The safety of horticultural produce

Effectss of public and private criterions used to guarantee the safety of horticultural green goods

Introduction

Standards as defined by Sykes ( 1990 as in Smith, 2006 ) is “ a specification or set of specifications that relate to some features of a merchandise or its industry ” or “ defined parametric quantities that segregate similar merchandises into classs and depict them with consistent nomenclature that can be normally understood by market participants ” ( Jones and Hill, 1994 as cited in Smith, 2006 ) . Food safety criterions are aimed at marinading nutrient safety throughout the supply concatenation – from farm to fork ( World Bank, 2005 ) .

Categorization of nutrient safety criterions

The nutrient safety criterions can be loosely classified into public and private criterions. the acceptance of public criterions can be compulsory but can besides be voluntary while private criterions are voluntary ( Smith, 2006 ) .

Public criterions

Codex Alimentarius ( nutrient codification )

Before the 1960 ‘s, states and regional organic structures had nutrient criterions implemented to protect consumers within their administrative boundaries. As trade expanded beyond state and regional boundaries, there arose the demand for a consonant criterion with a planetary influence. To this consequence, the Food and Agriculture Organisation ( FAO ) of the United Nations in 1961 established the Codex Alimentarius ( nutrient codification ) which is a digest of different criterions refering to the safety and quality of nutrient. It has since being administered by a joint committee ( Codex Alimentarius Commission ) of the FAO and the World Health Organisation of the United Nations with a adhering conformity in international trade ( FAO/WHO, 2006 ) .

HACCP

With increasing nutrient safety concerns across the Earth, the Codex Alimentarius ( Food Code ) Commission ( CAC ) has recommended for acceptance of a consonant and internationally recognized criterion, in this instance HACCP for the care of nutrient safety throughout the nutrient supply concatenation i.e. from the farm to the fork. In general, the CAC emphasises that nutrient and nutrient merchandises shall be safe and suited for human ingestion, free from off-flavours and any obnoxious affair. Unlike the traditional quality control measures which rely on terminal sampling for measuring possible jeopardies, HACCP is a nutrient safety system which adopts a systematic and preventive attack at placing and commanding possible jeopardies that are critical to nutrient safety. This system identifies seven basic stairss known as the seven rules of HACCP to place and command nutrient safety jeopardies or cut down them to acceptable degrees throughout the concatenation ( CAC/RCP, 2003: FAO and WHO, 2007 ) .

EC Regulation on pesticide residues on nutrient and provender of works and carnal beginning Manufacturers of fruits and veggies use pesticides to protect their harvests from pest infestation. The uninterrupted usage of these chemicals helps to command the plagues but some do non degrade rapidly and hence accumulate in the green goods to degrees that are mammalian toxic. Therefore, ingestion of such green goodss incorporating residuary pesticide above certain degree is insecure for the consumer. For this ground, the European Commission ( EC ) has set Maximum Residue Levels ( MRLs ) for pesticides on horticultural green goods. This is aimed at guaranting the safety of consumers particularly the vulnerable group ( babes, weak and vegetarians ) .Therefore, providers of horticultural green goodss have to follow with these criterions to keep a interest in European trade. The ordinance sets bounds for assorted pesticides and harvests. Where a peculiar pesticide has non been specified in the ordinance, a baseline of 0.01mg/kg is used as a baseline ( EC, 2008 ) .

Private criterions

Global GAP/EurepGAP

As indicated before, EurepGAP or soon Global GAP is an enterprise of retail merchants in the European states who usually import horticultural produce largely from tropical parts. In their quest to guarantee their clients of safe and quality produce, have instituted the EurpGAP or Global GAP enterprise as a criterion for the manufacturers and/or providers in these parts. The term “ GAP “ is an acronym for Good Agricultural Practices. Crop production begins from the farm and any handling pattern associated with a peculiar green goods at the production or reaping phase can act upon the quality and safety of the green goods at the postharvest degree. For this ground, the EurepGAP has established critical points and conformity standards for fruits and veggies aimed at following the GAP strategy on farms. The countries of much accent in this regard include input supply, production patterns, worker wellness and safety every bit good as environmental issues ( European Commission, 2006 ) .

Safe Quality Food codification 1000

The Safe Quality Food codification 1000 is a HACCP – based system that is designed to guarantee that primary manufacturers demonstrates their due diligence in the production of quality and safe nutrient as per the demands of the consumer. It was established in 1994 in Australia but has since 2004 been administered by the Food Marketing Institute in the US mandated to manage nutrient safety issues non merely in the US but around the Earth. The codification ensures that manufacturers undergo a three point enfranchisement system i.e. Food safety basicss, certified HACCP based nutrient safety programs and a comprehensive nutrient safety and quality direction systems. They have to show their due diligence on these three systems over the full primary production procedure every bit good as field handling of harvested green goods with mention to HACCP. It is a system that has been recognised by the Global Food Safety Initiative of the CIES and its ideal for manufacturers engaged in direct supply to retail merchants or stock agents ( Safe Quality Food Institute, 2009 ) .

Assured Food Standards

These criterions were established in the 1990s in the UK by retail merchants of fresh horticultural green goods. They have been benchmarked against the Global GAP criterions and hence implore agriculturists to show due diligence by following with the criterions to bring forth quality and safe nutrient for UK consumers. The criterions topographic point accent on environmental and microbiological issues throughout the supply concatenation. Agriculturists certified under these criterions are obliged to follow an integrated plague direction system with minimum usage of inorganic pesticides ( Assured Produce, 2008 ) .

