Precise Yet Uncertain: Broadening Understandings of Uncertainty and Policy in the BPA Controversy

Abstract

Bisphenol A (BPA) is one of the most studied and most controversial chemicals used by the food packaging industry, because of its endocrine disruptive properties. Part of the controversy is due to the uncertainty that surrounds the effects of BPA on the endocrine system. Uncertainty includes data gaps, methodological hurdles, incompatibilities between toxicology and endocrinology-based approaches, and so on. In this article, we analyze how uncertainty has been conceptualized and treated. We focus on the European Food Safety Authority assessments of BPA, and study how exposure and hazard assessments have evolved over time, how uncertainty has been analyzed, and how the agency responded to controversies. Results show that in the attempt to reduce knowledge gaps, assessments have become progressively larger, including more references, evidence, and effects. There is a tendency toward greater precisions and specification of results, and toward protocolization of all processes included in the assessment (from literature review, to uncertainty assessments, and public consultation). Yet, the uncertainty has not diminished following the increase in evidence. We argue that the strategy used to reduce uncertainty within risk assessment, namely including more variables, studies, data, and methods, amplifies the uncertainty linked to indeterminacy (as more results increase the fragmentation of the knowledge base due to the open-ended nature of complex issues) and ambiguity (as complexity gives way to multiple nonequivalent interpretations of results). For this reason, it is important to consider different types of uncertainty and how these uncertainties interact with each other.

Keywords: Ambiguity; EFSA; bisphenol A; endocrine disruptor; indeterminacy; risk; uncertainty.