Promoted by consumer demands for more sustainable and environmentally friendly food options, jurisdictions around the world are actively reviewing how they authorise novel foods. The UK Food Standards Agency (FSA) has a unique opportunity to completely rethink their approach after leaving the EU. A new report commissioned by the FSA considers how their Novel Foods Regulatory Framework could be improved. New concepts such as collaborative regulation and conditional authorisation and supervision could significantly improve the regulatory approval process for novel foods such as cultured meat and seafood.

Improving efficiency

A re-imagined novel food authorisation process could start with a triage based on the level of risk arising from the product/process. Similar applications could be grouped together, and the framework could be tailored to provide a clear route for specific technologies.

The FSA could recognise the evidence base or decisions of food regulators in other jurisdictions. They could align food safety standards with peer nations and share evaluation resources. This collaborative approach could reduce risk assessment costs for food regulators and applicants.

One of the models being considered is conditional authorisation and supervision – as currently used for regulating pharmaceuticals. This would allow novel foods to be authorised based on current knowledge while recognising that more evidence about safety may develop over time.

Considering the bigger picture

The report advocates for risk-benefit assessment as opposed to only risk assessments. Food safety is vital, but the report suggests the current process needs to allow for sufficient weighting of potential benefits to broader society, such as novel foods' sustainability or climate-change benefits.

Better communication

The FSA should engage with developers long before they make a regulatory submission and proactively publish details of approved novel food products, safety evaluations, and regulators’ assessments (the authors suggest this “is not a deal breaker” for applicants). This information, along with clear guidelines and checklists of test and safety factors that could be considered in a weight-of-evidence assessment, should improve the quality of submissions and save time for everyone.

The report also suggests regulators should embrace their role in educating the public about novel foods. Provided a novel food is found to be safe, they should focus on helping consumers make informed choices (for example, by requiring clear and informative labelling) instead of making a choice for them through approving/not approving specific novel foods.

Rethinking food safety regulation

This report, read in conjunction with the Cultured Meat Safety Research Priorities: Regulatory and Governmental Perspectives reported by Vireo and New Harvest earlier this year, contribute to an increasingly clear vision for future food safety evaluation and regulation for cultured meat and seafood and related innovations. By working together to update and streamline the approval process, develop and share new safety testing methods, and share safety data and results, we can all respond to consumer demands for safer and more sustainable foods.