FOOD SAFETYOF THE SHORT SUPPLY CHAIN

Symposium SciCom 2012Brussels

Friday, 9 November 2012

Edited by the Scientific Committee and the Staff Direction for Risk Assessment of the Belgian Federal Agency

for the Safety of the Food Chain (FASFC)

EditorsAndréHuyghebaert,ChairScientificCommitteeFASFCXavierVanHuffel,DirectorStaffdirectionforriskassessment,FASFCGilHouins,CEOFASFCFederalAgencyfortheSafetyoftheFoodChain(FASFC)CA‐BotaniqueFoodSafetyCenterBoulevardduJardinbotanique55B‐1000BrusselsLay‐outClaireVerraes,Staffdirectionforriskassessment,FASFCThecontentsreflecttheviewsoftheauthorsandnotnecessarilytheviewsoftheFASFCnoroftheSciCom.Reproductionisauthorizedprovidedthesourceisacknowledged.

PREFACE

Dr.XavierVanHuffelDirectorStaffdirectionforriskassessmentFASFCE‐mail:xavier.vanhuffel@favv.beThetopicofthisyears’symposiumorganizedbytheScientificCommitteeoftheFederalAgencyfortheSafetyoftheFoodChainisspecialinmanyways.Fromariskassessorpointofview‘Foodsafetyoftheshortsupplychain’isavagueissueofwhichthetermsofreferenceareunclearandaboutwhichdedicatedscientificinformation is lacking. Froma riskmanagementpointof view the short supplychain is part of the food chain and its food safety is covered by the existinglegislation.Althoughshortsupplyhasalwaysexistedinsociety,subgroupsofconsumersandproducershaverediscovereditasanewandattractivechannelforfoodsupplytowhichpositivecharacteristicsareassociatedsuchasauthenticity,quality,income,…andevenfoodsafety.Thislatteraspecthasrarelybeenstudiedorcoveredinscientific symposia.For this reason theScientificCommitteewasof theopinionthat the subject deserved attention as it is an emerging trend in society withmanydifferentfacetsandclosebytheconsumer.Thesymposiumhastobeseenas an excellent opportunity and forum at which risk assessors, regulators,consumers and producers convene to discuss about risks of new trends in thefoodchain.The Scientific Committee is grateful to the Food Safety Agency to support theyearly organization of a scientific event and thanks all speakers who havecontributedtothissymposium.

5

TABLEOFCONTENTS

Preface....................................................................................................................................................................................4 

Tableofcontents................................................................................................................................................................5 

Listofabbreviations.........................................................................................................................................................6 

Programofthesymposium............................................................................................................................................7 

Introduction.........................................................................................................................................................................9 

Session1.Theshortsupplychain:stateofart....................................................................................................12 

Definitionoftheshortfoodsupplychain.........................................................................................................13 

FASFCpolicyonfoodsafetyintheshortsupplychain...............................................................................17 

ShortfoodsupplychaininFlanders...................................................................................................................19 

ThepolicyforshortsupplychainsinWallonia.............................................................................................25 

FoodsafetyproblemsspecifictotheshortchainselectedcasestudiesfromtheNetherlands28 

Session2.Foodsafetyoftheshortsupplychain...............................................................................................32 

Microbiologicalsafetyandqualityaspectsinrelationtotheshortfoodsupplychain.................33 

Chemicalaspectsoffoodsafetyandqualityintheshortsupplychains.............................................45 

Controlofthefoodsafetyoftheshortcircuits:theexperienceofthecellqualityoffarmproducts(cqpf)supportingtheproducersinwallonia..............................................................................52 

Session3.Theshortsupplychainandthesociety............................................................................................58 

ShortchannelsinFrance:dotheymeatconsumersconcerns?..............................................................59 

Directmarketingfromproducerstoconsumers:economicaspectsandkeysuccesfactors.....66 

Summaryandconclusions..........................................................................................................................................75 

6

LISTOFABBREVIATIONS

ACW GeneralChristianWorkersAssociationADL LocalDevelopmentAgenciesBuRO OfficeforRiskAssessmentandResearchCoordinationofthe

