Consumers, the food industry, and the government are the main actors in the area of food safety and the embedded domain of public health. Theoretically, only by balancing power among the three actors will desired food safety be maintained, even though the three actors have different preferences. Nevertheless, the industry frequently plays the leading role in the market because of its superiority in information possession. Thus, the government usually leans toward collaborating with the industry, leaveing consumers under industry domination in the long run. In recent years, food scandals broke out one after another in Taiwan, forcing the government to amend the Act for governing food safety and public health, while hoping to better manage the market. Yet, the government’s response to address food safety caused an imbalance of rights and liabilities distribution among the three actors. Particularly, the obligations of the food industry increased, and the responsibilities of the government extended. This paper argues that such imbalance not only induced the incremental incidence of food scandals in Taiwan over the past years, but also worsened the interaction between the three actors, sharpening hostility among the three parties. As a result, the Taiwan’s Act Governing Food Sanitation has features of the law of the enemy. This article argues for the appropriate distribution of rights and liabilities of the three actors, and risk communication as remedy to the imbalance in the market and legislation.
Please enter the journal title, keywords, and author-related information you want to query.