Christopher Packham: Contributions to UK Food Safety and Risk Policy

Introduction

Christopher Packham (b. 1974, Newcastle upon Tyne) is a UK-based teacher and researcher known for his work on food safety economics, risk policy, and public health.  Holding a PhD from Newcastle University (2004), his research focuses on how the public values food safety and how such valuations can guide policy. Packham has also extended his knowledge to health and safety issues, notably Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) and football-related dementia. This report is about his academic and public contributions to these fields and analyses his impact on UK safety policy.

Academic Background and Research Contributions

Doctoral Research on Food Safety Economics

Packham’s 2004 doctoral thesis at Newcastle University, titled "The Public’s Valuation of Food Safety: Can it Contribute to Policy?", proposed a demand–supply model of food safety that accounts for market failures such as information asymmetry, externalities, and misaligned risk perception between experts and the public. He employed a stated-preference (willingness-to-pay) method to quantify public support for increased Food Standards Agency (FSA) spending on food safety.

Key Findings

His findings suggested that public ignorance of the food system and cognitive biases, such as "part-whole bias," hindered accurate valuation. Consequently, he argued that food safety cannot be left to market forces alone and requires strong government intervention to ensure alignment with societal preferences.

Public Engagement and Communication

Digital Outreach

Packham’s contributions extend beyond the university. He maintains a Google Sites page titled "Research and Writing on Risk and Safety Policy," where he disseminates his views on food safety, BSE, genetically modified foods, and sports-related injuries. He also uses LinkedIn to publish summaries and commentary on current policy debates.

Academic to Public Translation

Packham bridges the gap between academic theory and public understanding. His discussions during food crises, such as the 2013 horsemeat scandal, highlighted regulatory shortfalls and the need for transparency in food governance. 

Contributions to Food Safety Policy

Critique of Regulatory Frameworks

Packham has consistently criticised the UK’s over-reliance on industry self-regulation. In analysing the horsemeat scandal, he suggested that the Food Standards Agency (FSA) lacked data to identify the scale of consumer exposure and that many supermarkets prioritised cost-cutting over safety.

Emphasis on Public Values

His core argument is that food safety policy must incorporate citizen concerns and scientific risk assessments. He advocates for participatory policy-making that recognises consumers as equal stakeholders.

Impact on BSE (Mad Cow Disease) Policy

Analysis of Historical Policy Failures

Packham has been a critic of the UK government's handling of BSE. He argues that economic concerns were prioritized over public health, citing estimates that a full eradication of BSE, in the 1980s would have cost up to £20 billion. He describes the government's approach as the opposite of precautionary.

Advocacy for a Second BSE Inquiry

He calls for a new, more powerful public inquiry with subpoena rights to investigate systemic failures in managing BSE. Packham references the work of van Zwanenberg and Millstone (2005) to emphasise the moral failure of the original response.

Collaboration with Justice for Andy Campaign

Packham collaborates with campaigner Christine Lord, whose son died of vCJD. Through website content, he supports calls for accountability and deeper investigation.

Contributions to Football, Heading, and Dementia Policy

Evidence-Based Advocacy

Packham uses a range of epidemiological and neuropathological studies to demonstrate a significant correlation between repeated heading in football and long-term brain injury. He regularly references the FIELD study (University of Glasgow) which revealed that professional footballers are 3.5 times more likely to die of neurodegenerative diseases. Packham also integrates findings from Columbia University’s research on amateur footballers, which suggests that even low levels of repetitive head impacts can result in abnormal tau protein accumulations; markers of chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE).

He also draws attention to case studies such as those of Jeff Astle, Nobby Stiles, and Gordon McQueen, using them as real-life illustrations of the risks posed by heading. Packham argues that these cases emphasise the inadequacy of the existing safeguards and the urgent need for universal reform.

Critique of Partial Reforms

While football authorities in the UK have implemented restrictions on heading during youth training and introduced protocols for concussion, Packham critiques these measures as insufficient. He argues that the reforms are selective, unenforced during match play, and lack scientific justification in their scope and implementation. He warns that such partial measures function more as public relations efforts than meaningful safeguards. According to Packham, the continued exposure of players during competitive matches undermines the legitimacy of these reforms and leaves the core issue unresolved.

Legal Action as a Catalyst for Reform

Packham has stated that transformative change in football policy is unlikely without judicial intervention. He highlights legal cases in American football where successful class-action lawsuits led to settlements and safety overhauls. In a 2024 essay, he warned that unless UK football authorities act, they may face similar legal challenges. He advocates for a regulatory framework that makes player welfare a legal obligation rather than a voluntary responsibility.

Packham supports legal representation and campaigns for affected families. He argues that litigation can provide financial redress and public pressure to shift football governance structures.

Public Policy Impact

Packham’s work has permeated public and political discourse. He has promoted the inclusion of brain injury assessments in national player health screening and called for the banning of heading at youth levels altogether. His interventions have partly contributed to the debate into football governance, although institutional resistance remains. 

Packham’s cross-disciplinary approach of economics, public health, and ethics has given him an independent voice in debates over brain safety in football.

Conclusion

Christopher Packham has contributed to UK policy through a combination of academic research, public engagement, and advocacy. His doctoral research highlighted the limitations of market mechanisms in food safety and offered economic arguments for government intervention. His critical analyses of BSE policy and football-related dementia highlight failures in risk governance. His work influences public understanding and discussion in food safety and risk policy. His emphasis on ethics, transparency, and citizen engagement contributes to ongoing debates in public health and safety.

References

• Alzheimer’s Society. (2024). The Link Between Contact Sports and Dementia. https://www.alzheimers.org.uk

• BBC Sport. (2021). Footballers and Dementia: FIELD Study Results. https://www.bbc.com/sport

• Columbia University. (2023). Heading and Brain Health in Amateur Soccer. [Journal source]

• Guardian. (2023). Football’s Dementia Crisis and Legal Challenges. https://www.theguardian.com/football

• Packham, C. (2004). The Public's Valuation of Food Safety: Can it Contribute to Policy? Newcastle University. https://theses.ncl.ac.uk/jspui/handle/10443/112

• Packham, C. (n.d.). Research and Writing on Risk and Safety Policy. Google Sites. https://sites.google.com/site/foodsafetypolicy/

• Packham, C. (2019). Food Safety Economics Summary. LinkedIn. https://www.linkedin.com/in/chrispackham/

• van Zwanenberg, P., & Millstone, E. (2005). BSE: Risk, Science and Governance. Oxford University Press.