NetherlandsFoodandConsumerProductSafetyAuthorityCAP CommonAgriculturalPolicyCARAH CenterforAgricultureandAgro‐industryintheprovinceofHainautCODA‐CERVA VeterinaryandAgrochemicalResearchCentreDGARNE GeneralDirectionforAgriculture,NaturalResourcesand

Environment(Walloonregion)EC EuropeanCommissionEPASC ProvincialSchoolforAgricultureandSciencesEU EuropeanUnionFASFC BelgianFederalAgencyfortheSafetyoftheFoodChainGAL LocalActionGroupsGAP GoodAgriculturalPracticesGMP GoodManufacturingPracticesHACCP HazardAnalysisandCriticalControlPointsHMs HeavyMetalsILVO FlemishInstituteforAgriculturalandFisheriesResearchKHK CatholicHighSchoolKempenNVWA NetherlandsFoodandConsumerProductSafetyAuthorityPCB PolychlorinatedBiphenylPOPs PersistentOrganicPollutantsQCPF QualityCellforFarmProductsSC ShortChainSciCom ScientificCommitteeoftheBelgianFederalAgencyfortheSafetyof

theFoodChainSWOT Strengths,Weaknesses,OpportunitiesandThreatsSPW PublicServiceofWalloniaTADzuivel TechnologicalAdvisoryServiceforDairyProductsandDairy

FarmersUlg‐GxABT UniversityofLiège–GemblouxAgro‐BioTechQA QualityAssurance

7

Symposium of the Scientific Committee

of the Belgian Food Safety Agency

FOOD SAFETY OF THE SHORT SUPPLY CHAIN

Friday 9 November 2012

Auditorium Pacheco Pacheco Center – Finance Tower

Pachecolaan 13 1000 Brussels

9:00 RECEPTION

9:30 Introduction Luc PUSSEMIER Operational director CODA-CERVA – Vice-chair Scientific Committee FASFC

Session 1. The short supply chain: state of art Chairs: Els DAESELEIRE (Expert ILVO-T&V – Member Sci Com FASFC) Antoine CLINQUART (Prof. ULg)

9:40 What do we mean by the short supply chain? Mieke UYTTENDAELE Prof. Ghent University – Member Scientific Committee FASFC

10:05 The policy of the FASFC on the food safety of the short supply chain Herman DIRICKS Director-general DG Control Policy FASFC

10:30 COFFEE BREAK

11:00 The short supply chain in Flanders: possibilities and bottlenecks Ann DETELDER Coordinator Steunpunt Hoeveproducten KVLV

11:25 The short supply chain policy in Wallonia Damien WINANDY Director Direction Quality DGARNE SPW - Walloon region

11:50 The food safety of the short supply chain: case studies in the Netherlands Benno TER KUILE Senior advisor microbiology BuRO NVWA – Guest researcher Amsterdam University (The Netherlands)

8

12:15 RECEPTION

12:45 LUNCH

Session 2. Food safety of the short supply chain Chairs: Katleen RAES (Prof. HOWEST – Member Sci Com FASFC) Marie-Louise SCIPPO (Prof. ULg – Member Sci Com FASFC)

14:00 Microbiological aspects concerning the food safety of the short supply chain Lieve HERMAN Head of division ILVO-T&V – Member Scientific Committee FASFC

14:25 Chemical aspects concerning the food safety of the short supply chain Luc PUSSEMIER Operational director CODA-CERVA – Vice-chair Scientific Committee FASFC

14:50 The management of the food safety of the short supply chain: the experience of the ‘Quality Cell for Farm Products’ in the guidance of the producers in the Walloon region Marianne SINDIC

Prof. University of Liège / Gembloux Agro-Bio Tech

15:15 COFFEE BREAK

Session 3. The short supply chain and the society Chairs: Guido VAN HUYLENBROECK (Prof. UGent – Dean) Bruno SCHIFFERS (Prof. ULg / Gembloux Agro-Bio Tech – Member Sci Com FASFC)

15:45 The short supply chain in France: a response to the expectations of consumers?Pierre SANS Prof. National Veterinary School of Toulouse (France)

16:05 The direct sale from farmer to consumer: socio-economic success factors and points of attention Erwin WAUTERS Researcher ILVO-L&M – Guest Prof. Antwerp University

16:25 Summary and conclusions André HUYGHEBAERT Prof. Em. Ghent University – Chair Scientific Committee FASFC

