Food safety as a responsibility for the individual company and the whole supply chain

Food safety as a responsibility for the individual company and the whole supply chain

Dr. Hermann-Josef Nienhoff

China International Food Safety and Quality Conference, 07.11.2013

How voluntary quality assurance initiatives promote food safety

Food safety is a daily challenge for the whole supply chain

2 07.11.2013 China International Food Safety and Quality Conference

QS certification mark: a reliable trustmark for competitors and consumers

Food safety is a daily challenge for the whole supply chain

3 China International Food Safety and Quality Conference 07.11.2013

QS is the industry‘s self-regulatory quality assurance scheme

Prime responsibility of businesses

Industry joins forces and makes efforts within QS

Suppliers and customers can rely on each other

…and consumers can as well

Building trust is a daily challenge

QS certification mark: a reliable trustmark for competitors and consumers

Building trust in global food markets

Businesses share responsibility on top of legal requirements


Administrative laws Norms and standards Liabilities

Businesses‘ responsibility

QA schemes Offical control authorities

Multitude of stakeholders heterogeneous attitudes Differing structures

Sensitive products Diverse processes

EU-regulation No 178/2002

Self-assessment Food and feed business operators at all stages of production, processing and distribution…shall ensure that foods or feeds satisfy the

requirements of food law …and shall verify that such requirements are met.

Traceability They shall be able to identify any person from whom they have been supplied with a food, a feed… They shall have in place systems and procedures…

Society‘s confidence Critical consumers

Quality assurance from farm to fork

Voluntary commitment of the whole supply chain

QS is a transparent, cross-stage quality assurance scheme

to pursue a uniform understanding

to gain credibility of the businesses

to face crises together

to build mutual trust

QS as a reliable trustmark

QS certification mark for competitors and consumers

QS is an independent organisation

without political or economical influence


Food industry Agriculture

Feed sector Food retail

Process controls take precedence over final product controls

Three levels of control to ensure compliance with QS requirements

6

Integrity system

Independent inspections and laboratory analysis

China International Food Safety and Quality Conference 07.11.2013

regular self-assessments at

135,000 locations continuous sampling at

critical control points (> 2 M analysis results p.a.)

38 approved certification bodies

400 well-trained auditors

157 approved laboratories (standardised analytical methods)

Residue monitoring Feed monitoring Salmonella monitoring

Higher-level audits to secure scheme integrity

Laboratory performance assessment

Traceability checks

Scheme manual: uniform standards, rules and regulations

Internal self assessment and documentation

CHECKLIST

Feed and meat chain: 104,660 participants in 17 countries

Assuring food safety hand in hand


Food retail (23,500) Meat industry (660)

Agricultural production 31,000 cattle farmers, 40,100 pig farmers, 4,000 poultry producers 1,700 livestock transporters

Feed sector (3,700)

Traceability Self-assessment Hygiene Incident and crisis management …

Feed monitoring

HACCP

Raw material management

…

Feed monitoring

Animal welfare/transport

Salmonella monitoring

…

HACCP

Temperature registration

Animal welfare

…

Hygiene

Temperature registration

Training

…

Fruit and vegetable chain: 28,800 participants in 15 countries

Assuring food safety hand in hand

8

Production (13,300)

Wholesale (800)

Food retail (14,700) Traceability Self-assessment Hygiene Incident and crisis management …

Plant protection Maximum residue level Hygiene …

Storage Hygiene Training …

Hygiene Storage Transport …

07.11.2013 China International Food Safety and Quality Conference

Comprehensive data allow meaningful analyses

Number of audit results and analysis results per year


QS database

40,000 independent audit results

11,000 analysis results residue monitoring (fruit/ vegetables)

more than 80,000 antibiotic prescriptions

385,000 analysis results feed monitoring

1.72 million salmonella analyses

…

Monitoring of contaminants in feed

Risk-oriented control plans for compound feed and feed material

385,000 analysis results in 22,000 samples

Participation is mandatory for

Feed material producers

Compound feed producers

Feed traders

Control plans

Risk-oriented

Industry-sector-specific

Number of samples depends on total production


Total 385,086

Parameter

Pesticides 326,105

Heavy metals 21,076

Salmonella 9,665

Dioxin and dioxinlike PCB 7,366

Deoxynivalenol, Vomitoxin (DON) 5,406

Zearalenon 5,156

PCB (non-dioxinlike PCB) 2,960

Aflatoxine B1 2,495

Animal components 2,493

Antibiotic performance promoters 853

PAK 833

Ochratoxin A (OTA) 614

Number of analyses by parameters (2012)

