrients etc., so in the negative, not the positive.

  83. 83.

    Sunstein (2005).

  84. 84.

    Otsuki et al. (2001).

  85. 85.

    Codex (2010); Commission Regulation (EU) No 165/2010.

  86. 86.

    Hanekamp (2015).

  87. 87.

    See e.g. Stern and Wiener (2006).

  88. 88.

    Commission (2000).

  89. 89.

    Morris (2002).

  90. 90.

    Hanekamp (2015).

  91. 91.

    See e.g. Hottois (2000).

References

  • Allen L, De Benoist B, Dary O, Hurrell R (eds) (2006) Guidelines on food fortification with micronutrients. World Health Organization, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • Ames BN (2005) Increasing longevity by tuning up metabolism. EMBO Rep 6:S20–S24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ames BN, Profet M, Gold LS (1990) Dietary pesticides (99.99% all natural). Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 87:7777–7781

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baggini J (2002) Philosophy: key texts. Palgrave Mac Millan, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bast A, Hanekamp JC (2017) Toxicology: what everyone should know. A book for researchers, consumers, journalists and politicians. Academic Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Bast A, Briggs W, Calabrese E, Fenech M, Hanekamp JC, Heaney R, Rijkers G, Schwitters B, Verhoeven P (2013) Scientism, legalism and precaution - contending with regulating nutrition and health claims in europe. Eur Food Feed Law Rev 6:401–409

    Google Scholar 

  • Berendsen B, Stolker L, de Jong J, Nielen M, Tserendorj E, Sodnomdarjaa R, Cannavan A, Elliott C (2010) Evidence of natural occurrence of the banned antibiotic chloramphenicol in herbs and grass. Anal Bioanal Chem 397:1955–1963

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berendsen B, Pikkemaat M, Römkens P, Wegh R, van Sisseren M, Stolker L, Nielen M (2013) Occurrence of chloramphenicol in crops through natural production by bacteria in soil. J Agric Food Chem 61:400–4010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergkamp L (2014) The quiet revolution in EU administrative procedure: judicial vetting of precautionary risk assessment - case T-333/10, ATC and others v commission, 16/09/2013 (‘animal trading’). Eur J Risk Reg 5:102–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergkamp L, Hanekamp J (2015) Climate change litigation against states: the perils of court-made climate policies. Eur Energy Environ Law Rev 24:102–114

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergkamp L, Kogan L (2013) Trade, the precautionary principle, and post-modern regulatory process: regulatory convergence in the transatlantic trade and investment partnership. Eur J Risk Reg 4:493–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradford A (2012) The brussels effect. Northwest Univ Law Rev 107(1)

    Google Scholar 

  • Bramwell A (1989) Ecology in the 20th century. A history. Yale University Press, New Haven, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Calabrese EJ, Baldwin LA (2003) Toxicology rethinks its central belief. Hormesis demands a re-appraisal of the way risks are assessed. Nature 421:691–692

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carrique-Mas JJ, Hökeberg I, Andersson Y, Arneborn M, Tham W, Danielsson-Tham ML, Osterman B, Leffler M, Steen M, Eriksson E, Hedin G, Giesecke J (2003) Febrile gastroenteritis after eating on-farm manufactured fresh cheese – an outbreak of listeriosis? Epidemiol Infect 130:79–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cartwright N (2011) The art of medicine. A philosopher’s view of the long road from RCTs to effectiveness. Lancet 377:1400–1401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cartwright N, Hardie J (2012) Evidence-based policy. A practical guide to doing it better. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Coase RH (1960) The problem of social cost. J Law Econ 3:1–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Codex Alimentarius (2010) Codex general standard for contaminants and toxins in food and feed. Codex Stan 193-1995

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission of the European Communities (2000) Communication from the commission on the pre-cautionary principle. Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission Regulation (EC) 353/2008 of April 2008 establishing implementing rules for applications for authorisation of health claims as provided for in Article 15 of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council. O J Eur Union L109:11–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission Regulation (EU) No 165/2010 of 26 February 2010 amending Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006 setting maximum levels for certain contaminants in foodstuffs as regards aflatoxins. O J Eur Union L50:8–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Council Directive 96/22/EC of 29 April 1996 concerning the prohibition on the use in stockfarming of certain substances having a hormonal or thyrostatic action and of beta-agonists, and repealing Directives 81/602/EEC, 88/146/EEC and 88/299/EEC. O J Eur Comm L125:3–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Council Regulation (EEC) No. 2377/90 of 26 June 1990 laying down a Community procedure to set up maximum residue limits of veterinary medicinal products in foodstuffs of animal origin. 1990. O J Eur Comm L224:1–8

