Food safety and aquatic animals

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
European Commission, DG EAC – Unit A3
Advertisements

AGVISE Laboratories %Zone or Grid Samples – Northwood laboratory
Significance of ISO to the Food Industry
1 Collaboration between the 3 Sisters and the SPS Committee Dr Sarah Kahn Director, International Trade Department, OIE SPS Workshop 26 October 2009 Geneva.
Creating a world where environmental sustainability and social justice are the normal conditions of business Private standards and.
Technical Assistance and Capacity Building Related to the SPS Agreement The Contribution of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Workshop on SPS Coordination 17 October 2011 Codex Alimentarius Commission Standard-setting Procedures Selma H. Doyran Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme.
Geneva, Switzerland, June 2000
Office International des Épizooties World Organisation for Animal Health created in 1924 in Paris.
Application of the OIE-PVS Tool to Aquatic Animal Health Services Keren Bar-Yaacov CVO Norway, member of OIE-PVS ad-hoc working group OIE conference Aquatic.
Developing veterinary legislation in a WTO context OIE Global Conference on Veterinary Legislation 7-9 December 2010 (Djerba, Tunisia) Melvin Spreij Counsellor.
CALENDAR.
Break Time Remaining 10:00.
PP Test Review Sections 6-1 to 6-6
WTOSlide 1 The WTO TBT Agreement ISO CASCO/DEVCO – BIS Regional Workshop on Certification and Conformity Assessment: Building Confidence for Developing.
1 Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) Melvin Spreij Mobilizing Aid for Trade for SPS-related technical cooperation in East Africa Overview.
Workshop on Good Agricultural Practices, Rome October 2004 Good Agricultural Practices in Codex Jeronimas Maskeliunas MD, PhD Food Standards Officer.
Chumnarn Pongsri, Ph.D. Secretary-General, SEAFDEC Global Conference on Aquatic Animal Health Programmes Panama City, 30 June 2011.
Copyright © 2012, Elsevier Inc. All rights Reserved. 1 Chapter 7 Modeling Structure with Blocks.
The Role of the Veterinary Services in Food Safety
OIE International Standards The OIE Standard Setting Process Regional Information Seminar for Recently Appointed OIE Delegates Brussels, Belgium, 18 –
Before Between After.
2011 FRANKLIN COMMUNITY SURVEY YOUTH RISK BEHAVIOR GRADES 9-12 STUDENTS=332.
Clock will move after 1 minute
NORMAPME ISO User Guide for European SMEs The essence of.
C O D E X A L I M E N T A R I U S CODEX ALIMENTARIUS INTERNATIONAL FOOD STANDARDS Tom Heilandt, Codex Secretariat.
CODEX REGULATIONS NIGERIA AFLATOXIN WORKSHOP ABUJA NOVEMBER 5 TH 2012.
FAO/WHO CODEX ALIMENTARIUS COMMISSION (CODEX)
3er Foro Económico de Pesca y Acuacultura. La Acuacultura: un alterrnativa para la alimentación Mexico City, 25 – 26 November 2013 Dr Lahsen Ababouch Director,
EUREPGAP The European Principles of Food Safety. Increasing awareness of food safety in consumers greater variety of foods available for the consumer.
WTO’s Work on Private Standards Gretchen H. Stanton Senior Counsellor Agriculture and Commodities Division WTO.
Food Safety Legislation. Introduction Victorian England ( ) The history of much modern food safety legislation can be traced back to Victorian.
1 50 YEARS OF CODEX… a journey well travelled S Dave Chairperson Codex Alimentarius Commission.
FAO, Codex and other key international initiatives on GM food safety Masami Takeuchi, Ph.D. Food Safety Officer.
Good Hygiene Practices along the coffee chain The Codex General Principles of Food Hygiene Module 2.3.
