IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jfpoli/v38y2013icp177-189.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A fuzzy multi-criteria approach for the ex-ante impact assessment of food safety policies

Author

Listed:
  • Mazzocchi, Mario
  • Ragona, Maddalena
  • Zanoli, Agostina

Abstract

There are many obstacles hindering regulatory impact assessment (RIA) for food safety policies, mainly difficulties in the monetisation of impacts and major uncertainties in assessing some of the policy outcomes. This paper reviews these obstacles and explores how a procedure based on fuzzy methods could address them. The resulting tool (named ‘Scryer’) consists in the combination of an explicit scoring system with indicators of uncertainty in assessments, and the application of fuzzy logic to multi-criteria analysis. Among the desirable properties of Scryer there are the ability of aggregating a variety of different impacts without necessarily monetise them, and the flexibility to adjust to qualitative and model-based impact assessment. An illustrative application on regulating mycotoxin contents in cereals and cereal products is provided.

Suggested Citation

  • Mazzocchi, Mario & Ragona, Maddalena & Zanoli, Agostina, 2013. "A fuzzy multi-criteria approach for the ex-ante impact assessment of food safety policies," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 177-189.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jfpoli:v:38:y:2013:i:c:p:177-189 DOI: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2012.11.011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030691921200125X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Antle, John M., 1999. "Benefits and costs of food safety regulation," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 605-623, December.
    2. Munda, G. & Nijkamp, P. & Rietveld, P., 1992. "Comparison of fuzzy sets : a new semantic distance," Serie Research Memoranda 0055, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    3. Dubois, Didier & Prade, Henri, 1989. "Fuzzy sets, probability and measurement," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 135-154, May.
    4. Tanya Roberts & Jean C. Buzby & Michael Ollinger, 1996. "Using Benefit and Cost Information to Evaluate a Food Safety Regulation: HACCP for Meat and Poultry," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(5), pages 1297-1301.
    5. Jensen, Helen H. & Unnevehr, Laurian J. & Gómez, Miguel I., 1998. "Costs of Improving Food Safety in the Meat Sector," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(01), pages 83-94, July.
    6. Crutchfield, Stephen R. & Buzby, Jean C. & Roberts, Tanya & Ollinger, Michael & Lin, Chung-Tung Jordan, 1997. "Economic Assessment of Food Safety Regulations: The New Approach to Meat and Poultry Inspection," Agricultural Economics Reports 34009, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    7. Laurian J. Unnevehr, 1996. "The Benefits and Costs of Food Safety Policies: Discussion," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(5), pages 1302-1304.
    8. Munda, Giuseppe, 2004. "Social multi-criteria evaluation: Methodological foundations and operational consequences," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(3), pages 662-677, November.
    9. Helen H. Jensen & Laurian J. Unnevehr & Miguel I. Gomez, 1998. "Costs of Improving Food Safety in the Meat Sector, The," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 98-wp189, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    10. Gamper, C.D. & Turcanu, C., 2007. "On the governmental use of multi-criteria analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 298-307, April.
    11. Munda, G. & Nijkamp, P. & Rietveld, P., 1995. "Qualitative multicriteria methods for fuzzy evaluation problems: An illustration of economic-ecological evaluation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 79-97, April.
    12. Caswell, Julie A., 1998. "Valuing the benefits and costs of improved food safety and nutrition," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 42(4), December.
    13. Sven Anders & Claudia Schmidt, 2011. "The international quest for an integrated approach to microbial food-borne risk prioritization: where do we stand?," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 215-239, February.
    14. John M. Antle, 2000. "No Such Thing as a Free Safe Lunch: The Cost of Food Safety Regulation in the Meat Industry," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(2), pages 310-322.
    15. Henson, Spencer & Caswell, Julie, 1999. "Food safety regulation: an overview of contemporary issues," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 589-603, December.
    16. Bernauer, Thomas & Caduff, Ladina, 2004. "In Whose Interest? Pressure Group Politics, Economic Competition and Environmental Regulation," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 24(01), pages 99-126, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Perito, Maria Angela & Hammoudi, Abdelhakim, 4. "Food safety standards and their impact on the small farms of developed countries," Politica Agricola Internazionale - International Agricultural Policy, Edizioni L’Informatore Agrario, issue 4.
    2. Ragona, Maddalena & Albertazzi, Sergio & Nicolli, Francesco & Mazzanti, Massimiliano & Montini, Anna & Vitali, Giuliano & Canavari, Maurizio, 2014. "Alternative subsidy scenarios for different agricultural practices: A sustainability assessment using fuzzy multi-criteria analysis," 2014 Third Congress, June 25-27, 2014, Alghero, Italy 173095, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).
    3. Martha McMahon, 2013. "What Food is to be Kept Safe and for Whom? Food-Safety Governance in an Unsafe Food System," Laws, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 2(4), pages 1-27, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jfpoli:v:38:y:2013:i:c:p:177-189. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/foodpol .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.