Food Safety Systems

Food Safety ◽  
2016 ◽  
pp. 3-31
Author(s):  
Peter Raspor ◽  
Mojca Jevšnik ◽  
Mateja Ambrožič
Keyword(s):  
2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Hadjigeorgiou ◽  
Elpidoforos S. Soteriades ◽  
Anastasios Philalithis ◽  
Anna Psaroulaki ◽  
Yiannis Tselentis ◽  
...  

This paper is a comparative survey of the National Food Safety Systems (NFSS) of the European Union (EU) Member-States (MS) and the Central EU level. The main organizational structures of the NFSS, their legal frameworks, their responsibilities, their experiences, and challenges relating to food safety are discussed. Growing concerns about food safety have led the EU itself, its MS and non-EU countries, which are EU trade-partners, to review and modify their food safety systems. Our study suggests that the EU and 22 out of 27 Member States (MS) have reorganized their NFSS by establishing a single food safety authority or a similar organization on the national or central level. In addition, the study analyzes different approaches towards the establishment of such agencies. Areas where marked differences in approaches were seen included the division of responsibilities for risk assessment (RA), risk management (RM), and risk communication (RC). We found that in 12 Member States, all three areas of activity (RA, RM, and RC) are kept together, whereas in 10 Member States, risk management is functionally or institutionally separate from risk assessment and risk communication. No single ideal model for others to follow for the organization of a food safety authority was observed; however, revised NFSS, either in EU member states or at the EU central level, may be more effective from the previous arrangements, because they provide central supervision, give priority to food control programs, and maintain comprehensive risk analysis as part of their activities.


Author(s):  
Lynette Morgan

Abstract This chapter discusses harvest and postharvest factors. Harvesting involves the gathering or removal of a mature crop, with minimum damage and losses, from where it has been grown and transporting it on either for direct consumption or into the postharvest handling chain for further storage and distribution. Determination of harvest maturity, hand harvesting, robotic harvesting of greenhouse crops, postharvest handling, grading and storage, fresh-cut salad processing, shelf-life evaluation, packaging, postharvest cooling, postharvest handling damage, GAP - Good Agricultural practices in Postharvest Handling, postharvest storage, postharvest disorders, food safety and hygiene, ready-to-eat, minimally processed produce, certification and food safety systems, and postharvest developments are also discussed.


2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 9-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret D Weinroth ◽  
Aeriel D Belk ◽  
Keith E Belk

CFW Plexus ◽  
2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Robinson ◽  
J. Levenhagen ◽  
C. Hurburgh ◽  
G. Clapper ◽  
B. Heidolph
Keyword(s):  

2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (52) ◽  
pp. 6317-6335
Author(s):  
P Mensah ◽  
◽  
L Mwamakamba ◽  
D Nsue-Milang ◽  
C Mohamed ◽  
...  

Contaminated food continues to cause numerous devastating outbreaks in the African Region. In Africa, a large proportion of ready-to-eat foods are sold by the informal sector, especially as street foods. The hygienic aspects of vending operations and the safety of these foods are problematic for food safety regulators. The global food crisis has worsened an already precarious food situation because when food is in short supply people are more concerned about satisfying hunger than the safety of the food. The aetiological agents include various pathogenic bacteria, parasites and viruses. Chemical contaminants are becoming increasingly important. Human factors including: unhygienic practices and deliberate contamination, environmental factors, such as unsafe water, unsafe waste disposal and exposure of food to insects and dust, undercooked food, and prolonged storage of cooked food without refrigeration are the main predisposing factors. WHO’s position is that food safety must be recognised as a public health function and access to safe food as a basic human right. The work of WHO in food safety is in line with its core functions and various global and regional commitments, especially the document entitled “Food Safety and Health: A Strategy for the WHO African Region (AFR/RC57/4) adopted in 2007. WHO has been supporting countries to strengthen food safety systems and partnerships and advocacy; to develop evidence-based food safety policies; strengthen laboratory capacity for foodborne disease surveillance; enhance participation of countries in the standard-setting activities of the Codex Alimentarius Commission; and strengthen food safety education using the WHO Five Keys to Safer Food . The implementation of the Regional Food Safety Strategy adopts a holistic farm-to-fork approach which addresses the entire food control system. Much has been achieved since the adoption of the document Food Safety and health: A Strategy for the WHO African Region, but commitment to food safety still remains low due to competing priorities. In particular, countries are now shifting away from fragmented food control implementation towards multi-agency and coordinated as well as single agency systems. The Codex Trust Fund has facilitated participation and capacity building for Codex work. Although funding for the Food Safety Programme has increased as compared to the levels in 2002, this remains inadequate. WHO will continue to support countries to strengthen food safety systems in line with its core functions and as enshrined in the regional food safety strategy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document