Critical thinking about the precautionary principle in China's food safety law

• Author: LU Yi
• Pages: 692-717

FRONTIERS OF LAW IN CHINA

VOL. 11 DECEMBER 2016 NO. 4

DOI 10.3868/s050-005-016-0040-9

ARTICLE

CRITICAL THINKING ABOUT THE PRECAUTIONARY

PRINCIPLE IN CHINA’S FOOD SAFETY LAW

LU Yi *

Abstract We are living in a risk society where people devised the Precautionary

Principle in order to minimize the harm caused by risk ex ante. Compared to the

previous Food Hygiene Law (FHL) and the 2009 Food Safety Law, the 2015 revised

Chinese Food Safety Law (FSL) made a real breakthrough in the sense that it legitimates

an important principle in food safety governance. Apart from laying down the

fundamental importance of this principle in food safety regulations, the FSL 2015 also

invented arrangements from different aspects in order to implement this principle. In

other words, the FSL 2015’s incorporation of the Precautionary Principle in a very real

sense marked a transition from a demonstrative preventive food safety management

regime to a more effective precautionary regime. However, the Precautionary Principle

needs to be adopted in a “precautionary” way since this principle has its own limitations

and defects. Incautious application of the principle may create new risks. This article

compares the European approach in implementing the Precautionary Principle, and

examines China’s legal arrangements against negative impacts brought by the

Precautionary Principle. Three perspectives are discussed: independence of scientific

institutes; proportionality in risk management measures, and the shift of burden of proof

for market authorization.

Keywords the Precautionary Principle, food safety law, institutional independence,

proportionality, burden of proof

INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 693

I. THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE............................................................................ 694

II. STRUCTURE OF THIS ARTICLE ................................................................................ 696

III. EVOLUTION OF THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN CHINA’S FOOD SAFETY

REGULATIONS....................................................................................................... 697

A. Superficial Practice of the Precautionary Principle in the FHL ......................698

* (卢毅) J.D. & J.M., School of Transnational Law, Peking University; LL.M., Yale Law School; J.S.D.

Candidate, Yale Law School, New Haven, US. Contact: yi.lu.yl829@y ale.edu

The author owes a debt of gratitude to Professor Susan Rose-Ackerman who generously offered

invaluable discussion, inspiration and support in the writing of this article. The author would also like to

thank Professor DING Xiaodong for his insightful comments, suggestions, and enthusiastic encouragement.

Needless to say, the author is solely responsible for any error expressed in the views of this article.

2016] CRITICAL THINKING ABOUT THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN CHINA’S FOOD SAFETY LAW 693

B. Implied Precautionary Principle in the FSL 2009 ...........................................700

C. Explicit Precautionary Principle in the FSL 2015 ..........................................702

IV. PROBLEM #1: INDEPENDENCE OF SCIENTIFIC EVALUATION INSTITUTIONS ........... 703

A. Plausible Independent Risk Assessment in the EU.......................................... 703

B. Lack of Independence of the Scientific Body in China.....................................704

C. Comparison...................................................................................................707

V. PROBLEM #2: PROPORTIONALITY IN RISK MANAGEMENT ..................................... 707

A. Implied Application of Cost-Benefit Analysis in Proportionality Test in the

EU .................................................................................................................707

B. The “Classification of Risk” System in FSL 2015 and Its Draft

Implementation Rules..................................................................................... 709

C. Comparison...................................................................................................710

VI. PROBLEM #3: LIMITED SHIFTING OF BURDEN OF PROOF ......................................711

A. The EU’s Conservative Attitude towards Genetically Modified Organisms

(GMO) ........................................................................................................... 711

B. Basic Requirements on GMOs Labeling and the License System in

China............................................................................................................. 712

1. Requirements on GMOs.............................................................................712

2. The Licensing System ................................................................................713

C. Comparison.................................................................................................. 714

CONCLUSION........................................................................................................................ 715

INTRODUCTION

We are living in a risk society.1 Introduced by modernization and industrialization,

research and investigative journalism have documented multiple hazards and insecurities

facing human beings, many of which were unknown in the past. In particular, food safety

hazards are one of the fundamental risks to public health that have grown into a top

concern in both domestic and global food markets. The past two decades witnessed food

safety crises in different corners of the world. Foodborne diseases spread, casualties

resulted, food trade was affected, and consumers’ confidence in the government was

shattered. Against this backdrop, prevention of risks to human health is pressing. In this

risk society, the government is empowered to take preventive measures in the public

health field, in which the core notion is the Precautionary Principle. This article

endeavors to take stock of the Precautionary Principle practices during the evolution of

China’s food safety laws and explores experiences that we can learn from in the European

Union (EU) Food Law.

1 Ulrich Beck, Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity (1st edition), SAGE Publications Ltd, at 21

(1992).