Presentation 4.2 CODEX STANDARDS ON SAFETY Section IV Food Quality and Standards Service (ESNS) Food and Nutrition Division. FAO.
Food Safety Training Course Co-financiado:. Food safety Regulation.
FAO/WHO CODEX TRAINING PACKAGE
FAO/WHO CODEX TRAINING PACKAGE SECTION TWO UNDERSTANDING THE ORGANIZATION OF CODEX Module 2.4 Which committees should my country be involved in?
Codex Alimentarius: A briefing on the International Food Safety Body and its Dynamics Peter Sousa Hoejskov Food Quality and Safety Officer FAO Regional.
Good Hygiene Practices along the coffee chain The World Trade Organization Module 2.2.
Codex Alimentarius - basic principles- Prof. Elisaveta Stikova
The Impact of Standards and SPS in selected Food sectors International Agreements Related to Trade and Standards * WTO Agreement on SPS * WTO Agreement.
Health and Consumers Directorate-General (DG SANCO) Howard Batho, Head of import and OIE sector Unit D1, Animal Health and Standing Committees.
Improving the Safety of Food International aspects
Science - the basis of CODEX work. The Role of Science in Codex Decision-Making Key principles Risk analysis guide Codex stds from development to implementation.
“SA Good Agric. Practices and how it relates to Globally recognized GAP’s” - International food safety restrictions and requirements when exporting- International.
FAO/WHO CODEX TRAINING PACKAGE
IPC seminar Sustainability in the food & agricultural sector: the role of private sector and government Panel IV: Best practices / sustainability along.
Consultation on eco-labelling for fishery products.
UNECE International Forum on Market Surveillance and Consumer Protection UNECE, Geneva, November 2005 International Standards and Current Issues.
JON RATCLIFF Food and Agriculture Consultancy Services Ltd, Stratford-upon-Avon, UK EU FOOD SAFETY SYSTEMS.
The Codex Alimentarius Commission
/ 1 International Workshop for CIS countries “ The use of standards for fresh fruit and vegetables and dry produce in technical regulations and the application.
1 The Impact of Food Safety Control Malta June The Impact of Food Safety Control Malta June Enrico Casadei Food and Nutrition Division FAO,
1 The Future Role of the Food and Veterinary Office M.C. Gaynor, Director, FVO EUROPEAN COMMISSION HEALTH & CONSUMER PROTECTION DIRECTORATE-GENERAL Directorate.
Protecting the health of consumers and ensuring fair practices in the food trade VISIT OF CFDA TO FAO 12 September 2014.
JOINT FAO/IAEA PROGRAMME of Nuclear Techniques in Food and Agriculture 1 Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) &
CODEX ALIMENTARIUS RASHID AHMAD KHAN (31) MANSOOAR ALI (30) B. SC. (HONS.) FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY 8 TH SEMESTER (REG) IFSN UNIVERSITY OF SARGODHA.
FEFAC THE EUROPEAN FEED MANUFACTURERS CODE (EFMC) Bob Armstrong, Deputy President FEFAC.
SANITARY & PHYTOSANITARY MEASURES IN PRODUCTION PROCESSING FOR TRADE (LIVESTOCK & LIVESTOCK PRODUCTS) BY DR. (Mrs.) MARLINE SAMBO WAZIRI fcsn, fieon, ficon.
1 The contribution of VICH to the global One Health approach VICH5 CONFERENCE, OCTOBER 2015, TOKYO Jean-Pierre Orand, Anses, France, OIE Collaborating.
Public and private certification schemes to facilitate market access for sustainably managed fisheries Sustainable Fisheries in the Black Sea Committee.
The Codex Alimentarius Commission
FAO/WHO CODEX TRAINING PACKAGE
HACCP Essential Tool for Food Safety
Public and private certification schemes to facilitate market access for sustainably managed fisheries Sustainable Fisheries in the Black Sea Committee.
Animal production food safety
The WTO-TBT-Agreement
Presentation transcript:

