12. The Consultation, held in March 1995, had limited its discussion to issues related to risk assessment and had developed a set of basic definitions for risk analysis terminology. It had recognized the need to separate risk assessment and risk management and had identified areas of critical overlap, such as priority setting. Given the growing importance of Codex standards and other recommendations, the Consultation saw the need to improve risk analysis procedures within Codex, particularly in regard to exposure assessment. The Consultation had made specific recommendations on pesticide residue risk assessment related to improving exposure assessments and to increasing transparency of the MRL-setting process. The Consultation had also recommended that, because exposure assessment was primarily a scientific task, the work should be carried out by the respective expert advisory bodies, JECFA and JMPR.
13. The Commission at its 21st Session had considered the report of the Consultation and had asked that comments on the Definitions be sought from Member Governments. It recommended that further work be done to address risk management and risk communication issues, and also on the question of how to address uncertainty and variability in risk analysis in relation to standards setting and food regulation. It also noted that developing countries might have special needs in addressing these issues[7].
14. The Committee noted that a number of matters raised by the Consultation had already been taken up by the CCPR and/or JMPR, especially in relation to exposure assessment and improving the transparency of the MRL-setting process (e.g., paras. 21-23). The Committee stressed the importance of using risk analysis procedures in its work and agreed to inform the Commission that these procedures would be incorporated to the extent possible.