Residue monitoring for fruit and vegetables

Compliance with maximum residue level

Mandatory control plans for producers, wholesalers and retailers

Risk-oriented sampling and specified control plans

Products‘ adherence to maximum residue level

plant protection products

post-harvest treatment substances

growing agents

heavy metals

nitrate

>1,000 samples monthly

out of 40 countries

46 % of the samples had no detectable residues

1.9 % of samples with complaints


Systematic traceability (using the example of pork)

Accurate identification from farm to shop


Agricultural production -Stock book -Marking of animals with stamp or ear tag

Slaughtering/deboning -Incoming and outgoing goods documents -List of customers and suppliers

Traceability of batches

Traceability of individual animals

Wholesale -Incoming and outgoing goods documents -List of customers and suppliers

Export -Incoming goods documents -List of suppliers

Livestock transport -Stock book -Marking of animals with stamp or ear tag

Fresh products are vulnerable to crises

Well functioning incident and crisis management is mandatory


Crisis management requires clear communication and coordination

Containment, information and clarification indispensable


Comprehensive information of scheme participants, authorities, public,… (based on reliable data and facts)

Drawing conclusions

Adaptation of requirements

Tightening controls

Sanctioning of participants

...

Providing clarity Conducting audits immediately Product controls Tracing back Coordination with authorities …

Initiating measures Blocking scheme participants Withdrawing products Informing customers and suppliers Raising awareness (Informing all possibly affected scheme participants) …

Incidents and crises

Contamination of fruit/vegetables, meat/meat products, feed Non-compliance with requirements

Media coverage

Avoiding crises right from the start

QS data as basis for clarification of incidents and more


Essential data

center

QS data as key factor in clarifying incidents

Audit results Monitoring results Traceability data …

Identifying critical developments at an early stage

Immediate inspections to provide clarity Data exchange

Network of information Views of authorities Network of experts

We cannot inhibit crises, but we have to act promptly, coherently and comprehensively

Economic and scientific cooperations can influence the communicative dimension of crises

Measures

Cooperating quality assurance schemes

country-specific and global quality schemes for

Feed and feed material

Meat and meat products

Fruit and vegetables

15 mutual recognition agreements to ensure transnational quality

Eligible to deliver into QS scheme:

5,450 fruit/vegetables producers

40,530 cattle farmers

14,710 pig farmers/abattoirs

4,750 feed companies

07.11.2013 China International Food Safety and Quality Conference 16

Exchanging information and enhancing QA on a comparably high level

Food safety requires continuous improvement

New information and a better understanding need to be adopted

Our economy’s self-regulatory scheme requires constant reviewing:

How to identify risks quickly and counteract actively?

How to better protect competitors, consumers and the scheme itself?

How to make it harder to break down or act in a criminal matter?

How to improve cooperation with official authorities?

Basis for our work

is a common understanding of trust among auditors, competitors and consumers

is not to blame the state or others

is not to scrutinise mistakes and

is not to spy on each other


Self-regulation of businesses and official control authorities

Proactive and constructive instead of reactive and destructive. In both directions!

Do we need official control authorities?

Yes, we do! Responsibilities can not be delegated!

the official authorities have a sovereign responsibility and they have to be supreme

instances without any economical influence

self-regulatory systems can only work effectively, if they are independent and

without any political influence

Self-regulatory systems and official control authorities can improve cooperation (with respect of data protection in a predefined way)

to assess and classify risks

to work together in case of incidents

to avoid double auditing and costs

to exchange critical findings


Regarding food safety: the supply chain is actively and jointly taking responsibility

Each company for its processes

In the voluntary self-regulatory system

The supply chain together for the consumers


Thank you for your attention!

Hermann-Josef Nienhoff QS Qualität und Sicherheit GmbH Phone: +49 (0)228 35068 0 E-Mail: [email protected] www.q-s.de

Food safety as a responsibility for the individual company and the whole supply chain

Business

food safety hand

quality conference1

quality conferencethey

quality conference326

quality conference2

quality conference6

quality conference7

feed monitoring31