Food safety and aquatic animals Lahsen Ababouch Chief, Fish Products, Trade and Marketing Fisheries and Aquaculture Department Food and Agriculture Organization Rome, Italy OIE Global Conference on Aquatic Animal Health Programmes: Their benefits for Global Food Security Panama City, 28 – 30 June 2011

World Fish Trade 2007 (by value) Quality requirements are dominated by three import areas, which represent three quarter of the world imports, EU, Japan, USA where as the exports are to 50% coming from developing countries

Fisheries and Aquaculture Value Chain (Estimated at US $ 818 billion) Capture fisheries US $ 100 billion Primary processing US $ 90 billion Secondary processing US $ 180 billion Distribution US $ 350 billion Aquaculture US $ 98 billion The sector of fisheries and aquaculture contributes significantly to national economies, income and livelihood for millions of people around the world. In 2008, the first sale value of capture fisheries was estimated at US$ 100 billion and that of aquaculture at 98 billion, in addition to US$ 7.4 billion of aquatic plants. This harvest undergoes a primary and a secondary processing before distribution, generating additional value at each subsequent step, estimated in 2007 at US$ 90 billion, 180 US$ billion and 350 US$ billion respectively for primary processing, secondary processing and distribution. This value addition is also accompanied by employment opportunities, especially for women employed in first and secondary processing in developing countries. Analysis of the dynamics of various value-chains in international fish trade can help understand the distribution of benefits in the value-chain and the linkages between the relative benefits obtained and the design of the chain. In an FAO project, comparisons are being made between domestic, regional and international value-chains with the view to understand better how developing countries can increase the value derived from their fishery resources. The project includes capture fisheries – marine and freshwater – as well as aquaculture and involves 15 countries, including Maldives, Bangladesh, Thailand, Vietnam and Combodia from Asia.

Historical background Attempts to codify food well known by early civilizations and during the middle age Scientific developments of nineteenth century More recent milestones 1963: Creation of the Codex Alimentarius 1985, the UNGA adopted resolution 39/248 on guidelines for consumer protection 1995: Creation of the WTO and signing of two agreements on The SPS measures and on TBT Initiated in 1960, work to establish the Codex Alimentarius finalized in 1963 when a Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards programme was adopted In 1985, the UNGA adopted resolution 39/248 on guidelines for consumer protection, which state that “when formulating national policies and plans with regard to food, Governments should take into account the need of all consumers for food security and should support and, as far as possible, adopt standards from the Food and Agriculture Organization’s ... and the World Health Organization’s Codex Alimentarius ...” The agreement on sanitary and phytosanitary measures and the agreement on the technical barriers to trade were signed by WTO members in 1995

Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement (TBT) Revised Agreement from Tokyo Round (1973 - 79) Purpose of Agreement: To encourage the development and use of international standards and conformity assessment systems to prevent the use of technical requirements as unjustifiable trade barriers To prevent deceptive trade practices Product (1979) vs. product, process and production methods (1995) SPS measures for agriculture and foods dealt with separately under SPS

Scope of SPS and TBT is different! “any measure” Scope of SPS and TBT is different! technical regulations, standards, conformity assessment procedures Central Governments, regional Governments, Non Government Organizations The SPS agreement Expanded and updated text from GATT (1947, Article XXII b) and from TBT agreement of the Tokyo Round (1973 – 1978) Purpose of the SPS agreement: - to ensure that measures established by governments to protect human, animal and plant life and health are consistent with obligations prohibiting arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination on trade between countries where the same conditions prevail. - Such measures shall not be applied in a manner that would constitute a disguised restriction on international trade The TBT Agreement: Revised Agreement from Tokyo Round (1973 - 79) Purpose of Agreement: - To encourage the development and use of international standards and conformity assessment systems - To prevent the use of technical requirements as unjustifiable trade barriers - To prevent deceptive trade practices Product (1979) vs. product, process and production methods (1995) SPS measures for agriculture and foods dealt with separately under SPS

SPS/TBT, harmonization and equivalence World Trade Organisation Guidelines Standards Codes of Practice of CODEX, OIE, IPPC or other international Organizations National Regulations

Objectives of the Codex alimentarius To protect the health of consumers; To ensure fair trade practices in food production and distribution; To coordinate the development of food standards and facilitate international trade in food

Management Organs of the Codex Alimentarius The Executive Committee The Regional Co-coordinating Committees The Secretariat of the Commission

Technical Organs of the Codex Alimentarius 9 General Subject (horizontal) Committees 12 Commodity (vertical) Committees 4 Ad Hoc Inter-Governmental Task Forces (JECFA, JEMRA,...)

