Food Defense – do conceito às atuais exigências do mercado internacional

O conceito food defense emergiu nos EUA como resposta aos atentados terroristas do 11 de Setembro, em 2001. A Food and Drug Administration (FDA) e outras agências desenvolveram medidas para proteger a cadeia alimentar do país aos ataques maliciosos. O objetivo consistia em adotar medidas preventivas da contaminação intencional da água e alimentos, onde indivíduos recorrem a agentes (biológicos, químicos ou físicos) com o intuito de causar prejuízos às organizações, governos ou à população. A vulnerabilidade da cadeia alimentar propiciou a difusão deste conceito através de normas certificáveis como: International Featured Standards (IFS), British Retail Consortium (BRC) e Food Safety Systems Certification (FSSC 22000). Este estudo tem como objetivo a emergência do conceito food defense (defesa alimentar), junto aos termos já conhecidos: food quality (qualidade alimentar), food safety (segurança alimentar), food security (acessibilidade alimentar) e food fraud (fraude alimentar), através das regulamentações, leis, metodologias e ferramentas para implementação de food defense nas cadeias de produção e distribuição de alimentos de empresas exportadoras até empresas familiares. Metodologia: análise qualitativa através de pesquisa bibliográfica nas bases Scopus, Web of Science e SciELO. Espera-se que os resultados deste estudo despertem a necessidade de formar profissionais da área de alimentos conhecedores do conceito food defense, e que orientem a adoção de medidas conceituais e práticas que previnam e controlem a contaminação intencional de alimentos, de forma a atender às exigências dos mercados consumidores e às normas e legislações vigentes pertinentes à qualidade e segurança dos alimentos.

Perceived food safety and food defense responsibility for farmers, transporters, retailers and consumers

PurposeContaminated food is a major source of illnesses around the world. This research seeks to learn how people assign responsibility for two food contamination risks and how they allocate costs to reduce these risks to four members of the food supply chain. The aims are to identify differences between countries and test options to control for cultural differences.Design/methodology/approachA random sample of online panellists from six countries (N = 6,090) was surveyed on how they assigned responsibility for controlling natural and accidental food contamination (traditional food safety) and for controlling intentional contamination (food defense) to farmers, transporters/distributors, retailer grocery stores/restaurants and consumers. They were also asked how they would allocate food safety and defense costs to the four groups. Differences between countries were tested with dummy variables and cultural measures.FindingsIn nearly every country, respondents assigned the least responsibility and allocated the smallest cost shares to consumers. In multivariate models, responsibility and cost-share results differed, suggesting that preferences varied by country and that respondents did not allocate costs the same way they assessed responsibility. The food safety and defense models also differed, implying that the respondents believed the two sources of contamination represented different risks.Originality/valueThis is the first study to examine how adults allocate the responsibility and costs for food safety and defense to farmers, transporters/distributors, retailer grocery stores/restaurants and consumers. Other research did not differentiate between these two food risks. This study also compared Hofstede's cultural measures with the recently developed Minkov's cultural measures.

Food defense e publicly available specification 96/2017

O Brasil possui considerável importância no cenário global da cadeia de alimentos de origem animal, sendo esta influenciada pela situação política, econômica e social do país. Neste contexto, iniciativas para defesa dos alimentos com base em requisitos internacionais se fazem necessárias para garantir competitividade estratégica em relação aos demais mercados e a saúde de seus consumidores. Atualmente, o Publicly Available Specification (PAS) 96 do governo inglês é uma referência por sua objetividade e simplicidade no tema, com a finalidade de garantir a segurança dos alimentos contra possíveis ataques intencionais. Entretanto, a indústria de alimentos de origem animal apresenta desafios proporcionais à sua complexidade demonstrando a relevância do tema. Este artigo tem o objetivo de apresentar uma releitura do PAS, direcionamentos para implementação de programa de Food Defense com base no documento e sua importância para a cadeia de alimentos de origem animal brasileira.

Assessing the implementation of food defense requirements in industrial meat-based food processors

Food defense is the effort to protect food from causing harm to the consumer, including security procedures to mitigate intentional acts of adulteration. To assure entry in new markets, food companies need to develop and implement food defense strategies through third-party certification. Although there are some programs designed to assist food business operators in creating effective food defense strategies, this is still not regarded as a priority by food companies. As a first aim of this work, a first-party audit of two meat-producing industries was performed to verify the implementation of food defense requirements. The second purpose of the work was to compare vulnerabilities identified in those two food industries with the ones detected in other previously certified food units in Portugal. For such, a food defense requirements checklist was prepared for the audit and a private certification database was consulted to compare audit results with those from other food business operators certified by at least one international food defense standard. Audit results revealed that both industries were above 50% in overall compliance regarding food defense requirements; still the main vulnerabilities were related to the lack of a food defense plan, the failure to identify critical areas, ineffective warning systems and no training in food defense. Similar vulnerabilities were detected in other certified national food business operators, leading to the conclusion that implementation of food defense requirements seems to be underestimated. As an intervention strategy proposal, food defense training would be of upmost importance to get staff and managers acquainted with the concept.

KETAHANAN PANGAN DALAM AL-QURAN DAN AKTUALISASINYA DALAM KONTEKS KEINDONESIAAN BERDASARKAN PENAFSIRAN TERHADAP SURAH YUSUF AYAT 47-49

is an agrarian country, but in reality food security is apparently still very fragile. The evidence is evident from the large number of people's food imported from abroad. There is still a lot of wrong food management which causes Indonesia to not have food sovereignty. This article discusses food security in the Koran by analyzing Qs. Joseph verses 47-49. This study is qualitative, literature and will conduct a search of Qs. Joseph 47-49. This article found that, first, Qs. Yusuf explained the meaning contained in the interpretation of dreams of the fertile period and famine explained what people must do to maintain food security. Second, the contextualization of Indonesia's food defense includes: Increasing the quality and quantity of agricultural products, environmentally friendly agriculture, proportional consumption, moderation, and knowledge of weather and disasters. Abstrak: Pangan merupakan kebutuhan esensial bagi manusia dalam melangsungkan kehidupannya. Indonesia merupakan negara yang agraris, namun ketahanan pangan ternyata masih sangat rapuh. Bukti itu terlihat dari masih banyaknya bahan pangan rakyat yang diimpor dari luar negeri. Masih banyak pengelolaan pangan yang salah sehingga menyebabkan Indonesia tidak mempunyai kedaulatan pangan. Artikel ini membahas tentang ketahanan pangan dalam al-Quran dengan menganalisis QS. Yusuf (12): 47-49. Kajian ini bersifat kualitatif, kepustakaan dan akan melakukan penelusuran ragam penafsiran terhadap QS. Yusuf(12): 47-49. Artikel ini menemukan bahwa, pertama, ayat tersebut menjelaskan makna yang terkandung dalam tafsiran mimpi, terkait masa subur dan paceklik dan menjelaskan apa yang harus dilakukan masyarakat demi menjaga ketahanan pangan. Kedua, kontekstualisasi pertahanan pangan Indonesia meliputi: Peningkatan kualitas dan kuantitas hasil pertanian, pertanian ramah lingkungan, konsumsi yang proporsional dan tidak berlebihan, serta pengetahuan tentang cuaca dan bencana.