A Glimpse at the Food Safety actors in the Mediterranean region

.

(and some words on cooperation)

…based on the SAMEFOOD Country Reports

Gorgias GarofalakisHellenic Food Authority

Zaragoza 10-11 June 2014

A few words on the Hellenic Food Authority

Public body operating under the Ministry of Rural Development and Food established in 1999:

– Competent Authority for official controls after primary production– Actor in risk assessment, risk management and risk communication in

food safety and nutrition– Quality and safety standards of foods– National contact point in Greece for:

• RASFF• Codex Alimentarius• EFSA

– Development of training courses for FBOs and public officers involved in food safety activities

– Close collaboration with other actors involved in food safety in Greece and abroad (Authorities, Public bodies, Researchers, stakeholders, etc.)

What is the purpose of the Country Reports?

• To identify key priorities for risk assessment

• To present the main public actors involved in food safety with mention to their role in risk assessment, risk management and risk communication

• To establish a basis for communication

• To facilitate a more targeted future collaboration

What are the results unsuitable for?

The Country Reports do not constitute:

• A detailed map of the public and private actors involved in food safety and risk assessment

• A gaps or needs analysis

• An evaluation of the efficiency or effectiveness of the national food safety systems

• An accurate snapshot of the structure and the operating environment of the agro-food sector at the country level

How was the survey carried out?

• A questionnaire template with open fields was used*• It was sent to contact points of the SAMEFOOD network• Input was received by:

– Albania– France– Greece– Lebanon– Malta– Morocco– Portugal– Spain– Tunisia– Turkey

*based on the structure of the EU Food Safety Almanac, Bundesinstitut für Risikobewertung, 2014http://www.bfr.bund.de/en/press_information/2011/33/food_safety_in_europe___who_is_responsible_for_what_-127285.html

General remarks based on the survey

• In all countries studied, the agro-food sector is of high importance having:

– A high number of enterprises– Considerable contribution to employment (12-25% of the industrial workforce)– Considerable contribution to the industrial turnover (23-26%)

• Important subsectors in terms of no. of enterprises or turnover include:– Alcoholic/ non alcoholic beverages; Wine; Spirits (ES, FR, GR, PT, TR)– Animal feed (ES)– Confectionary products, cocoa, chocolate, sugar, spices (ES, GR, TR)– Dairy products (AL, ES, FR, GR, LB, PT,TN, TR)– Fats and Oils (ES, GR, PT, TN, TR)– Fisheries and seafood products (GR, ES, MO, MT, TN)– Flour, starch, pastry and bakery products (ES, FR, GR, LB, TR)– Fruits and vegetables (AL, FR, LB, MT, TN,TR)– Meat and meat products (AL, FR, ES, MT, PT)

• CSOs present and active in all countries (not necessarily food-centered)

Identified priorities for risk assessment

• Risk assessment for food contaminants and additives, plant protection products, botanicals, novel foods, substances used in food contact materials and GMO varieties used for human consumption

• Cumulative and aggregate exposure assessment to chemicals• Nutritional benefits and risks• Consumer-phase risk assessment• Emerging risks• Uncertainties in risk assessment• Use of weight of evidence approach for risk assessment

• Infrastructure and support, such as:– Tools for risk assessment (incl. reliable databases)– Data collection and collation– Harmonisation of risk assessment methodologies– Prioritisation of target products for risk assessment– Training – Transnational cooperation

Different organisational approaches

• Governmental entities (e.g., Ministries for Agriculture/ Food/ Fisheries and Health) are involved in all countries

• Variable complexity of the organisational structure of the national food safety systems

FR

TN

Different approaches in providing for independent risk assessment

• The clear separation of the tasks of risk assessment and risk management is not commonly observed

• Governmental (non-research) organisations are often involved in all three tasks (risk assessment, management and communication)

Note: In some cases, when there is no separation of the risk assessment task at the organisation level, this activity can be isolated within an organisation by defining appropriate internal structures and applying suitable workflow processes

• The mechanism differs amongst countries with regards to steps and the actors involved!

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Established mechanism toevaluate and respond to food

safey crises

Committees with pre-definedmembers

---with actors for riskassessment

---with actors for riskmanagement

---with actors for riskcommunication

Yes

No

Mechanism to respond to crises

Why is further cooperation important?