9

INTRODUCTION

Dr.ir.LucPussemierOperationaldirectorCODA‐CERVAVice‐chairoftheScientificCommitteeoftheFASFCE‐mail:luc.pussemier@coda‐cerva.beTheannual symposiumorganizedby theScientificCommitteeof theFASFChasprogressivelybecomeagoodopportunity tomeet thescientists, industrialsandriskmanagersinterestedinthescientificaspectsoffoodsafety.Thefirsteditionwasheldin2005andtodayisthe8theditionofthissymposium.Onecanobservesometrendsinthedifferentsubjectstreatedovertheyears.Atthebeginning,notonly was the methodology of risk assessment felt important (theme of thesymposium in 2006) to discuss but also the quality and the valorization of thedatabasesavailableattheFASFC(themeofthe2007symposium).Fromthefirstyear, however, attention was also paid to challenging subjects such as theprecautionaryprinciplewhichwasexplainedandillustratedindetailduringourvery first symposium in 2005. More recently we have also tackled veryspecialized topics such as the emerging animal diseases (2008) and thenanotechnology applications in the food chain (2010). These two events wereorganized jointly with the European Food Safety Authority and the EuropeanCommissionandhaveattractedalargeraudiencefromotherEuropeancountries.More recently, however, new accents have appeared as a reaction to somepreoccupationsfromtheriskmanagers,thegeneralpublicandtheconsumers.Ithinkmore specifically about the communication organized since 2009 aroundthedevelopmentofabarometerforfoodsafety.Thistoolseemstobeveryusefulfor food safetymanagers in their communication strategy towards the generalpublicandthemediaanditwasfurtherdevelopedintheyearsafter.Thisconceptof measuring general food safety, based on the pioneer work carried out inBelgium, has been published in high level research literature and presented atinternational fora where it attracted much attention by other Countries andorganizations.ThisyeartheScientificCommitteemakesfurtherstepstorespondtosomeactualpreoccupationsoftheconsumersandtheriskmanagers.Indeed,wepresentyoua very sensitive topic that is the food safety in the short supply chains, thosechainsstarting fromtheproducersandreaching theconsumerswithaminimalnumberoflinks.Untilrecently,theshortsupplychainwasnotfelttobeinterestingbythepolicymanagers in general and, more particularly, by those responsible for theagriculturalpolicy.Butthingsarechanging.Firstly,theregionalauthoritieshavebecome aware of the great economic interest of local food production and

10

consumption. Everywhere, initiatives have been taken in order to promoteorganic baskets and farm markets. And this wave eventually reached theEuropeanAuthorities.InApril2012,indeed,aconferenceonlocalagricultureandthe short supply chains for food was organized in Brussels. At this occasion,DacianCiolos,amemberoftheEuropeanCommissionresponsibleforAgricultureandRuralDevelopment,pointedouttheimportanceoftheshortsupplychainsasan answer to the increasing demand for local products. According to theEurobarometer,indeed,oneintwoconsumersregretthatlocalproductsarehardtofindanddifficulttodistinguishfromotherproducts.Therefore,thefutureCAP(Common Agricultural Policy) has to integrate this new dimension. Somemeasures have, thus, been proposed in the CAP reform. According to DacianCiolos,theissuestosolveare:

1. Theclearidentificationoflocalsupplychainsinordertoensurecredibilityandvisibility;

2. The assurance of hygiene and food safety without discouraging thecreationofsmallproductionunits;

3. The restoration of the link between consumers in towns and cities andproduction centers nearby by supporting the initiatives of farmers’markets;

4. Theencouragementforfarmerstoinvest.Inhis speechduring thisConferenceon localagricultureandshort foodsupplychains,Mr.Ciolosalsostated:“Itisobviousthatshortsupplyfoodhastoolongbeenoverlooked (…) and, despite the lack of recognition and support, available datashowthat15%ofEUfarmssellmorethanhalfoftheirproducelocally”.ThisstatementfromtheEuropeanCommissionerforAgricultureclearlyindicatesthat the potentialmarket of short supply chains on the European Continent isvery huge, even though some voices claim that themarket share is much lessimportant(only2to3%)andthat“locavores”areromanticsandnostalgicsofthegoodoldtimes.