General Subject Committees General Principles (France) Import/Export Inspection and Certification Systems (Australia) Food Labeling (Canada) Methods of Analysis & Sampling (Hungary) Food Hygiene (USA) Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Food (USA) Pesticide Residues (Netherlands) Food Additives and Contaminants (Netherlands) Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses (Germany)

Active Commodity Committees Fats and Oils (Malaysia) Fish and Fishery Products (Norway) Milk and Milk Products (New Zealand) Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (Mexico) Cocoa Products & Chocolate (Switzerland) Natural Mineral Waters (Switzerland)

UNIFORM PROCEDURE Decision to elaborate standard (Commission) Draft standard proposed (Relevant Codex Committee) Request for Comments (Secretariat) Amendments / Session (Relevant Codex Committee) Adoption as a draft standard (Commission) Adoption as a Codex standard (Commission) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Codex Outputs relevant to Fisheries and aquaculture Code of practice for food hygiene (GHP, HACCP, Risk assessment, microbiological criteria) Standards for fish and fishery products (Volume 9A: 16 standards on frozen, canned, salted and dried fish, 2 guidelines for sensory evaluation) Code of practice for Fish and Fishery products (GHP, GAP, HACCP) Several international risk assessments (Vibrios in seafood, biotoxins, antimicrobial resistance) Several principles and guidelines for food import and export inspection and certification MRL for veterinary drugs relevant to FFP MRL for contaminants relevant to FFP Work in progress (EC Viruses, Risk/benefits of MeHg or active chlorine, antimicrobial resistance, fish sauce, sturgeon caviar)

The food chain approach (FAO) Prevention at Source Risk Analysis Harmonization Equivalence Traceability Fish safety and quality from a food chain perspective should incorporate the three fundamental components of risk analysis - assessment, management and communication Tracing techniques (traceability) from the primary producer through post-harvest treatment, processing and distribution to the consumer must be improved. Harmonisation of fish quality and safety standards, implying use of internationally agreed, scientifically-based standards Equivalence in food safety systems – achieving the same results whatever means of control are used Increased emphasis on risk avoidance or prevention at source within the whole food chain – from farm or sea to plate,

Prevention at source Producers and processors are responsible for fish safety and quality along the food chain using preventive systems (GAP, GHP, HACCP and GMP) Competent authorities enact food laws and regulations, verify that producers and processors apply properly preventive systems (through inspection, audit and verification)

(interactive exchange information and ideas) The Risk Analysis Process Risk Assessment “scientific” hazards exposure dose-response synthesis uncertainty Risk Management “policy” social cultural economic Risk Communication (interactive exchange of information and ideas) Process Initiation

How do “experts” and consumers rate risks?

Food safety hazards from aquatic animal products Microbiological contaminants: Bacteria (Vibrio spp., Salmonella, Shigella, E.coli,...) viruses (hepatitis A, Norwalk) Parasites (nematodes, cestodes, trematodes) Chemical contaminants: pesticides, heavy metals, dioxins, PCBs,... Residues of veterinary drugs (chloramphenicol, nitrofurans, green malachite,...) additives (e.g. metabisulfites) Biotoxins: PSP, DSP, ASP, NSP

EU Rapid Alert System-by causes for Aquaculture   2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 CAUSE   total  50  101  247  103  137 (01-04) 46 total Chloramphenicol 44(43%) 44 188(76%) 102 73(71%) 13 48(35%) 8 26(57%) chemical nitrofurans 85 50 26 12 malachite green 1 10 14 Vibrio (parahaemolyticus/cholerae) 46(92%) 36 (16/20) 57(56%) 38 (25/13) 58(23%) 37 (27/10) 29(28%) 15 (13/2) 87(64%) (22/4) 19(41%) 2 (2/0) salmonella 6 17 4 biological mesophiles 3 listeria 34 7 e.coli others Labeling 4(8%)  0 1(1%) 2(1%) 1(2%) 0  temp.control 684 100% 379 55% 296 43% 9 2%

Sources of food safety hazards in aquaculture Farm and its surroundings Water Source of fry and fingerlings Feed Grow-out (practices, workers, animals) Harvesting and transportation Biosecurity vs GAP/GHP

Harmonization and equivalence Codex standards, Codes of practice and guidelines European Union: “Farm to Fork” Food Hygiene Package (2002 + 2005) FDA: 1997 (21CFR 1230): GHP, GMP, Guidance for hazards in fish and fishery products, Seafood HACCP Alliance training program Mutual recognition agreements

