BENEFITS OF THE RISK ANALYSIS APPROACH: PERSPECTIVES FROM A

FOOD INDUSTRY

DR MARK CHAMBERLAIN

Head of Risk Analysis GroupSafety and Environmental Assurance Centre

Unilever ColworthSharnbrook Bedfordshire

United Kingdom

UNILEVER BUSINESS

• Foods, and Home and Personal Care• 265,000 employees world wide• Brands on sale in 151 countries• Consumers choose our products 150 million

times every day• $50bn annual turnover

WHAT IS SEAC

• Independent Corporate group responsible for:– assuring consumer safety– assuring environmental safety – advising on safe handling in factories

• Reporting to the highest level of the organisation• Dedicated to its role• Incident management• >10,000 requests annually for pre-market safety

approvals• 40 years of experience and expert knowledge

RISK ANALYSIS

3 COMPONENTS:– Risk Assessment– Risk Management– Risk Communication

KEY IMPROVEMENTS

• Transparency

• Include stakeholder issues

Risk Risk RiskAssessment Management Communication

PAST CONCEPT OF RISK ANALYSIS

• focus on hazard

• linear process

• unique stages

• stages province of difference experts

EXPERTS AND RISK ANALYSIS

Risk Assessment:The world of Scientists

– Hazards (toxic chemicals, food poisoning micro-organisms, explosions)

– Exposures (measurements, worst case assumptions, probabilistic modelling)

– Likelihood of adverse events (probabilities)

EXPERTS AND RISK ANALYSIS

Risk ManagementThe world of policy makers and managers (decision makers)

– what decisions are to be made• accepting• transferring• reducing• avoiding

• trade-offs

• constraints

EXPERTS AND RISK ANALYSIS

Risk CommunicationThe world of the “spokesperson” and the media (who deal with ‘Issues’)

– informing people about hazards and risk– informing (telling) them what they should do

–avoiding unnecessary alarm

THE THREE DOMAINS OF RISK DEBATES

ISSUES•values and ethics

•concerns and perceptions•effect on me

•fairness•emotions

SCIENCE•scientific facts

•numbers and probabilities•effect on populations

•scientific rules

DECISIONS•trade-offs

•money•politics

WHO SITS WHERE IN THE THREE DOMAINS

ISSUES•public

•consumers•citizens•NGO’s

•public relations•media

SCIENCE•academic scientists

•government scientists•industry scientists

DECISIONS•business decision-makers

•governments•regulators

TECHNOCRATIC VIEW OF RISK COMMUNICATION

Risk Risk RiskAssessment Management Communication

SCIENCE DECISIONS COMMUNICATIONTO AUDIENCES

One-way communication: scientists explain to everyone else

CHALLENGES TO THE TECHNOCRATIC APPROACH

• Risk assessment increasingly scientific and quantitative

• Risk become increasingly controversial (particularly in Europe)

• Questions about who benefits, who takes the risks, who checks that safety is observed

• Challenges have come from the public, pressure groups, political players

ATTRIBUTES OF RECENT RISK DEBATES

• Some players use science-only based arguments (usually industry and/or government)

• Other players challenge the science suggesting alternative interpretations (often campaigning organisations)

• Many non-scientific issues are raised (by other stakeholders)

So science is not enough

CHANGING VIEW OF RISK COMMUNICATION: STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT

1986 Slovic. P.“Informing and educating people about risk”

1989 US National Research Council“Improving Risk Communication”

1993 Sandman.P.M.“Responding to community outrage:strategies for

effective risk communication”

RISK AND OUTRAGE

Acceptability = fn Technical , Level ofof risk risk outrage

‘Technical risk’ stands for all the scientific/technical assessment of risk

‘Outrage’ stands for all the broader issues that people get concerned or angry about

(Adapted from Sandman P.M. 1993 Responding to Community outrage:strategies for effective risk communication, American Industrial

Hygiene Association)

