United Fresh Global Food Safety Conference 24 April 2009
1. Comparing Canada’s Food Safety Programs in the Fresh Produce Sector with Programs Available in Exporting Countries Global Conference on Produce Food Safety Standards Las Vegas, Nevada 24 April 2009 Albert Chambers Monachus Consulting
2. MonachusConsulting United Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009 Presentation Outline Introduction Brief Description of Canadian Programs Comparison Project Description Findings Conclusions Ongoing Activities
3. MonachusConsulting United Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009 Introduction Presenting on behalf Canadian Produce Marketing Association- over 670 international & Canadian members … responsible for 90% of the fresh fruit & vegetable sales in Canada And the International Federation for Produce Standards - an international forum to address issues which require international harmonization or standardization for the produce sector
4. MonachusConsulting United Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009 Canadian Produce Food Safety Programs Programs On-farm Food Safety Program developed by Canadian Horticultural Council for growers, packers & storage intermediaries Repack/Wholesale Food Safety Program developed by Canadian Produce Marketing Association Design Characteristics HACCP-based food safety requirements National programs 3rd Party conformity assessment Government recognized GFSI or GFSI & GlobalGAP benchmarked
5.
6. Site/farm specific application of Codex HACCP approach using a full hazard analysis (biological, chemical & physical) to identify all control measures (prerequisites & CCPs) needed to produce safe food
8. Where the hazard analysis is generic (i.e. covers all producers or users in a given sector) and results in a list of commonly accepted hazards (biological, chemical & physical) and related controls that are then translated into a series of GAPs (or GHPs) & CCPs to which users shall adhere. (Canadian definition)Monachus Consulting Assisting Canada’s Agri-food Industry to Adapt and Prosper
9. Monachus Consulting United Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009 2007/8 Joint Comparison Project - Participants
10. Joint Comparison Project - Objectives Compare Canadian fresh produce food safety programs with those of other countries. Enable the industry to determine how its food safety programs could be accepted internationally; Provide a basis for Canadian stakeholders (wholesalers, retailers & food service distributors) to assess the acceptability/ equivalence of programs available in other countries. Work done in 2007 with some additional comparisons in early 2008 Monachus Consulting United Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009
11. Monachus Consulting United Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009 Joint Comparison Project - Outputs Environmental scan of fresh produce food safety programs: farm/packer/storage intermediary & repacker/wholesaler Comparison criteria Comparison of CHC on-farm (CanadaGAP)& CPMA repack/wholesale (RWFS) programs with other programs to establish commonalities & differences Comparison of government recognition & private benchmarking schemes Final report providing comparisons, conclusions & recommendations.
12. Monachus Consulting United Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009 Joint Comparison Project - Methodology Steering committee identified key exporting countries Extensive Internet & Literature search Documents used in comparisons Generic HACCP model Program requirements ( the standard) Audit checklist General scheme requirements for certification, etc
13. Monachus Consulting United Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009 Comparison Criteria - 1 General characteristics: ownership commodity scope (fresh produce, integrated) chain scope (grower/packer/storage/repacker/ wholesaler) content scope (food safety, environmental, etc) geographic reach (national, international) participation ( # of participants, certificates) recognition (government &/or customers) other factors (infrastructure sharing)
14. Monachus Consulting United Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009 Comparison Criteria - 2 Program/Food Safety content HACCP or HACCP-based or “sewn together” Relationship to Codex Alimentarius principles, guidelines CCPs (if any) identified Detailed analysis of GAPs or GMPs against either the CHC or CPMA programs Record keeping requirements
15. Monachus Consulting United Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009 Comparison Criteria - 3 Conformity assessment: Certification body requirements (including accreditation) Audit attributes (frequency, duration, use of random/ unannounced audits, etc) Audit scoring approach Auditor competency/qualifications, training requirements, etc
