(Regulatory Impact Assessment) ITP602 Purwiyatno Hariyadi · Old Concept Purwiyatno Hariyadi phariyadi.staff.ipb.ac.id ... phariyadi.staff.ipb.ac.id 4 Purwiyatno Hariyadi phariyadi.staff.ipb.ac.id

____________________________ITP602: Analisis Dampak RegulasiProgram Magister Teknologi Pangan - Keamanan Panganphariyadi.staff.ipb.ac.id 1

Purwiyatno Hariyadiphariyadi.staff.ipb.ac.id

MPTP, Dept ITP , Fateta, IPB

Analisis Dampak Regulasi (Regulatory Impact Assessment)

ITP602




Keamanan Pangan?

• kondisi dan upaya yang diperlukan untuk mencegahpangan dari kemungkinan cemaran biologis, kimia, dan benda lain yang dapat mengganggu, merugikan, dan membahayakan kesehatan manusia serta tidakbertentangan dengan agama, keyakinan, dan budayamasyarakat sehingga aman untuk dikonsumsi. (UU No 18/2012)

Food safety?

• Safe = Reasonable certainty of no Harm (FD&C Act)

… Notes : Fokus pd Regulasi Keamanan Pangan




How safe is safe enough?











Old Concept



… Notes :




… Notes :



1. Transparan (~informasi)

2. Terbuka (~ keterlibatan)

3. Konsensus dan Tidak Memihak

4. Efektif dan Relevan

5. Koheren ( ~ harmonisasi)

6. Dimensi pengembangan

Prinsip Pengembangan Standar/Regulasi




~ WTO Code of good practice pengembangan SNI

a. OpenessTerbuka bagi agar semua stakeholder yang berkepentingan dapat berpartisipasi dalam pengembanganSNI.

b. TransparencyTransparan agar semua stakeholder yang berkepentingan dapat mengikuti perkembangan SNI mulaidari tahap pemrograman dan perumusan sampai ke tahap penetapannya . Dan dapat dengan mudahmemperoleh semua informsi yang berkaitan dengan pengembangan SNI;

c. Consensus and impartiality Tidak memihak dan konsensus agar semua stakeholder dapat menyalurkan kepentingannya dan diperlakukan secara adil;

d. Effectiveness and relevanceEfektif dan relevan agar dapat memfasilitasi perdagangan karena memperhatikan kebutuhan pasar dan tidak bertentangan dengan peraturan perundangundangan yang berlaku;

e. CoherenceKoheren dengan pengembangan standar internasional agar perkembangan pasar negara kita tidakterisolasi dari perkembangan pasar global dan memperlancar perdagangan internasional; dan

f. Development dimension Berdimensi pembangunan agar memperhatikan kepentingan publik dan kepentingan nasional dalammeningkatkan daya saing perekonomian nasional.




No Kategori Pelaksanaan berdasarkan hasilsurvey

Rekomendasi

1 Transparan • 18,33% responden: tidakmengetahui prosedur

• 34,43% responden: sulitmendapatkan info

• 40,91% responden yang mengetahui dari web

Publikasi via website agar mempermudah

2 Keterbukaan • 40% responden belum dilibatkandlm pantek

• 18,64% tidak pernah dimintaimasukkan

• 54,39% belum aktif mengusulkanstandar

Optimalisasi peransemua stakeholdermelalui asosiasi


Sumarto., Hariyadi, P. dan Purnomo, E.H. 2014. Kajian Proses Perumusan Standar dan Peraturan Keamanan Pangan di Indonesia. PANGAN, Vol 23 No. 2 Juni 2014. Hal 108-119




3 Konsensusdan TidakMemihak

• 43,33% responden tidak dilibatkanpengambilan keputusan

• 55,56% responden: hanyasebagian aspirasinya diterima

• Perbedaan penilaian antarapemerintah dan industri (terkaitproporsi pengambilan keputusan)

Buat mekanismeyang menjaminbahwa semuamasukan berbagaiinstansidipertimbangkan

4 Efektif danRelevan

• 28,85% responden: hanyasebagian standar yg diterapkan

• 53,33% responden: kendalapenerapan krn keterbatasan lab uji

• 98,28% responden: kesehatanadalah faktor utama

Perlu dilakukankajian dampak dan kesiapaninfrastruktur RIA

Prinsip Pengembangan Standar/RegulasiNo Kategori Pelaksanaan berdasarkan hasil

surveiRekomendasi




5 Koheren •32,76% dan 18,96% responden: cukup dan kurang memperhatikanperaturan/standar lain di dalamnegeri

•74,65% responden: Codex sebagairujukan utama

Jika data diIndonesia belumtersedia, menggunakanstandar Codex sbgrujukan utama

6 Dimensipengem-bangan

•Seluruh responden: faktorpengembangan bahan baku lokal, pengembangan UMKM, peningkatan daya saing produkIndonesia penting diperhatikan

Pengembanganbahan baku lokal, UMKM, peningkatandaya saing produkIndonesia dijadikanpertimbangan dalamperumusan standar

Prinsip Pengembangan Standar/RegulasiNo Kategori Pelaksanaan berdasarkan hasil

surveiRekomendasi





Garis mutu

Standar Deviasi

Standar/Regulasi dan “Pembangunan”



TMS MS

Standar Deviasi

Garis mutuStandar





MS

Standar Deviasi

Garis mutuStandar




TMS MS

Standar Deviasi

Garis mutuStandar





Populasi produk

pangan yang memerlukan pembinaan

mutu

Standar Deviasi

Garis mutuStandar




Standar Deviasi

PembinaanAkan

mendorong TMS MS

Garis mutuStandar





Standar Deviasi

Standar Garis mutu




SNI (2000) CFU : 106

Tidak memenuhi SNI

?

Contoh Kasus: SNI Susu Segar




In 1997 the European Commission proposed a uniform/harmonized standard for total aflatoxins, setting the acceptable level of the contaminant in food products (European Commission, 1997).

• 4 ppb in cereals, edible nuts, dried and preserved fruits, and groundnuts intended for direct human consumption, and

• 10 ppb in groundnuts subject to further processing. • 0.05 ppb for Aflatoxin M1 in milk.

The harmonized standard for the European Union is tighter than those which have been applied in most member countries

Case of Aflatoxin



Maximum allowable aflatoxin levels in Europe and Africa (ppb) [T. Otsuki et al. / Food Policy 26 (2001) 495–514]

Case of Aflatoxin




Case of AflatoxinMaximum allowable aflatoxin levels in Europe and Africa (ppb) [T. Otsuki et al. / Food Policy 26 (2001) 495–514]



Case of AflatoxinMaximum allowable aflatoxin levels in Europe and Africa (ppb) [T. Otsuki et al. / Food Policy 26 (2001) 495–514]




*applies to cereals & cereal products, nuts not subject to further processing, & dried fruit

Case of Aflatoxin



Case of Aflatoxin




Case of Aflatoxin

What do U think

?



Case of Aflatoxin




Case of Aflatoxin



Case of Aflatoxin




Case of Aflatoxin



• “Milder” calculation: $450 million annual loss to ALL food exporters if ALL nations harmonized to EU aflatoxin standard (Wu, 2004)

• Strict aflatoxin standards can have severe economic impacts

• “A World Bank study has calculated that the European Union regulation on aflatoxins costs Africa $670 million each year in exports of cereals, dried fruit and nuts. And what does it achieve? It may possibly save the life of one citizen of the European Union every two years… • Surely a more reasonable balance can be found.” --

Kofi Annan, former UN Secretary General

Case of Aflatoxin








… Key word



… Key word• “Milder” calculation: $450 million annual loss to ALL food

exporters if ALL nations harmonized to EU aflatoxin standard (Wu, 2004)




RIA








… RIA : Effective vs Efficient

RIA

… Key word

RIA



… Framework?

• What, in general terms, is the problem to be addressed?

• What is the specific policy objective to be achieved?

• What are the different ways of achieving it?




… Framework? Impact?

• What groups in society are being affected;

• What is the size of each group;

• What is the nature of the impact on each group;

• How large are these effects;

• How long will these effects persist?



… Framework? Cost?

• Buying new equipment needed to comply with regulations;

• Employing additional staff to work on regulatory compliance;

• Employing consultants or other sources of expertise to help with regulatory compliance;

• Changes in production processes made necessary by regulations;

• Other increases in the costs of producing goods;

• Collecting and storing information that the regulations require them to report or keep.




… Framework? Cost? Analysis?

• Risk/Benefit analysis

• Benefit/cost analysis

• Break even analysis

• Cost-effectiveness analysis

• Which of the possible ways of achieving the regulatory objective has the lowest cost?

• If regulation (or policy action) is to proceed, which option is preferable?

• Etc???




Clearly outline the benefits and costs expected from the regulatory proposal for each group;

• Administrative

• Economic

• Social

• Environmental

• Enforcement and Compliance





Data Collection?

• Literature reviews• Review of experience in other countries• Other government agencies• Business Test Panels• Consultation with Stakeholders• Surveys



… Example? Cost? Analysis?




















• ALOP ?• ALARA ?




• ALOP ?





• ALOP ?




• ALOP ?




Table 4: Weekly fish consumption amounts required to reach PTWI of 1.6 μg/kg bw at various methylmercury concentrations.


• ALOP ?




• ALARA ?





• ALARA ?




• ALARA ?





• ALARA ?

• ALARA : As Low as Reasonably Achievable

• Case of “Irreducible level” that concentration of a substance (hazard)

which cannot be eliminated from a food without involving the discarding of that food altogether, severely compromising the ultimate availability of food supplies




• ALARA ?

• ALARA : As Low as Reasonably Achievable

• The phrase refers to a principle of keeping hazards in food as low as can be achieved, based on technologic and economic considerations.





• ALARA ?

= f(ALOP)




• ALARA ?

?





• Risk/Benefit ratio?




• Risk/Benefit ratio?





• Chasing zero ?



TERIMAKASIHphariyadi.staff.ipb.ac.id

(Regulatory Impact Assessment) ITP602 Purwiyatno Hariyadi · Old Concept Purwiyatno Hariyadi phariyadi.staff.ipb.ac.id ... phariyadi.staff.ipb.ac.id 4 Purwiyatno Hariyadi phariyadi.staff.ipb.ac.id

Documents