MOVING TO A STAKEHOLDER APPROACH

• Stakeholders are to be engaged with, not just audiences to receive communication

• Science has to be communicated more effectively

• Listening to broader concerns• All parties prepared to change their

position in light of what others say

ENGAGING WITH STAKEHOLDERS

Build trust through open and honest communication:

– tailor the message– demonstrate empathy– be responsive– demonstrate credibility– articulate the benefits of proposed and

alternative options– do not hide uncertainties– banish no-risk messages

TWO-WAY COMMUNICATION: ANTICIPATING AND INTERACTING

SCIENCEOPTIONS

ANDDECISIONS

COMMUNICATIONWITH

STAKEHOLDERS

EXPLAIN HERE

EXPLAINHERE

LISTEN LISTENISSUES

UNDERSTANDINGSTAKEHOLDER

ISSUES

IMPROVING RISK ANALYSIS

• Combining subjective information with scientific data using structured approaches– Decision Analysis– Bayesian Belief Networks

DECISION ANALYSIS TOOLS

Problem definition

Issue raising

Strategy table

Influence diagram

Decision hierarchy

Stakeholder analysis

Scenario analysis

Fright factors

Decision trees

Monte Carlo

Probability assessment

Deterministic sensitivity

Probability distributions

Value of Information

Value of Control

Sensitivity to probability

Framing and structuring tools Evaluation tools

BAYESIAN BELIEF NETWORKSRepresenting variability and uncertainty in a simple model of microbial growth (G. Barker, 2002)

q lamda

T0 a0 t

Alpha

LogNc

Cp_

Uq

qmoments

a T

No

c LogNtNtest Nplus

TAKE CONTROL (BECEL/FLORA pro.active)

• Phytosterol esters in spreads• Reduced serum cholesterol• Initial safety prognosis good• Unfamiliar issues• Unilever’s first functional food• Novel food in Europe, Australia and New

Zealand– new legislation, first non-GM application

KEY OPINION FORMER COMMUNICATIONS

• 60 key opinion formers • 25 countries• Discussed safety programme• Received concerns• Constructed agreed work programme• Feedback and further dialogue

TAKE CONTROL (BECEL/FLORA pro.active)

• Products launched from 1999• USA, Europe, Switzerland, Brazil,

Australia, New Zealand, Czech Republic, Poland, Cyprus, South Africa, Japan

• Consumer post launch monitoring established via customer care-lines

• Continuing dialogues with key opinion formers

LEARNINGS

• Importance of face-to-face meetings• Requires a great deal of effort• Prepare and train our people to engage in

dialogue• Listen to views/concerns and understand

LEARNINGS

• Others in society view our products and associated risks differently

• Demonstrate by our behaviour that we have – listened– understood– taken seriously– acted

• Feedback– listen ………

BENEFITS FOR UNILEVER

• Understand stakeholders concerns• Receive direct consumer feedback• Allows time for consideration and action• No surprises• Facilitates partnership way-of-working• Communicate better internally and

externally

BENEFITS FOR UNILEVER

• Changes our views• Helps formulate future developments• Continuous improvements• Reinforces our values

BENEFITS FOR STAKEHOLDERS

• Concerns are being listened to, considered and acted upon

• Being taken seriously• Communication channels are clearer• Feel that they can influence positively now

and future developments• Increased transparency of decisions

RISK ANALYSIS - SUMMING UP

Provides a framework for considering scientific data as well as policy and societal values pertinent to risk management decisions:•Structured and inclusive

– to communicate clearly how the issues have been addressed

• Transparent– to display the reasoning for the decision

•Builds trust– via open and honest communication

RISK ANALYSIS - SUMMING UP

OUTCOME

Transparent risk analysis adds value

by incorporating stakeholder issues and

increases the acceptability of risk

management decisions

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Harriet Wallace Linda LeaJon Arthur Paul HepburnLeon GorrisAndrea DickensSven RodenBart Sangster