Effectss of public and private nutrient safety criterions on horticultural green goods

Decrease in food-borne unwellnesss: –the conformity with nutrient safety criterions whether private or public has led to reduced instances of food-borne unwellnesss. DEFRA ( 2009 ) reported that the Food Standards Agency ‘s enterprise to cut down food-borne unwellnesss in England and Wales has resulted in the diminution of food-borne unwellnesss by 27 % in 2008 over a 10 twelvemonth span.

Trade harmonization: –the establishment of public criterions peculiarly the Codex Alimentarius brings together criterions of different economic systems such that international trade can fall back to the Codex Alimentarius in finding the criterions for a peculiar trade good or class of trade goods. This ensures that trade can be conducted in mode that is affable for both exporters and importers ( Wouterset Al. , 2009 ) .

Market entree: –the acceptance and pattern of nutrient safety criterions increases importer assurance in the provider as nutrient supplied would be considered safer and let easy entree to international market. A instance in point is the vegetable agriculturists in Kenya providing British supermarkets as the former have invested in nutrient safety criterions required by the supermarkets and hence have unimpeded entree ( World Bank, 2005 ) .

Improved efficiency in production and market: –through the acceptance of Good Agricultural Practices ( GAP ) and appropriate postharvest engineerings, manufacturers increase their productiveness, outputs and income ( export ) borders every bit good as the safety of their supplies ( Graffham, 2007 ) .

Conformity costs: –in order to keep a portion in the international market, horticultural green goods providers ought to follow steps to guarantee conformity with the criterions. This extra committedness imposes a cost that makes the small-scale and medium-scale provider apt to be knocked out of concern. This has been the instance of small-scale husbandmans seeking to follow EurepGap and British Retail Consortium Standards. It was estimated by Frohberget Al. , ( 2006 ) that it cost a moderate-sized tomato farm of 10 hour angles US $ 71, 0000 to follow with EurepGap criterions, the cost of which is 8 % of production cost per hectare. These costs harmonizing to Henson ( 2006 ) are like to be more in states with less-developed nutrient safety criterions.

Trade barriers: –the scene of criterions largely by the developed importation states poses trade limitation to most underdeveloped ( exporting ) states neglecting to run into these criterions. For case, a survey by Graffhamet Al. , ( 2007 as cited in Henson and Humphrey, 2009 ) , showed that the debut of enfranchisement for husbandmans providing to UK supermarkets caused a bead in Numberss by up to 50 % .

Mentions

Assured Produce ( 2008 ) . ” Assured produce generic protocol criterions ” . Assured Produce, October Issue. No. 1

CAC/RCP ( 2003 ) . “ Recommended international codification of pattern: General rules of nutrient hygiene ” .1-1969, Rev.4.

DEFRA ( 2009 ) . “ Sustainable agriculture and nutrient strategy- index fact aheet ” . [ Online ] : www.defra.gov.uk.. [ Accessed on 14th Dec.2009 ] .

European Commission ( 2006 ) . ” Case surveies ” . 5 EurepGAP. Directorate General, Joint Research Centre/Institute of Prospective Technological Studies ( Seville ) . Sustainability in agribusiness, nutrient and wellness.

European Commission ( 2008 ) . “ New regulations on pesticide residue in nutrient ” . Directorate – General for wellness and consumers. Factsheet. September.

FAO and WHO ( 2006 ) . “ Understanding the codex alimentarius ” . Third edition. Codex secretariat. FAO/WHO nutrient criterions programme. FAO, Rome.

FAO and WHO ( 2007 ) . “ Fresh fruits and veggies ” . Codex Alimentarius. First edition. pp 160-168.

Frohberg, K. , Grote, U. , and Winter, E. ( 2006 ) . “ EU nutrient safety criterions, traceability and other ordinances: a turning trade barrier to developing states exports? “ . Conference paper. International Association of Agricultural Economists. Gold Coast, Australia. Augut 12-18.

Graffham, A. ( 2007 ) . “ Public and private criterions -trends in the gardening export sector from sub-Saharan Africa ” . Regoverning market. Small-scale manufacturers in modern agrifoods market. Information sheet. Swedish International Development Agency ( SIDA ) .

Henson, S. , and Humphrey, J. ( 2009 ) . “ The impacts of private nutrient safety criterions on the nutrient concatenation and on public standard-setting procedure ” . Joint FAO/WHO nutrient criterions programme. Codex Alimentarius Commission. FAO central office. Rome.

Henson, S. ( 2006 ) . “ The function of public and private criterions in modulating international nutrient markets ” . IATRC summer symposium, May. Food ordinance and trade: institutional model, constructs of analysis and empirical evidenc.Bonn, Germany.

Safe Quality Food Institute ( 2009 ) . “ SQF 1000 codification: A HACCP -based provider confidence codification for the primary manufacturer. 5th.edition 2245 Crystol thrust. Suite 8800. Airlington. VA 22202 USA.

Smith, G. ( 2006 ) . “ Interaction of public and private criterions in the nutrient concatenation ” . Working party on agricultural policies and markets. Directorate for nutrient, agribusiness and piscaries. Committee for agribusiness. Administration for Economic Co-operation and Development.

World Bank ( 2005 ) . “ Food safety and agricultural wellness criterions: challenges and chances for developing state exports ” . Report No.31207. Poverty decrease and economic direction trade unit and agricultural and rural development section.

Wouters, J. , Marx, A. , and Hachez, N. ( 2009 ) . “ In hunt of a balanced relationship: public and private nutrient safety criterions and international jurisprudence ” . Working paper, No. 29. Leuven Centre for Global Governance Studies. Katholieke Universiteit, Leuven. Available online: hypertext transfer protocol: //www.ggs.kuleuven.be/nieuw/publications/working % 20papers/new_series/wp29.pdf.

[ Accessed on 3rd Feb. , 2010 ] .