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, Nevada24 April 2009
Albert ChambersMonachus Consulting
Monachus ConsultingUnited Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009
Presentation Outline
• Introduction• Brief Description of Canadian Programs• Comparison Project
• Description• Findings• Conclusions
• Ongoing Activities
Monachus ConsultingUnited 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
Monachus ConsultingUnited 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
• HACCP Program • 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
• Or, HACCP-based Program • 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 ConsultingAssisting Canada’s Agri-food Industry to Adapt and Prosper
HACCP can’t be done on farm, or can it?
Monachus ConsultingUnited Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009
2007/8 Joint Comparison Project - Participants
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 ConsultingUnited Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009
Monachus ConsultingUnited 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.
Monachus ConsultingUnited 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
Monachus ConsultingUnited 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)
Monachus ConsultingUnited 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
Monachus ConsultingUnited 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
Monachus ConsultingUnited 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 GlobalGAP or 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
Monachus ConsultingUnited 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
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 ConsultingUnited Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009
Monachus ConsultingUnited 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)
Monachus ConsultingUnited 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
Monachus ConsultingUnited Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009
CHC/US - Example
Monachus ConsultingUnited Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009
CHC/International Example
Monachus ConsultingCPMA Webinar – 12 November 2008
CPMA/US Example
Monachus ConsultingUnited Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009
Conclusions (1)1. Programs in fresh produce sector are rapidly evolving in
response to global buyer demand2. 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)
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 ConsultingUnited Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009
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 ConsultingUnited Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009
Monachus ConsultingUnited Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009
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 ConsultingUnited Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009
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
Thank you to the United Fresh Produce Association
for the invitation and to the Canadian Produce Marketing Association for its
support
Albert ChambersMonachus [email protected]
Monachus ConsultingUnited Fresh Conference – 24 April 2009