Summary
This 2019 EFSA editorial presents food safety regulatory research priorities for the period up to 2030, synthesized from a structured consultation with outgoing Scientific Panel members, EFSA staff, and stakeholders. The consultation ran from July 2018 to February 2019 and produced 73 discrete research contributions organized into three research streams: Safe Food Systems, Innovation in Risk Assessment, and Holistic Risk Assessment. The document is cited in the Heavy Metal Index as regulatory context: it identifies EFSA-endorsed research gaps directly relevant to heavy metals, including improvements to chemical-hazard exposure assessment, mixture and cumulative risk assessment, biomonitoring, aquaculture contaminant evaluation, and nanomaterial safety. The editorial does not contain measurement data or metal concentration values and cannot support occurrence-based evidence pooling.
Consultation process
The consultation proceeded in six stages (pp. 1-2 of the editorial):
- By July 2018, EFSA received 43 research-need submissions from Scientific Committee and Scientific Panel members and from EFSA’s own scientific staff.
- These 43 research needs were collated and shared with EFSA’s Advisory Forum for comment by September 2018.
- At EFSA’s Scientific Conference (18-21 September 2018), the wider scientific community contributed 30 additional submissions, bringing the total to 73.
- The various inputs were grouped by theme and tabled at the Stakeholder Forum meeting on 20 November 2018.
- The resulting research streams and priorities were presented at the workshop “Food Safety Systems for the Future” on 17 January 2019, convened by Directorate General Research and Innovation.
- The Scientific Committee reviewed and endorsed the research needs in February 2019.
EFSA drew additional input from the Risk Assessment Research Assembly (RARA), which in February 2018 brought together 200 participants from 39 countries to discuss research priorities.
Key numbers
The editorial does not report measurement data, metal concentrations, or quantitative thresholds. The consultative figures are:
- 43 research-need submissions received by July 2018 from Panel members and EFSA staff (p. 1).
- 30 additional contributions received at the EFSA Scientific Conference in September 2018 (p. 1).
- 200 participants from 39 countries at the RARA event in February 2018 (p. 2).
- 375 competent organizations in EFSA’s partner network, including public authorities, universities, and research organizations (p. 2).
- 16 scientific networks coordinated by EFSA, with representatives from all EU Member States (p. 2).
- 10 research themes in Annex A, organized under 3 research streams.
- 8 pages total, published as EFSA Journal 2019;17(7):e170622.
No analytical instruments, samples, detection limits, or recovery data are reported. These fields are not applicable to this editorial.
Heavy metals research priorities identified
The editorial identifies the following research gaps directly relevant to heavy metals risk assessment (Annex A, pp. 6-8):
Exposure assessment and biomonitoring (Annex A, Themes 1 and 6): Development of biomonitoring for cross-domain monitoring and exposure assessments; improving tools and approaches in exposure assessment in risk analysis; developing physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models and methods to convert external into internal exposure; non-dietary cumulative exposure and risk assessment; and open and interoperable data from various domains to support risk assessment.
Mixture and chemical-hazard assessment (Annex A, Themes 1 and 7): Integrated risk-assessment approaches on chemical and biological hazards including social and environmental factors based on a One Health approach; new tools for assessing genotoxicity potential of chemical substances, with an emphasis on mixtures; methodologies for the safety assessment of combined exposure and effect of multiple chemicals in food; and identification of Adverse Outcome Pathways, including integration of large molecular datasets.
Aquaculture and food-chain contaminants (Annex A, Theme 9): Increased food production from aquaculture to be assessed for residues and contaminants, as well as assessment of production processes (Annex A, Theme 9, verbatim item).
Nanomaterials (Annex A, Themes 1, 7, and 8): Methods for evaluation of nanoparticles in food; ability to assess safety and human and environmental impact of technologies such as nanomaterials and synthetic biology; and testing novel prebiotic drugs based on nanoparticles (inorganic) (Annex A, Theme 1, verbatim item).
Evidence Fitness
This source is classified Context only (EF-X). It is an agency editorial synthesizing research priorities; it contains no measurement data, no occurrence values, and no regulatory limits. It may be cited as background for regulatory-context statements about EU research priorities for chemical-hazard exposure assessment, mixture risk, and contaminant monitoring. It does not support any occurrence-based pooling, any product or ingredient contamination profile, or any certification threshold determination. The evidence tier is A because EFSA is a recognized regulatory agency, but the editorial form limits its use to contextual citation only.
Methods (brief)
The editorial used a structured iterative consultation design. Research-need submissions were collected in writing from Panel members and EFSA staff, shared with the Advisory Forum, then supplemented by in-person contributions at the EFSA Scientific Conference. Contributions were grouped thematically and refined through two additional consultation events before Scientific Committee endorsement in February 2019. This process produced an agency-endorsed priority list, not a systematic review or meta-analysis. No analytical methods, food matrices, or statistical procedures were applied.
Analytical instrument: not applicable (no measurement study). Speciation: not applicable. LOD/LOQ: not reported (not applicable to this editorial). CRM recovery: not reported (not applicable to this editorial).
Limitations
The editorial is explicitly forward-looking and aspirational rather than a systematic evidence review. Priority rankings were based on expert and stakeholder judgment rather than a formal evidence synthesis or quantitative weighting scheme. The document does not resolve the specific research gaps it identifies; subsequent EFSA scientific opinions and technical reports are the appropriate sources for quantitative outcomes in areas this editorial flags as priorities. The consultation drew primarily from EFSA’s existing network of EU Member State bodies; non-EU regulatory perspectives are limited. As a 2019 document with a 2030 horizon, some stated priorities have been addressed by subsequent EFSA opinions published after 2019.
Implications
Certification: This source provides no data for HMT&C threshold-setting. It may be cited when explaining the EU regulatory basis for continuing investment in contaminant exposure assessment and mixture risk assessment as background framing for a standards document.
Courses: Useful as a primary source for illustrating how regulatory agencies identify and communicate research gaps. Demonstrates the structured consultation model EFSA uses to translate scientific-panel experience into funded research priorities.
App: No change to any ingredient contamination profile; this source has no occurrence data.
Microbiome: Not directly relevant. The editorial mentions microbiome research as one of ten themes (Annex A, Theme 3) but does not connect it to heavy metals.
Provenance notes
The PDF used for this rebuild was retrieved from PMC Open Access S3 (PMC7009208.1; sha256 bb6e74a902376ec59ec196e53042c04c4706600aea8e9a83689d904ae33dd5fd). The original EFSA publication is accessible at the access_url above under CC BY-ND 4.0 as stated on the PDF title page. An earlier version of this page used sha256 411198f29754d852fecbc89f158bc0fc2661d1bb77c984a40694a3832c4d2c7e, which corresponds to a separate retrieval of the same paper from the EFSA website; that file has since been confirmed lost from raw/. The PMC OA file is the authoritative copy now held in raw/ and its hash is recorded above. The publication volume is 17(7), not 17(6) as recorded in a prior page version; the PDF title page and the suggested citation in the paper both state volume 17 issue 7.
Related evidence
No downstream wiki pages were updated on this rebuild. This source is context only and does not contribute to any ingredient or product contamination profile.
Update history
No substantive edit history is available in this build. The full commit record is available in git.