The emergence of a concept
2. Quasi-states? The unexpected rise of private food law
3.18 EurepGAP/GlobalGAP 116
EurepGAP started in 1997 as an initiative by retailers belonging to the Euro-Retailer Produce Working Group (EUREP). British retailers in conjunction with supermarkets in continental Europe were the driving forces. They reacted to
113 Luning, P.A., Marcelis, W.J. and Jongen, W.M.F., 2009, Food Quality Management. A techno-managerial approach, Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, the Netherlands, p. 225 refer to Good Practices as ‘self-discipline’.
114 The Codex Basic Text on hygiene, 2009, is a standard work comprising of: Recommended International Code of Practice General Principles of Food Hygiene CAC/RCP 1-1969, Rev. 4 (2003); Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) System and Guidelines for its Application; Principles for the Establishment and Application of Microbiological Criteria for Foods CAC/GL 21 – 1997, and Principles and Guidelines for the Conduct of Microbiological Risk Assessment CAC/GL-30 (1999).
115 See for example the Dutch HACCP certification scheme (based in Apeldoorn, the Netherlands). See:
http://www.foodsafetymanagement.info.
116 Information from the GlobalGAP website http://www.globalgap.org.
growing concerns of consumers regarding product safety, environmental and labour standards and decided to harmonise their own often very different standards for agricultural products.
The development of common certification schemes was considered to also be in the interest of producers. Those with contractual relations to several retailers explained that they had to undergo multiple audits against different criteria every year. With this is in mind, EUREP started working on harmonised standards and procedures for the development of Good Agricultural Practices117 in conventional agriculture including highlighting the importance of Integrated Crop Management and a responsible approach to worker welfare. This resulted in what was initially called the European Retailers Protocol for Good Agricultural Practice (EurepGAP).
Over the next ten years a growing number of producers and retailers around the globe joined in with the idea as this matched the emerging pattern of globalised trading: EurepGAP began to gain in global significance. To align EurepGAP’s name with the proposition as the pre-eminent international GAP-standard and to prevent confusion with its growing range of public sector and civil society stakeholders, the Eurep Board decided to undertake the step to re-brand. It was considered a natural path and evolution that led EurepGAP to become GlobalGAP. The decision was announced in September 2007 at the 8th global conference in Bangkok.
GlobalGAP has established itself as a key reference for Good Agricultural Practices in the global market-place, by translating consumer requirements into agricultural production in a rapidly growing list of countries – currently more than 80 on every continent (Figure 3.5).
GlobalGAP is a private sector body that sets standards for the certification of agricultural products around the globe. The aim is to establish one single standard (the Integrated Farm Assurance (IFA) Standard) for Good Agricultural Practice with different product applications capable of fitting to the whole of global agriculture.
Governance is by a Board whose decisions are based on a structured consultation process. In the board retailers and suppliers are represented. Sector specific interests and multi-stakeholder input are consolidated to ensure global acceptance.
Sector Committees discuss and decide upon product and sector specific issues.
All committees have 50% retailer and 50% producer/supplier representation.
GlobalGAP is a pre-farm-gate standard, which means that the certificate covers the process of the certified product from farm inputs like feed or seedlings and all the farming activities until the product leaves the farm. GlobalGAP is a business-to-business (B2B) label and is therefore not directly visible to consumers. Its certification is carried out by more than 100 independent and accredited certification bodies in
117 Hence the GAP part in the name.
The anatomy of private food law
more than 80 countries. It is open to all producers worldwide. GlobalGAP includes annual inspections of the producers and additional unannounced inspections.
GlobalGAP consists of a set of normative documents. These documents cover the GlobalGAP General Regulations, the GlobalGAP Control Points (Textbox 3.5) and Compliance Criteria and the GlobalGAP Checklist.
As many other on-farm assurance systems have been in place for some time prior to the existence of GlobalGAP, a way had to be found to encourage the development of regionally adjusted management systems and so to prevent farmers from having to undergo multiple audits. Existing national or regional farm assurance schemes can seek recognition as equivalent to GlobalGAP through independent benchmarking.
The GlobalGAP standard is subject to a three year revision cycle of continuous improvement to take into account technological and market developments.
Propagation material
Global GAP risk assessment for social practices
Flowers and ornamentals
Figure 3.5. GlobalGAP structure of the Integrated Farm Assurance Standard.(Source: http://www.
globalgap.org/cms/front_content.php?idcat=176.)
