食品安全為當今的國際重要議題之一，根據「風險=危害+憤怒」的公 式，政府在管理有風險爭議的食品時，應兼顧科學證據與民眾感受。本文 試圖主張WTO授權會員就有害健康與生命的進口食品制定檢驗與管制措 施的SPS協定下的透明化與調和原則，與WHO、FAO與Codex等國際組 織建議各國政府管理國内食品與食品貿易的風險分析機制中的風險溝通 並不相同。進而主張SPS協定要求會員必須依據科學證據或國際標準制定 食品安全管制措施的規定，因為限制會員經由風險溝通將民意反映在風險 決策，使得民意無法成決策依據之一，將可能引發民眾的不滿與憤怒，甚 至演變成影響國内政局的國安事件。

Food Safety is one of major issues of global concerns. According to the formula of "Risk = Hazard + Outrage" both scientific evidences and public opinions shall be taken into consideration while managing the risk of domestic and imported foods. It is the intention of this paper to argue with that the principles of transparency and harmonization in the SPS Agreement should not be regarded as the process of risk communication which is an integral part of risk analysis for food safety which is proposed by the WHO, FAO and Codex for governments to apply. In addition, the paper suggests the rules of the SPS Agreement, which requires Members should ensure that food safety measures are based on scientific principles and are not maintained without sufficient scientific evidence, in fact leaves no sufficient room for risk communication or allow policy makers to incorporate public opinions into decisions making process. The absence of public opinions in risk control process may be a reason to trigger serious dissatisfaction and anger of the public and, in extreme cases, result in severe national security problems.