Placard showing project site Study of aquaculture practices, possible sources of parasites and pathogens that affect fish heath Develop site-specific good aquaculture practices and train farmers on implementation Training of the officers of Bureau of Fisheries Improve awareness in farmers about animal health problems and strategies for prevention of diseases Support to the Laboratory and training on monitoring water and sediment quality, monitoring use of chemicals by farmers

Desiltaion of ponds- about 1 meter silt was removed

Training of DOF officers on water quality and fish health management

Harvesting of demonstration ponds Ten demonstration and 10 non demonstration ponds Mean profit in non-demonstration ponds: Yuan 958 Mean profit in demonstration ponds: Yuan 1678

Gross Revenue increased by 14% Profit Doubled over the year Economics (US$ per ha) Gross Revenue increased by 14% Profit Doubled over the year 20 000 people reached by BMP programme 47 farmers in 2007, following BMPs; 2656 in 2010. Losses to disease halved, numbers making a profit doubled 150 farmers’ groups formed, 27 Petua Neuheun at the organizational level above Aquaculture strategy, spatial plan, tilapia diversification, studies on socio-economics, potential for freshwater and oyster farming Strengthening government capacity & support

Progress: 2007-2009 2007 2008 2009 2010 Villages 11 34 84 93 Farmers 47 260 1100 2656 Ha 22 184 1027 2442 FAO Aceh 601/ARC Jun 2010

Development of “private standards” Globalization of production, processing and trade Vertical integration and Consolidation “Supermarketization”, including in developing countries Increasing role of retailers as the last link between suppliers and consumers. The use of B2B standards to protect reputations Emergence of coalitions (GFSI, BRC) Food scares: Mad cow disease, Dioxin, Avian flu, SARS,... Loss of confidence in public control authorities Concern over the sustainability of natural resources, the marine fauna (dolphins, whales, turtles,...) and environment Increasing influence of civil society and consumer advocacy groups FSMs: food safety management standards; FSMS: Food safety management systems

“Corporate social responsibility” - Legality (IUU) - Sustainability - Certification - Eco-labelling - Tracability and chain of custody - Social and Environmental aspects As a result, major buyers have developed corporate social responsibility policies which now regularly include references to a range of private standards. The fisheries procurement policies of most large retailers typically include a significant sustainability component, often with targets for wild caught fish to be certified to an ecolabel, and for farmed fish and seafood to be certified to an aquaculture certification scheme. Suppliers working at the post-harvest level are increasingly required to be certified to a private food safety management certification scheme. The onus is therefore increasingly on suppliers to verify that their products meet certain standards. Certification provides this ‘burden of proof’. The costs and benefits of certification accrue differently to different stakeholders. Retailers are the main drivers for certification and reap the most rewards in terms of value-addition to their brand and reputation, risk management, ease of procurement, and potential price premiums, at relatively low or no cost (relating to chain of custody certification or licence fees). In contrast, producers assume the main cost burden. 32

Market Response Individual logos are the property of the owner and used for illustration purposes only

Implications Competing standards and labels can be confusing as to the value of the process Definition of boundaries between private and public sectors. Who is responsible for what? Duplication or complementarity Compliance with WTO rules Who bears the cost of certification Specific needs of small scale businesses and developing countries

Market driven phase ‘B2B’ Focus ‘B2B’ Focus B2C Focus Governments Policymakers Fisheries Bodies National Fisheries Fishing Farming Sector Processors Retailers

Guidelines for aquaculture certification Background Scope Terms and Definitions Users Application Principles (OIE) Minimum Substantive Criteria 7.1 Animal Health and Welfare (OIE) 7.2 Food Safety and Quality 7.3 Environmental Integrity 7.4 Social Responsibility 8. INSTITUTIONAL AND PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS 8.1 Governance 8.2 Standards Setting 8.3 Accreditation 8.4 Certification 9. Implementation http://www.fao.org/fishery/about/cofi/aquaculture/en

Lahsen.Ababouch@fao.org ! شكراً 谢谢! Thank you! Merci! Gracias! Спасибо 37