    Google Scholar 

  • De Vries J (ed) (1997) Food safety and toxicity. CRC Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Directive (EU) 2015/412 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2015 amending Directive 2001/18/EC as regards the possibility for the Member States to restrict or prohibit the cultivation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in their territory. O J Eur Union L68:1–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Directive 2002/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 June 2002 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to food supplements. O J Eur Union L183:51–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Dominguez M, Jourdan-Da Silva N, Vaillant V, Pihier N, Kermin C, Weill FX, Delmas G, Kerouanton A, Brisabois A, de Valk H (2009) Outbreak of Salmonella enterica serotype Montevideo infections in France linked to consumption of cheese made from raw milk. Foodborne Pathog Dis 6(1):121–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EFSA (2010) Guidance on human health risk-benefit assessment of foods. EFSA J 8(7):1673

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM) (2013) Guidance on methodological principles and scientific methods to be taken into account when establishing Reference Points for Action (RPAs) for non- allowed pharmacologically active substances present in food of animal origin. EFSA J 11(4):3195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Expert Group on Vitamins and Minerals (2003) Safe upper levels for vitamins and minerals

    Google Scholar 

  • Forrester I, Hanekamp JC (2006) Precaution, science and jurisprudence: a test case. J Risk Res 9(4):297–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furedi F (2009) Precautionary culture and the rise of possibilistic risk assessment. Erasmus Law Rev 2(2):197–220

    Google Scholar 

  • Gollier C, Bruno J, Treich N (2000) Scientific progress and irreversibility: an economic interpretation of the precautionary principle. J Pub Econ 75(2):229–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham JD (2001) Decision-analytic refinements of the precautionary principle. J Risk Res 4(2):127–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanekamp J, Bergkamp L (2016) The ‘best available science’ and the Paris agreement on climate change. Eur J Risk Reg 7:35–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanekamp JC (2015) Utopia and gospel: unearthing the good news in precautionary culture. Dissertation, Tilburg University, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanekamp JC, Bast A (2007) Hormesis in a precautionary regulatory culture: models preferences and the advancement of science. Hum Exp Toxicol 26:855–873

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanekamp JC, Bast A (2015) Antibiotics exposure and health risks: chloramphenicol. Environ Toxicol Pharmacol 39(1):213–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanekamp JC, Calabrese EJ (2007) Chloramphenicol, European legislation and hormesis. Dose Response 5:91–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanekamp JC, Kwakman J (2004) Beyond zero-tolerance: a novel and global outlook on food-safety and residues of pharmacological active substances in foodstuffs of animal origin. Environ Liabil 1:33–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanekamp JC, Kwakman JHJM (2009) Towards intended normal use (part I): a European appraisal of the chloramphenicol case and some thoughts on the potential of global harmonization of antibiotics regulation. In: Boisrobert C, Stjepanovic A, Oh S, Lelieveld H (eds) Ensuring global food safety: exploring global harmonization. Academic Press, New York, pp 193–208

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanekamp JC, Pieterman R (2009) Risk communication in precautionary culture–the precautionary coalition. Hum Exp Toxicol 28:15–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanekamp JC, Frapporti G, Olieman K (2003) Chloramphenicol, food safety and precautionary thinking in Europe. Environ Liabil 6:209–221

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanekamp JC, Verstegen SW, Vera-Navas G (2005) The historical roots of precautionary thinking: the cultural ecological critique and ‘The Limits to Growth’. J Risk Res 8(4):295–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanekamp JC, Bast A, Calabrese EJ (2015) Nutrition and health – transforming research traditions. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 55(8):1074–1080

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harremoës P, Gee D, MacGarvin M, Stirling A, Keys J, Wynne B, Vaz SG (2001) Late lessons from early warnings: the precautionary principle 1896–2000. Environmental issue report no 22. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  • Heaney RP (2008) Nutrients, endpoints, and the problem of proof. J Nutr 138(9):1591–1595

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hottois G (2000) A philosophical and critical analysis of the European convention of bioethics. J Med Philos 25:133–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James P, Kemper F, Pascal G (1999) A European food and public health authority. The future of scientific advice in the EU

    Google Scholar 

  • Joined Cases C-154/04 and C-155/04. See http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:62004CJ0154:EN:HTML. Accessed 29 May 2015

  • Keeney R (1997) Estimating fatalities induced by the economic costs of regulations. J Risk Uncertain 14:5–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keeney RL (1994) Mortality risks induced by the costs of regulations. J Risk Uncertain 8:95–110

    Google Scholar 

  • Kysar DA (2006) It might have been: risk, precaution, and opportunity costs. J Land Use Environ Law 22:1–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Leamer EE (1983) Let’s take the con out of econometrics. Am Econ Rev 73(1):31–43

    Google Scholar 

  • Majone G (2002) What price safety? The precautionary principle and its policy implications. J Common Mark Stud 40(1):89–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mckinney WJ, Hammer Hill H (2000) Of sustainability and precaution: the logical, epistemological, and moral problems of the precautionary principle and their implications for sustainable development. Ethics Environ 5(1):77–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris J (2002) The relationship between risk analysis and the precautionary principle. Toxicology 27:127–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munthe C (2011) The price of precaution and the ethics of risk. The international library of ethics, law and technology, vol 6. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver SP, Boor KJ, Murphy SC, Murinda SE (2009) Food safety hazards associated with consumption of raw milk. Foodborne Pathog Dis 6(7):793–806