16. Monachus Consulting United Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009 Comparison Output Three types of comparison: Described (i.e. programs for which limited information can be accessed) – Result: summary of available information with source details Benchmarked (i.e. programs determined by GlobalGAPor GFSI to be equivalent) – Result: short description Compared (i.e. access to hazard analysis &/or detailed requirements) – Result: 10-25 page fact sheet rolled up into Final Report tables on content & conformity assessment
17. Monachus Consulting United Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009 Programs - Described Americas: Argentina, Brazil, Columbia, Costa Rica, Mexico, Peru Africa: Ghana, Kenya Asia - China, India, Malaysia, Philippines, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, Viet Nam If we looked again 2009 – we would find many more programs
18. Farm/Packer/Storage Programs Compared Canadian (2) CHC potatoes CHC greenhouse United States (6) USDA Fresh Produce California Leafy Greens PrimusLabs Ranch PrimusLabs Greenhouse Davis Fresh ProCert SQF 1000 International (5) GlobalGAP (fruits & vegetables) ChileGAP NewZealandGAP FreshCare (Australia) PPECB (South Africa) Monachus Consulting United Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009
19. Monachus Consulting United Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009 Repack/Wholesale Programs Compared Canadian (1) CPMA Repacking & Wholesale United States (4) PrimusLabs.com Packinghouse Davis Fresh Packing Facility Scientific Certification GMP Packing Facility AIB Produce & Fruit Packinghouse International (2) PPECB Off-Farm Produce Handling (South Africa) QS (Germany)
20. Monachus Consulting United Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009 Final Report Individual comparisons are “rolled up” using tables & symbols to facilitate comparing key elements: Comparable to Canadian program ●● Missing key requirements ● Has additional requirements ●●● Requirement not mentioned ▬ Note is made of requirements with “record keeping” (R) Report available at: www.cpma.ca/pdf/FoodSafety/JFSCP_May_2008_ENG.pdf
24. Monachus Consulting United Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009 Conclusions (1) 1. Programs in fresh produce sector are rapidly evolving in response to global buyer demand 2. Rigorously applied HACCP-based approach generates comparable programs CHC & CPMA Programs are currently comparable or more comprehensive Programs that do not use HACCP-based approach have deficiencies that reflect their underlying objectives (e.g. focus on biological hazards) 3. Trend in conformity assessment is to accredited 3rd party certification bodies The Canadian programs are implementing this approach US Programs use a variety of certification approaches (government staff, 3rd Party auditors, etc)
25. Conclusions (2) 4. Audit Approaches vary: Annual audits predominate Some schemes permit a group or multi-site certification Risk based frequencies are being introduced 5. Private Benchmarking & Government Recognition schemes Have similar characteristics Appear to provide similar results Benchmarking could be used as a proxy for full comparisons 6. Comparison template provided demonstrated value to all segments of the supply chain, particularly retailers. Monachus Consulting United Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009
26. Conclusions (3) 7. Good comparisons require detailed program information (e.g. generic model, auditable requirements & conformity assessment scheme) 8. The Joint Comparison Project is the largest fresh produce program review to date 9. Competitive intelligence monitoring & “best practice adoption” are an essential part of the global fresh produce industry’s future – Joint Comparison Project needs updating & deepening Monachus Consulting United Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009
27. On-going Activities (1) United Fresh Produce Association Using report as part of broader assessment of US schemes International Federation for Produce Standards Members: Canada, USA, United Kingdom, Chile, South Africa, New Zealand, Australia, Norway Using report as a reference document for discussions of harmonization of fresh produce food safety standards Engaging other stakeholders (e.g. GFSI) in discussions about harmonization of fresh produce standards Monachus Consulting United Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009
28. On-going Activities (2) Canadian Stakeholders Reference document for assessing foreign schemes Basis for discussions on customer requirements & recognition of CHC & CPMA Food Safety Programs CHC launched its program – now CanadaGAP - in September 2008 Major retailer – Loblaws: Requesting CHC program (or GlobalGAP/GFSI) of Canadian & other suppliers for 2009 Requesting CPMA RWFS program or equivalent CPMA board – Meets in May 2009 to consider plan to launch its audit/certification scheme Monachus Consulting United Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009
29. Thank you to the United Fresh Produce Association for the invitation and to the Canadian Produce Marketing Association for its support Albert Chambers Monachus Consulting afchambers@monachus.com Monachus Consulting United Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009
