Matkontroll i Europa - en studie av regulering i fem europeiske land og EU

The thesis analyzes and identifies central characteristics of food safety regulation in Europe. Itconsists of four separate articles and a synthesizing introduction. The first article explores theorigins and development of the Norwegian food control, and in particular studies recentchanges in food legislation and central organization. The second article compares food safetyregulation in Norway, Sweden, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and Germany, while thethird article gives an account of the historical development of food regulation in the EU. Thefourth article analyzes the establishment of two new food agencies – the Food StandardsAgency in the United Kingdom, and the European Food Safety Authority within the EU.The thesis employs a historical institutional and a multi level governance approach. Theorigins of food safety regulation are similar, but the main characteristics of the regulationtoday varies. Regulation is formed both at the national and the supranational (EU) level. Theinteraction between the two is essential. Food safety regulation concerns important, butconflicting values and considerations. Choices made concerning what to regulate for, canreveal significant stakeholder and power constellations within the field. Tensions between theaim to protect public health and also pay heed to business interests – in particular agriculturalinterests – is a general feature, and typical results in a struggle between central healthauthorities and argricultural interests. It varies between the countries how these tensions areresolved, and major differences are found by analyzing the main food control legislation andhow food control is organized.The mad cow disease, or BSE scandal, lead to major changes in European foodregulation. The general approach, central arguments and principles, are similar. Public healthis identified as the primary goal, food control should be independent, food regulation shouldbe based on scientific risk assessment, and rest on a "farm-to-fork" approach. Nevertheless,food legislation and the organization of the field varies. The historical development of foodregulation, existing institutional arrangements, and different interest and power relations areimportant explanatories. Furthermore, fundamental changes within the field also take placewithout preceding dramatic incidents or crisis. Consequently, the exploration of specificregulation fields where there are no major crises, is also important