TextBox 3.5. GlobalGAP on traceability and record keeping (Source: GlobalGAP Control Points and Compliance Criteria Plant Propagation Material March 2008). Nº b Control pointCompliance criteria Level PM 1Traceability PM 1.1 Is GLOBALGAP (EUREPGAP) registered product traceable back to and trackable from the registered nursery (and other relevant registered areas) where it has been grown?
There is a documented identification and traceability system that allows GLOBALGAP (EUREPGAP) registered plants to be traced back by individual batch numbers which relate to customer orders, on a per batch basis to inputs (such as Seed Lot / Growing Media Batch / Growing or Germination Temperature Regimes / Crop protection materials applied / plant movements within the nursery) to the registered nursery, and tracked forward to the immediate customer. No N/A.
Major must PM 1.2 Do all propagators have a documented procedure to manage the withdrawal of registered products from the market?
All propagators must have access to documented procedures which identify the type of event that may result in a withdrawal, persons responsible for taking decisions on the possible withdrawal of product, the mechanism for notifying customers and the GLOBALGAP (EUREPGAP) CB (if a sanction was not issued by the CB and the propagator or group recalled the products out of free will) and methods of reconciling stock. The procedures must be tested annually to ensure that it is sufficient. Procedure must be demonstrated.
Major must PM 2 Record keeping and internal self-assessment PM 2.1Are all records requested during the external inspection accessible and kept for a minimum period of time of two years, unless a longer requirement is stated in specific control points?
Propagators keep up to date records for a minimum of two years from the date of first inspection, unless legally required to do so for a longer period. No N/A.
Minor must PM 2.2 Does the propagator take responsibility to undertake a minimum of one internal self-assessment per year against the GLOBALGAP (EUREPGAP) Standard?
There is documentary evidence that the GLOBALGAP (EUREPGAP) or benchmarked standard internal self-assessment under responsibility of the propagator has been carried out and are recorded annually. No N/A.
Major must PM 2.3 Are effective corrective actions taken as a result of non-conformances detected during the internal self-assessment?
Effective corrective actions are documented and have been implemented. No N/AMajor must
The anatomy of private food law
3.19 BRC
118In 1998 the British Retail Consortium (BRC based in London), responding to industry needs, developed and introduced the BRC Food Technical Standard to be used to evaluate manufacturers of retailers own brand food products. In BRC the British supermarkets Tesco, Sainsbury, Safeway and Summerfield participate.
In early days each retailer inspected his own suppliers. These common efforts to inspect suppliers have huge cost advantages for retailers, because a supplier fulfils the requirements of all British retailers once.
BRC is designed to be used as a pillar to help retailers and brand owners with their ‘due diligence’ defence, should they be subject to a prosecution by the enforcement authorities. Under EU food law, retailers and brand owners have a legal responsibility for their brands.119
In a short space of time, the BRC Standard became invaluable to other organisations across the sector. It is regarded as a benchmark for best practice in the food industry. This and its use outside the UK has seen it evolve into a global standard used not just to assess retailer suppliers, but as a framework upon which many companies have based their supplier assessment programmes and manufacture of some branded products.
The majority of UK, and many continental European and global retailers, and brand owners will only consider business with suppliers who have gained certification to the appropriate BRC Global Standard (Textbox 3.6).
Following the success and widespread acceptance of the Global Standard – Food, the BRC published the first issue of the Packaging Standard in 2002, followed by Consumer Products Standard in August 2003, and by the BRC Global Standard – Storage and Distribution in August 2006. In 2009, the BRC partnered with the Retail Industry Leaders Association (RILA) to develop the Global Standard for Consumer Products North America edition. Each of these Standards is regularly reviewed and each standard is fully revised and updated at least every 3 years after extensive consultation with a wide range of stakeholders.
118 Information from BRC website http://www.brc.org.uk.
119 See for example Article 17(1) of Regulation 178/2002 (the General Food Law) and Directive 85/374 on product liability. EU, 2002. Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety. Official Journal of the European Union L 31, 1/2/2002: 1-24; EU, 1985. Council Directive 85/374/EEC of 25 July 1985 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning liability for defective products. Official Journal of the European Union L 210, 7/8/1985: 29-33.
3.20 IFS
120In 2002, in order to create a common food safety standard, German food retailers from the HDE (Hauptverband des Deutschen Einzelhandels) have developed a common audit standard called International Food Standard or IFS. In 2003, French food retailers (and wholesalers) from the FCD (Fédération des entreprises du Commerce et de la Distribution) have joined the IFS Working Group.
