我國向以「美食王國」享譽國際，各種美食不但曾為國人共同驕傲，亦帶來大量觀光人潮與經濟收入。未料，2011年5月「塑化劑事件」揭開我國食安風暴之黑幕，此後毒澱粉事件、黑心油事件等一連串黑心事件爆發，不但使國人對政府食品安全行政管制失去信心，亦讓我國美食商譽嚴重受創。 政府雖於每次食安事件爆發後，隨即召開相應之各種食安會議，提出相關管制改革措施；更透過數次修改食安法，不斷提高對違反法規黑心食品相關業者之罰則。然而食安事件仍不斷爆發，黑心食品不但數量未曾減少，反而製造、加工方法更趨黑心；顯示我國食品安全行政管制完全失靈，傳統法執行制度陷入困境，亟需改革。 我國食安法於2013年6月進行重大修正，此次修正納入以預防原則為前提之風險分析模式，風險分析模式係由歐盟開始發展，主要包括風險評估、風險管理及風險溝通。我國雖擬納入風險分析模式革新食品安全管制，惟食安法似僅將核心置於風險評估之制度設計，有關風險管理措施著墨不多，風險溝通更是付之闕如。因此，修法2年多以來，食品安全仍未能有效管制，食安事件爆發後，更是主管機關手忙腳亂，消費者人心惶惶。 有鑑於傳統法執行制度陷入困境，無法完成食安管制之任務，食安法除納入風險分析模式外，尚設立三級管理機制，亦即採取公私協力與自主規制之手段，主要透過業者自我管理、建立通報系統等措施強化食安管制。藉由與私部門之合作，固可提高食安管制之專業與效率，惟因我國未能體察社會民情與企業文化之差異，徒使自主規制成為政府卸責之藉口，有待進一步檢討。 因此，我國應就食品安全管制應就立法政策、風險分析及供應鏈管制等三方面，徹底檢討並提出解決辦法。 / In Taiwan, “Delicious Food” is well known world wide, and is one of the most proud of issue for Taiwanese. Small eats, and a lot of them, are the big things in Taiwan, and attracted a lot of tourists and brought a favorable income. Unfortunately, the Taiwan food scandal was started by the overuse one of plasticizer as a clouding agent in numerous food and beverage. It followed by “Toxic starch” and “Evil oil event”, which led to lose confidence and ruin administrative regulation of food safety to Taiwan government. Furthermore, there was a huge impact on Taiwan delicious food goodwill in the world. After uncovered each food scandal, Taiwan government tried to organize numerous food safety conferences, and has taken measures to restrain food safety regulation. In addition to food safety law revision, the penalty provision has been enhanced for unscrupulous vendors of food industry. However, food scandal is keeping on going, and the events are increasing in numbers these years. The food manufacturing and refining processes has become more evil. It means that food safety administrative regulation is run out of order, and the traditional law enforcement has faced the difficulty in this changing era. Since June 2013, food safety law revision included the brand new “Risk Analysis” model into “Precautionary Principle” concept. Risk analysis started over by European Union (EU), which is a politico-economic union of 28 member states that are located primarily in Europe. “Risk Analysis” model has three components, including risk evaluation, risk management and risk communication. In Taiwan, we have already taken “Risk Analysis” model on board for the innovation of food safety regulation, but Food Safety Law focused in the accounting system design of risk evaluation. There is only few in the risk management, and no statements in risk communication. Two years after food safety law revision, we still found the administration office has difficulty in facing the new food scandal, and the general populations are still worry about food safety issue. In order to reform the traditional law enforcement in food safety, the Act Governing Food Safety and Sanitation Taiwan included the risk analysis model first. Furthermore, in Taiwan’s food safety regime, the three-tier quality control system refers to self-management by food businesses, testing by independent institutions, and inspections by the government. It means that public-private partnerships (PPP) and self-regulation become a part of new regulation system. Through the cooperation between Taiwan Food and Drug Administration (TFDA) and private industrial association, the professionalism and efficiency of food safety regulation will be enhanced, but this kind of cooperation might be become the reasons of shirking the responsibility of government. Further investigation is mandatory.