• Different standards/ practices/ operation of Food Business Operators and in the operation and competent Authorities– In the EU: Harmonisation of the legal requirements; Established

cooperation across MS, further strengthened by EFSA. E.g.:• Reg. (EC) 852/2004 on the hygiene of foodstuffs• Reg. (EC) 882/2004 on official controls• Reg. (EC) 1924/2006 on nutrition and health claims on foodstuffs• Reg. (EU) 1169/2011 on the provision of information to consumers

– Beyond the EU: The requirements of the “food law” vary considerably across countries but guidance/ communication exists:

• Harmonisation effort in pre-accession and neighbourhood countries• Codex Alimentarius Standards (e.g., RCP 1-1969 rev. 2003 Food

Hygiene)• FVO carries out audits and produces recommendations• Certification bodies support the adoption of relevant standards, etc.

Why is further cooperation important?

• A considerable portion of food safety challenges is common across counties

• Cooperation on may allow for:– Knowledge transfer– Pooling of resources– Better cooperation in areas other than food safety (spillover

effects) – Prevention of incidents

• Cooperation could:– help raise the food safety level – lead to solutions in a shorter time, possibly at a lower total cost – improve the operating environment of the agro-food sector

What are the challenges for closer cooperation?

• Agro-food is a cross-cutting sector (agriculture, food production, competitiveness, public health, etc.)

• Differences in priorities at the national/ local level

• Hostile socio-political, socio-economic or natural environment (e.g., financial crises, social unrest, conflicts, natural disasters, etc.)

• Lack of resources (people, money, infrastructure, etc.)

• Variety of stakeholders involved

• Difficulties in communication depending on the groups involved (legal barriers, different points of reference, customs, perceptions, languages)

The issue of complexity

• The complexity of the food production and distributionchain is both a challenge for and a motive towards closercooperation

• Various layers of complexity. E.g.:– Long, multi-link chain between farmer and consumer– Complex trade routes of foods and ingredients, often transnational– Vast variety of products and brands

Source: European Technology Platform “Food for Life”

The complete International Agro-Food Trade Network in 1998

Ercsey-Ravasz M, Toroczkai Z, Lakner Z, Baranyi J (2012) Complexity of the International Agro-Food Trade Network and Its Impact on Food Safety. PLoS ONE 7(5)

Source:European Food Safety Authority; Tracing seeds, in particular fenugreek seeds, in relation to the Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC) O104:H4 2011 Outbreaks in Germany and France; July 2011

Locations of the HAV outbreaks attributed to a common, continuous source in the EU/EEA – frozen berries; 240 confirmed cases since January 2013

Source:European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control and the European Food Safety Authority, 2014; Outbreak of hepatitis A in EU/EEA countries - Second update. EFSA supporting publication 2014:EN-581. 14 pp.

Are there tools to support cooperation?

• International or intergovernmental agreements and treaties provide for the cooperation framework

• IPA, ENPI and ERDF funds* can support a variety of transnational activities in areas such as competitiveness, infrastructure, environment, cultural heritage, etc.– Programme MED– ENPI CBC MED– Adriatic IPA– South East Europe Transnational

Cooperation Programme– Bilateral programmes, etc.

* Indicative information only; the Programmes are under revision for the period 2014 - …

Are there tools to support cooperation?

• Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation– Food Security, Sustainable Agriculture and Forestry, Marine,

Maritime and Inland Water Research and the Bioeconomy. Current indicative topics:

• SFS-14-2014/2015: Authentication of food products• SFS-15-2014: Proteins of the future • SFS-13-2015: Biological contamination of crops and the food chain

(China)• ISIB-3-2015: Unlocking the growth potential of rural areas through

enhanced governance and social innovation (non EU-Mediterranean countries)

– Other sections with relevance to the agro-food sector (environment, biotechnology, health, etc.)

– Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (ec.europa.eu/research/mariecurieactions)

Are there tools to support cooperation?

• Other funding schemes (e.g., Erasmus+, EuropeAid) supporting twinning, training, infrastructures, etc. E.g.:– Strengthening of Israeli veterinary diagnostic capacities (twinning -

Israel)– Support to enhancing export potential of agricultural and food

products to the EU (twinning light – Bosnia Erzegovina)– Support to the Implementation of the Action Plan and Association

Agreement Programme ENPI/2010/021-871 (twinning – Egypt)

• Technology Platforms, e.g., Food for Life (etp.fooddrinkeurope.eu)

• Enterprise Europe Network (een.ec.europa.eu)

Concluding remarks

• Further cooperation on food safety aspects in the Mediterranean region would be beneficial

• There is a variety of cooperation routes and means depending on:– the level at which the interaction occurs– the target audiences– the target outcomes – the available resources

• The involvement of important stakeholders should be encouraged• Discussion on needs & priorities should continue• Actions agenda formulated via a business plan process

Thank you for your attention!