The aim of the IFS (now based in Paris) is to create a consistent evaluation system for all companies supplying retailer branded food products with uniform formulations, uniform audit procedures and mutual acceptance of audits, which will create a high level of transparency throughout the supply chain. Its scope is now beyond the food sector alone: ‘IFS’ has become to mean: International Featured Standard. Among its standards IFS food still holds a prominent position.
The IFS food defines requirements in content, procedure and evaluation of audits and a requirement profile for the certification bodies and auditors. The IFS food standard (the so-called catalogue of requirements) consists of five parts called chapters:
• senior management responsibility;
• quality management system;
• resource management;
• product process;
• measurements, analyses and improvements.
120 The information in this section has been taken from the IFS website http://www.ifs-certification.com.
Textbox 3.6. BRC principle on management commitment (From BRC Global Standard for Food Safety, issue 5 2008, section 2.1 Principles of the Global Standard for Food Safety).
2.1.1 Senior Management Commitment
Within a food business, food safety must be seen as a cross-functional responsibility, including activities that draw on many departments using different skills and levels of management expertise in the organisation. Effective food safety management extends beyond technical departments and must involve commitment form production operations, engineering, distribution management, procurement of raw materials, customer feed back and human resource activity such as training.
The starting point for an effective food safety plan is the commitment of senior management to the development of an all-encompassing policy as a means to guide the activities that collectively assure food safety. The Global Standard for Food Safety places a high priority on clear evidence of senior management commitment.
The anatomy of private food law
The auditor will audit against the IFS food standard which is divided into two levels plus recommendation on higher level. The chapter ‘Senior Management Responsibility’ deals with the responsibility of the management, the management commitment, the management review and the customer focus. In the chapter
‘Quality Management System’ requirements concerning the HACCP system, the HACCP team and the HACCP analysis are defined. It also contains rules for a quality manual to be applied and the obligation to keep reports and documents.
The chapter ‘Resource Management’ addresses personnel issues (hygiene, medical screening) and staff facilities. The chapter ‘Product Process’ is the most extensive one. It considers topics about e.g. specifications for products, factory environment, pest control, maintenance, traceability; GMOs and allergens. The last chapter,
‘Measurements, Analyses and Improvements’, deals with e.g. internal audit, all kind of controls during production steps, product analysis and corrective actions.
The requirements for auditors and the certification bodies are strictly regulated.
All certification bodies shall have an accreditation against EN 45011 on IFS food.121 Only authorised auditors who have passed a written and oral examination can audit against the standard. The auditor shall have professional knowledge of the IFS food. The auditors can only audit against their competence in a certain sector (at least 2 years professional experience in the specific sector or at least 10 audits in this sector). Finally, auditors who comply with these requirements shall only work for one IFS certification body accredited for auditing against the IFS food.122
3.21 SQF
123Safe Quality Food (SQF; now based in Arlington, USA) is an Australian initiative.
Taking over this system seems to have been the American answer to the mainly European initiatives described above.
Besides food safety, SQF focuses on product quality and stimulation of improvement strategies. The main goal of SQF is to control the whole chain. However, SQF believes that one standard does not work for all companies in the chain and that most other standards only work for big companies. Most procedures associated with the standards are considered too elaborate and laborious for small companies. So SQF developed two different norms, the SQF 1000 and the SQF 2000. The SQF 2000 Code was developed in consultation with food industry and quality professionals.
HACCP guidelines, as developed by the Codex Alimentarius Commission, form the basis of the Code. Unlike other well-recognised quality systems like BRC, HACCP
121 Again an example of interconnected private schemes as discussed above.
122 The question if such requirement is compatible with competition law (Article 81 EC Treaty) is outside the scope of this chapter.
123 The information for this section has been taken from the SQF 2000 Code 6th edition issued August 2008 (and update July 2010) and the SQF 2000 Certification Trade Mark rules for use 7th edition amended November 2005. See also http://www.sqfi.com.
and ISO 9000,124 SQF combines a management quality system, like ISO 9000 and a food safety system (HACCP) with requirements for tracking and tracing. Besides the Critical Control Points (CCP) for food safety, Critical Quality Points are also identified, which makes SQF an integrated system.
The SQF codes (in particular the 1000 and 2000 Code) provide the food sector (primary producers, food manufacturers, retailers, agents and exporters) a food safety and quality management certification program that is tailored to its requirements and enables suppliers to meet regulatory, food safety and commercial quality criteria in a cost effective manner. In 1994 the Code was developed and pilot programs implemented to ensure its applicability to the food sector. It was circulated in draft form for comment to experts in quality management, food safety, and food regulation, food processing, agriculture production systems, food retailing, food distribution and HACCP.
The Food Marketing Institute (FMI) acquired the rights to the SQF Program in August 2003 and has established the SQF Institute (SQFI) Division to manage the program. The SQF 2000 Code is recognised by the Global Food Safety Initiative125 as a standard that meets its benchmark requirements.
The SQF 2000 Code can be used by all sectors of the food industry. The Code is a HACCP based quality management system that encapsulates NACMCF126 and CODEX HACCP Principles and Guidelines, proven methods used by the food industry to reduce the incidence of unsafe food reaching the marketplace (Textbox 3.7). It is designed to support industry or company branded product and to offer benefits to suppliers at all links in the food supply chain.
The SQF 2000 Code enables a supplier to demonstrate that they can supply food that is safe and that meets the quality specified by a customer. Certified SQF 2000 suppliers receiving raw materials from suppliers who have implemented the SQF 1000 Code can ensure that, through these complimentary systems, product is traceable from the producer to the consumer.127
The SQF 2000 Code also provides a mechanism for the food sectors of developing countries seeking to effectively enter the global food market to implement a management system that addresses their needs and the needs of their customers.
124 On quality management in general. See here after section 3.22 for ISO 22000 on food.
125 Discussed in section 3.23.
126 National Advisory Committee on Microbiological Criteria for Foods.
127 Here we find an example where a private scheme goes beyond compliance. Unlike EU food law, traceability is not mandatory in US food law.
The anatomy of private food law
Textbox 3.7. SQF 2000 on HACCP (edition 6 August 2008, amended July 2010).
9. Principles and applications of HACCP
Table 1. A description of the 12 HACCP steps that comprise the HACCP method (Adapted from Codex Alimentarius Commisssion – recommended International Code of Practice Principles of Food Hygiene, CAC/RCP 1-1969, Rev. 4-2003)
Preliminary Steps 1. Assemble HACCP team with expertise in product and processes
2. Describe product 3. Identify intended use 4. Construct flow diagram
5. Confirm flow diagram against process in operation (or planned process)
HACCP Principle HACCP Application
1. Conduct a hazard analysis. 6. List all potential hazards associated with each step and consider any measures to control identified hazards.
2. Determine Critical Control Points (CCPs). 7. Determine CCPs.
3. Establish critical limit(s). 8. Establish critical limits and tolerance levels. Determine at what point critical limit is exceeded based on known limits or risk assessment if unknown.
4. Establish system to monitor control of CCP(s).
9. Establish a monitoring system for CCP that is able to detect loss of control i.e. when critical limits are exceeded.
Consider continuous monitoring and/or periodic audit.
5. Establish corrective action to be taken when monitoring indicates CCP(s) are not under control.
10. Establish corrective actions that are able to deal with loss of control when it occurs and is capable of determining when CCP has been brought under control.
6. Establish procedures for verification to confirm that the HACCP system is working effectively.
11. Establish procedures for verification or audit that include review of HACCP system and records, records of deviations and actions taken in order to confirm that CCPs are kept under control.
7. Establish documentation covering all procedures and records appropriate to these principles and their application.
12. Documentation and record keeping should be appropriate to the nature and scale of the operation.
3.22 FS22000
128The youngest of the main private food safety schemes is ISO 22000. When GFSI evaluated the ISO 22000 for approval, they determined that they wanted more requirements identified for Prerequisite Programs. To fill this gap, the British Standards Institution wrote a document called PAS 220. The combination of PAS 220 and ISO 22000 has been approved by GFSI for a registration scheme, and is called FS22000 (previously FSSC 22000). This scheme is run by the Foundation for Food Safety Certification (FSSC).
The International Organization of Standardization (ISO) has decades of experience developing standards for many different types of applications. One of the most popular and most recognised is the Quality Management System standard ISO 9001. This standard was developed to provide a uniform standard worldwide for quality management. A buyer in one part of the world would have a degree of confidence in the quality practices of a registered company in another part of the world. This standard was used as the basis for other more specific standards for quality management in the automotive industry, the medical device industry, and the aerospace industry.
Now this approach has been taken for food safety management. ISO and its member countries used the Quality Management System approach, and tailored it to apply to food safety, incorporating the HACCP principles into the quality management system. The resulting standard is ISO 22000. ISO 22000 requires that the business design and document a Food Safety Management System (FSMS).
The standard contains the specific requirements to be addressed by the FSMS.
The standard contains the specific requirements to be addressed by the FSMS.