Governmental bodies must often rely upon scientific research to decide when and how to structure regulatory programs in areas of emerging health risks. This is especially true in areas of food safety, where agencies are charged with promulgating regulations to respond to arising issues of contamination and other foodborne ailments. Because the science is developing in these areas, and because new situations often arise, research regarding food safety can be both uncertain and controversial. Thus governmental bodies regulating food safety must draw from a number of different research sources, including scientific advisory bodies, as well as regulatory research institutions and educational research institutions. This Article will provide a preliminary comparison of how the United States and the European Commission govern the scientific advisory bodies that provide information to their food safety regulatory institutions. In particular, this Article will examine the processes by which the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Food Advisory Committee and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has provided advice to government decision-makers in areas of food safety risks. In doing so, I hope to bring attention to the ways in which expert advice, as well as actual actions, might be influenced by new governance theories, and to provide practical insights relevant to theoretical discussions regarding the nature of expertise.
