Comments on the Proposal for a Joint Institute for Food Safety Research

by Tracy Irwin Hewitt

Public Hearing, December 1, 1998

Washington, DC

Presented to: Dr. Eileen Kennedy, Deputy Under Secretary for Research, Education and Economics, USDA; Dr. Cliff Gabriel, Deputy to the Associate Director for Science, Office of Science and Technology Policy; Dr. William Raub, Science Advisor, Dept of Health and Human Services.

Good morning, I am Tracy Irwin Hewitt the executive director of the Council on Food, Agricultural and Resource Economics (C-FARE). One of C-FARE's primary goals is to educate policy makers about the actual and potential contributions of the science of economics to policy issues about our food and agricultural system and our natural resource base. I appreciate the opportunity to be here and thank you for holding this important meeting.

I am here to urge you to involve agricultural economists and other social scientists in the joint institute for food safety research from the very beginning. Certainly we recognize that the biological components of the problem are significant, however, so are the economic and social components of the problem. The only way we will have efficient and effective food safety policies is with significant input from the social sciences.

I was pleased in reading through the October 1 report to the President that the economic and social science components of food safety were recognized as important pieces of the puzzle.

For example, throughout the organizing principles there is reference to:

1. optimizing current investment and infrastructure,
   
2. developing cost-effective programs that maximize the benefits to public health, and
   
3. increasing accountability.
   

All of this language could have been taken from the economics literature on food safety research that has been done over the last two decades by some of our most well-respected economists.

Also in the goals section of the paper, there is a discussion about how the institute is to facilitate research planning, and prioritization to fulfill the informational needs of food safety regulatory agencies. There is little doubt, that one of the most important pieces of information that regulators should have is what are the costs and benefits of various food safety regulations on all aspects of the food system.

So while I was pleased with some of the language in the October 1 document, I would have liked to have seen a more formal recognition of the special role that economists can and should play in the area of food safety research.

I am concerned that unless we make the role of economics more explicit in the structure of the institute, that economics will be treated as an afterthought rather than as the underlying factor that it really is.

The reason that I am concerned is that last month I was disturbed that at the national conference on food safety research -- a conference designed to identify research priorities for USDA -- that there was no formal involvement by economists or other social scientists. When I asked a USDA official why there was no apparent involvement by the social sciences, I was told that "no one dies from the economics." Of course, as I am sure you appreciate, this couldn't be more wrong. If we don't understand the economic incentives and obstacles to improved food safety, we will definitely fail to maximize the benefits to public health.

Finally, I'd like to make some general recommendations the committee working on the joint institute for food safety.

1. Be inclusive. Food safety is one of our most complicated issues. The only way to reduce the number of foodborne illnesses is to think broadly and recognize that there are contributions to be made by the biological, physical and social sciences.

2. Encourage interdisciplinary research that crosses not just sub-disciplines of biology, but also crosses the biological, physical and social sciences.

3. Seek input from professional associations that represent scientists about their research priorities related to food safety. If you do, you'll notice that not only is food safety research identified by the agricultural economics profession as a research priority (C-FARE, 1997), but the economics of food safety is identified as a research priority by the Coalition for Research on Plant Systems (CROPS'99), and by FAIR'95 a consortium of more than 40 organizations representing the food animal sciences.

4. Consider having three assistant directors on the institute staff -- one for economics and social science, another for the biological sciences, and a third for the physical sciences. This would be one way to further promote collaboration and cooperation among scientists and other stakeholders.

In closing I'd like to reiterate a point I made earlier. There is no doubt that the biology of food safety is of utmost importance. However, a national research program that ignores economic impacts of new technologies and regulations; or one that ignores how economic incentives can modify and or change behavior of individuals, companies and institutions; or a program that ignores how economic tools can enhance and promote food safety will, no doubt, short change society.

Thank you for the opportunity to present these views.

Public Statements