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Otsuki T, Wilson JS, Sewadeh M (2001) Saving two in a billion: quantifying the trade effect of European Food Safety Standards on African exports. Food Policy 26:495–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pagnotti VS, Chubatyi ND, McEwen CN (2011) Solvent assisted inlet ionization: an ultrasensitive new liquid introduction ionization method for mass spectrometry. Anal Chem 83:3981–3985

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park J, McFarlane I, Phipps R, Ceddia G (2011) The impact of the EU regulatory constraint of transgenic crops on farm income. New Biotechnol 28(4):396–406

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Purnhagen K (2014) The behavioural law and economics of the precautionary principle in the EU and its impact on internal market regulation. J Consum Policy 37:453–464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quaglia NC, Dambrosio A, Normanno G, Parisi A, Patrono R, Ranieri G, Rella A, Celano GV (2008) High occurrence of Helicobacter pylori in raw goat, sheep and cow milk inferred by glmM gene: a risk of food-borne infection? Int J Food Microbiol 124:43–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raffensperger C, Tickner J (eds) (1999) Protecting public health and the environment: implementing the precautionary principle. Island Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety. O J Eur Comm L31:1–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Regulation (EC) No 470/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 laying down Community procedures for the establishment of residue limits of pharmacologically active substances in foodstuffs of animal origin, repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 2377/90 and amending Directive 2001/82/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council. 2009. O J Eur Comm L152:11–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Regulation 1924/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on nutrition and health claims on foods. O J Eur Union L404:9–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Rolston H III (1988) Environmental ethics. Duties to and ethics in the natural world. Temple University Press, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  • Rome Declaration on World Food Security (1996) See http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/w3613e/w3613e00.HTM. Accessed 8 June 2015

  • Scientific Committee on Veterinary Measures Relating to Public Health (SCVPH) (1998) On benefits and limitations of antimicrobial treatments for poultry carcasses

    Google Scholar 

  • Sien IAR (2007) Beefing up the hormones dispute: problems in compliance and viable compromise alternatives. Georget Law J 95:565–590

    Google Scholar 

  • Sjöberg L (2000) Perceived risk and tampering with nature. J Risk Res 3(4):353–367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smyth SJ, Phillips PWB (2014) Risk, regulation and biotechnology: the case of GM crops. GM Crops Food 5(3):170–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stern J, Wiener JB (2006) Precaution against terrorism. J Risk Res 9(4):393–447

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein CR (2005) Laws of fear: beyond the precautionary principle. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Szajkowska A (2010) The impact of the definition of the precautionary principle in EU food law. Common Mark Law Rev 47:173–196

    Google Scholar 

  • Tengs TO, Adams ME, Pliskin JS, Safran DG, Siegel JE, Weinstein MC, Graham JD (1995) Five-hundred life-saving interventions and their cost-effectiveness. Risk Anal 15(3):369–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Health Council of the Netherlands (2010) Guideline to the classification of carcinogenic compounds. Report No. A10/07E, The Hague, the Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Treich N (2001) What is the economic meaning of the precautionary principle? Geneva Pap Risk Insur Issues Pract 26(3):334–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turvey CG, Mojduszka EM (2005) The precautionary principle and the law of unintended consequences. Food Policy 30:145–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veldman M (1994) Fantasy, the bomb and the greening of Britain. Romantic protest, 1945–1980. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Viscusi WK (2015) The role of publication selection bias in estimates of the value of a statistical life. Am J Health Econ 1(1):27–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viscusi WK, Aldy J (2003) The value of a statistical life: a critical review of market estimates throughout the world. J Risk Uncertain 27(1):5–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vogel D (2012) The politics of precaution: regulating health, safety, and environmental risks in Europe and the United States. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wildavsky A (1997) But is it true? A citizen’s guide to environmental health and safety issues. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hunton Williams Kurth LLP, Brussels, Belgium

    Lucas Bergkamp

  2. University College Roosevelt, Middelburg, The Netherlands

    Jaap C. Hanekamp

  3. Environmental Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, MA, USA

    Jaap C. Hanekamp

Authors
  1. Lucas Bergkamp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jaap C. Hanekamp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lucas Bergkamp .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Law and Governance Group, Wageningen University and Research (WUR), Wageningen, The Netherlands

    Harry Bremmers

  2. Law School, Erasmus University of Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    Kai Purnhagen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Bergkamp, L., Hanekamp, J.C. (2018). European Food Law and the Precautionary Principle: Paradoxical Effects of the EU’s Precautionary Food Policies. In: Bremmers, H., Purnhagen, K. (eds) Regulating and Managing Food Safety in the EU. Economic Analysis of Law in European Legal Scholarship, vol 6. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77045-1_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77045-1_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-77043-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-77045-1

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation