Second International Workshop on Conformity Assessment Rio de Janeiro, 11-12 December 2006

KETAHANANPANGAN KESEHATAN DAN LINGKUNGAN Second International Workshop on Conformity Assessment Rio de Janeiro, 11-12 December 2006 Presented by: Ulrich HOFFMANN, UNCTAD secretariat diabstraksikanoleh: Soemarnopsl-ppsub-Nop 2012

2 2 2 2 2 “Perception” on recent food scares and scandals Risk and cost minimization management by major retailers Demographic developments in OECD countries More sophisticated detection and testing methods Escalating Food Safety and Quality Requirements Key Reasons

Drivers of Private-sector Safety and Quality Requirements 3 3 3 3 • Governments “Name and Shame” policy in some countries. • Retailers legal responsibility (due diligence legislation in some countries) and increasing retailer own labels. • Retailers do not want to compete on the basis of “who’s food is safer”. • Shuffling off certain risk management costs to producers. • Globalisation of retailing and production (i.e. global sourcing) requires rigorous quality assurance system. • New food-safety, health and environmental requirements are being used as value-chain governance tools.

4 4 4 4 Putting Environmental, Health and Food-safety Requirements into Context Enhanced globalization of investment and trade lead to transnational application of specific EHFSRs (Environmental, Health, and Food-Safety Requirements ). Many EHFSRs are an attempt to alter market conditions to encourage sustainable production, trade and consumption patterns. With increasing liberalization of tariffs and quotas, EHFSRs have the potential of being turned into versatile non-tariff measures – difficult to distinguish justified from unjustified EHFSRs. A tool of companies in the competitive battle with rivals -- gain or temporarily maintain a competitive edge over rivals – certain EHFSRs may require anti-trust/competition law measures. EHFSRs are increasingly becoming an integral part of product quality. DgCsneed to exploit full national benefits of meeting EHFSRs in export markets, notably in terms of resource efficiency, pollution intensity, occupational safety and public health -- important are dynamic effects that also reduce adjustment costs.

5 5 5 5 Main Trends in EHFS Requirements 3 Trends: More strict (e.g. MRLs) More complex (e.g. traceability and auditing requirements) More multi-dimensional (e.g. see next slide)

Multidimensionality of Requirements 6 Pillars of Environmental, Health and Food Safety Requirements Plant/Animal Health Product Quality Food Safety Environment Social Product composition Product cleanliness Grading Labeling requirements Control of nutritional claims ISO 9002 Labour standards Fair trade standards MRLs Heavy metal limits Food additives Hygiene requirements Traceability HACCP Surveillance Quarantine Pest risk assessment Sanitation Control of water and env contamination Protection of biodiversity Protection of endangered species Recycling Organic prod requirements

Multidimensionality of Requirements 7 7 7 7

8 8 8 8 Main Trends in EHFS Requirements • • Growing importance of private sector standards and codes in the marketplace in general; • Growing importance of requirements transmitted to producers and exporters in developing countries through the supply chain; • • An enhanced relationship between mandatory and voluntary requirements; • • Greater reliance on traceability and related certification; and • • Greater regulatory responsibility on food and feed controls, including system of registration of crop-protection products for the exporting country.

9 Local Customs and Consumer Preferences Private Sector Competitive Strategies Laws and Regulations Standards as applied Enforcement Capacity Diverse Standards in National and International Markets Source: Jaffee, S. There is an ongoing process to put in place harmonized requirements and codes, yet the application is occurring at different speed and depth. • Differential application of requirements/standards is the norm, rather than the exception. • Weak compliance enforcement by governments, strong by retailers.

EHFSRs and the Limits of WTO Disciplines 10 10 TBT and SPS Agreements contain disciplines on the preparation, adoption and application of technical regulations, standards and conformity assessment procedures. • Four sets of problems: • Many DgCs cannot take advantage of the disciplines because a baseline of institutional capacity does simply not exist. • The procedural aspects of voluntary standards can be as important as for technical regulations, yet they are de facto outside WTO disciplines (also: non-governmental bodies that set voluntary requirements are not part of WTO debate). • Notification and transparency requirements need to be further improved • Access to information is difficult • No difference in notification between complex and simple EHFSRs • Format of notification should be changed (even problematic for industry representatives) • Justification, legitimacy and the role of scientific evidence under TBT / SPS.

Hierarchy of Trade-related SPS Management Functions 11 SPS Diplomacy Technically Demanding Risk Management Functions Source: Jaffee, S. et.al. Institutional Structures and Role Clarity Suitable and Effectively Implemented Regulation Application of Basic “Good Practices” for Hygiene and Safety Awareness and Recognition

Pillars of EHFS Requirements 12 12 12 12 Source: Jaffee, S. et al.

Main Problems Arising from Mandatory EHFSRsin Key Export Markets 13 13 13 13 • Stringent phyto-sanitary measures in certain countries, such as Japan and the United States impose restrictions on imports based on the country of origin • individual country listings of FFV approved for entry • cumbersome approval process for new products • More stringent food-safety requirements: • HACCP has become mandatory for all food categories (of both animal and non-animal origin). Use of HACCP is not mandatory in the case of primary production, which covers most of FFV; exception – packaging for semi-processed fruit. • Registration of plant protection products: problematic for those pesticides used in production of “minor crops”, which applies to most FFV exported by DgCs. • Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 on official food and feed controls obliges DgCs to provide information on the general organization and management of their national food control system, including assurance of compliance or equivalence with the requirements of Community legislation.

Spectrum of Private-sector Requirements 14 14 14 14 14 Whole Chain Assurance REQUIREMENTS Currently some 400 private food schemes PRE- FARM GATE POST FARM GATE Food Packing and Processing Growers Farmers Retail Stores Consumers • Key components • Pre-Farm and Post Farm • Gate Standards • Traceability • Documentation • Residue Monitoring Collective Individual EurepGAP SQF 1000 Integrated Farming of FARRE UK Assured Produce TESCO’s Nature’s Choice HACCP BRC ISO 9000 SQF 2000 HACCP ISO 9000 SQF 3000

Implications for DgC Producers/Exporters 15 15 15 15 15 • Move towards high-precision agricultural production methods. • Explicit objective to meet higher food-safety and quality requirements with environmentally beneficial practices (EurepGAP refers to itself as the “Partnership for Safe and Sustainable Agriculture”). • Supply-chain requirements tend to reinforce existing strengths and weaknesses of competing producers. Risk of marginalization. • Multitude of standards increases certification costs. Need for equivalence and harmonization, such as EurepGAP. Also increasingly important for enhanced South-South trade (particularly relevant in Asia). • Significance of adjustment costs and little opportunity for price premiums.

Interrelationship between Mandatory and Voluntary EHFS Requirements 16 16 16 16 16 • Different thrust: • mandatory requirements: equivalence of risk-outcomes (i.e. characteristics of finished product) • Private-sector standards: equivalence of production system • Results in a “tacit alliance” that benefits either side: • Reduced need for enforcement of governmental regulation. Rather than spending large amounts of money on extensive and costly testing of imports, governments can rely on the certification and assurance processes laid down by private sector bodies. • Private standards free governments from any need to interfere with overseas production processes. • Governmental regulation (reflecting private-sector requirements) is occasionally required to - harmonize requirements; • - level the competitive playing field; or • - reduce consumer confusion. • Private sector benefits from public funds that assist producers in meeting supply-chain requirements.

Advantages of the EurepGAP Standard 17 17 17 17 17 • Harmonization of procurement standard among key global retailers • However, retailers can still procure non-EurepGAP certified produce • Allows local adaptation through “interpretation guidelines” • Facilitates equivalence of standards through “benchmarking procedure” • Allows “group certification” • Can provide access to lucrative export markets, cutting out middlemen • Better transparency in development and revision of standard, compared to requirements of individual retailers • Appropriate EurepGAP implementation can lead to benefits and catalytic effects (in terms of reduced input use, better occupational safety, better soil fertility etc.)

Problematic Aspects of the EurepGAP Standard 18 18 18 18 18 • Risk of marginalization of small producers • (different experience in Senegal and Kenya) • Supply-chain governance implications • Control mechanisms without ownership • Favours FDI type of investment • Producers have to shoulder significant part of risk management costs (capital and recurrent costs: 20-200% of annual profit of producers of 0.5-6 hectares) • No price premium for compliance or advantages through use of a EurepGAP label • Risk of becoming dependent on servicing packages of globally active agro-chemical companies • EurepGAP is gradually becoming important also for access to the high-end domestic market in DgCs • Revision of EurepGAP standard every three years – moving target (DgCs have to seek active participation)

Key Challenges for Developing Countries 19 19 19 19 19 • Lack of local regulation/enforcement in DgCs • Lack of institutional support (notably significant deficiencies in SMTQ system - standards, metrology, testing, and quality assurance) • Weak regulatory system relating to the import, production and sale of crop protection products • Lack of knowledge on responsible pesticide use • Lack of extension services • Constraints of physical infrastructure • Constraints regarding farmer skills

Key Problems of Current Adjustment Approach 20 20 20 20 20 General Issues • Reactive/fire-fighting approach prevails (delaying compliance until after a crisis has occurred). • Piecemeal and fire-fighting approach on technical assistance • Insufficient participation in pre-standard-setting consultations by DgC producers/exporters • Costs of adjustment are often more apparent than benefits/ catalytic effects.

Swinging the Pendulum 21 21 21 21 21 Fire-fighting, reactive approach Pro-active, strategic approach INVOLVES: • In DgCs: • looking beyond costs at opportunities and catalytic role of new EHFS requirements for national economy (e.g. resource savings, enhanced occupational safety, environmental benefits, new business and export opportunities) • assuring coherent and inclusive policy approach towards supply-chain requirements (conceptual clarity on approaches and supportive policies) • Active participation of DgCs’ exporters in standard-setting consultations and revision process of supply-chain requirements (including insistence on ex-ante assessment of impact on DgCs).

Specific Elements of Pro-active Adjustment to Supply-chain Requirements 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 • Enhanced transparency in setting of supply-chain requirements (including consideration of international trade implications and impact on DgCs. Active outreach to DgCs on participation in consultative processes). • Develop coherent national strategies in DgCs to respond to new requirements (conceptual clarity, stakeholder dialogue/involvement). • Strengthen synergies between meeting external requirements and assuring domestic food safety. • Promoting strategic alliances among key stakeholders in DgCs. • Building regulatory/institutional capacity (on food control systems, information management, without being focused on a specific standard). • Pay special attention to needs, but also best ways of adjustment of small producers (strategies should be multi-pronged, i.e. enabling them to supply global retailers, national and international conventional wholesale markets, and national and international organic markets). • For further detail: See handout that distils findings of recent country-cases studies prepared by UNCTAD’s Consultative Task Force.

Key Elements of a Proactive Role of DgC Governments 23 23 Info gathering and dissemination – cost/benefit analysis Pay special attention to small producers Public- private sector dialogue Setting up and Supporting Quality Assurance Systems • Key Function of Government: • Taking into account broad commercial and developmental objectives. • Optimizing long-term costs and catalytic benefits of compliance. • Focus on wider distributional and societal impacts of the available responses. Clusters of Policy Tools Effective adjustment

FSHE FOOD SAFETY, HEALTH & ENVIRONMENT 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 Sumber: …….. Diunduh 27/10/2012

FSHE FOOD SAFETY, HEALTH & ENVIRONMENT 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Food safety is a scientific discipline describing handling, preparation, and storage of food in ways that prevent foodborne illness. This includes a number of routines that should be followed to avoid potentially severe health hazards. Food can transmit disease from person to person as well as serve as a growth medium for bacteria that can cause food poisoning. In developed countries there are intricate standards for food preparation, whereas in lesser developed countries the main issue is simply the availability of adequate safe water, which is usually a critical item. In theory food poisoning is 100% preventable. The five key principles of food hygiene, according to WHO, are: Prevent contaminating food with pathogens spreading from people, pets, and pests. Separate raw and cooked foods to prevent contaminating the cooked foods. Cook foods for the appropriate length of time and at the appropriate temperature to kill pathogens. Store food at the proper temperature. Do use safe water and cooked materials. Sumber: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_safety…….. Diunduh 27/10/2012

FSHE FOOD SAFETY, HEALTH & ENVIRONMENT 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 . Sumber: …….. Diunduh 27/10/2012

Second International Workshop on Conformity Assessment Rio de Janeiro, 11-12 December 2006

Second International Workshop on Conformity Assessment Rio de Janeiro, 11-12 December 2006

Presentation Transcript

Rio-de-Janeiro, December 2006

Rio de janeiro

Rio de Janeiro

Rio De Janeiro

Rio de Janeiro

RIO DE JANEIRO

2012 ROMS WORKSHOP – Rio de Janeiro

Rio de Janeiro