Why is this topic so trendy? Is this a hype thatwill soonbe forgotten?Or is itreallyanewattitudethatwillpersist?Theseareverycomplexquestionsanditisnottheaimofthissymposiumtogiveananswertothem.Letuslimitourselvesbymentioning that several factorswill help tomaintain this trend, such as thewillingness to promote sustainable production systems, which are not onlyenvironmentally friendly but also in agreementwith the financial needs of theproducers. Nutritional and organoleptic concerns will also be present becauselots of consumersdobelieve that suchproducts arebetter for theirhealth andtastier.Ontheotherhand,onecansometimeshearthat,besidestheadvantages,therearealsosomespecificriskslinkedtolocalfoodandshortsupplychains.Theaimofthissymposiumisthustoinformriskmanagersandthegeneralpublicinthemostcompleteandneutralwayonthestateoftheart.

11

Yet, local food and short supply chains need to be clearly defined. We willimmediately start with this difficult task during the first session of thissymposium.AlsoinformationwillbegivenduringthissessiononthepoliciesthatareadoptedbyourFederalandRegionalAuthoritiesandwewillalsohearwhathappenswithourcloseneighbors.Lunchtimewillallowustoshiftfromtheorytopracticeasyouwillbeinvitedtotaste some local specialities and kitchen products and to interact with otherparticipantsatthesymposium...Withthesecondsession,after lunch,wewillbeat thecoreof the themeof thissymposium and we will try to get more information on advantages andconstraintsofferedbytheshortsupplychainsasfarasfoodsafetyisconcerned.We’llalsohavetheopportunity toget informedontheeffortsspent inorder totrainthelocalproducersinaneffectiveway.Finally, during the third session, more insight will be given in the consumers’behavior and on his motivating to be attracted to this new production andconsumptionapproach. Speakerswill also try todiscusshow far theproducerscan meet the consumers’ requirements. Finally, the symposium will end bydrawingsomegeneralconclusionsandproposingsomerecommendations.Iwishyouallanenrichingsymposium,tastydiscoveriesandfruitfuldiscussionswithalltheinvitedstakeholders.

12

SESSION1.THESHORTSUPPLYCHAIN:STATE

OFART

13

DEFINITIONOFTHESHORTFOODSUPPLYCHAIN

M.Uyttendaele*,L.Herman1,3,E.Daeseleire1,3,A.Huyghebaert3,L.Pussemier2,31ILVO2CODA‐CERVA3ScientificCommitteeFASFC*Speaker:Prof.dr.ir.MiekeUyttendaeleProf.GhentUniversityMemberoftheScientificCommitteeoftheFASFCE‐mail:mieke.uyttendaele@ugent.beDevelopmentsattheconsumerandthefarmerlevelhaveresultedinarenewedinterest in short market channels for foods. Consumers are increasinglymotivated by health and environmental concerns, which is expressed by anincreased demand for high quality foods (with emphasis on freshness, taste,nutritionalqualityandsafety)andsalesdirectfromsource.Theshortfoodsupplychain,offeringlocallygrown(organicandnon‐organic)foodisasegmentseenasa place to buy ‘good food’ but also as means to express consumer valuesassociated with food choices (e.g. resource conservation, animal welfare, therevivalofasenseofcommunity,enjoymentofcooking).Ruraleconomybenefitsfromtheincreaseinactivityandprofitsthroughdirectsales(Berlinetal.,2009;Careyetal.,2011).Shortfoodsupplychains‘shortcircuit’theconventionallongand usually more anonymous supply chain which has multiple intermediatesinvolved.Typicalfortheshortfoodsupplychainsisthatthereisafacetofaceorproximateproducer‐consumerrelationandoftentheproducerinvolvedusesthisdirect contact with the consumer in marketing his products and exchangeinformationonqualityattributesandprovenanceonthefoodtotheoverallmoreinvolved and interested consumer whomakes his purchases in the short foodsupplychain.For the FASFC Scientific Committee Symposium on ‘Food Safety of the ShortSupply Chain’ on November 9th 2012 the focus is put on activities in the foodsupplychain inwhichfaceto faceorproximatecontact is takingplacebetweenon the one hand grower/producer and on the other hand consumer. It usuallyincludesthefollowingrelationshipbetweenthegrower/producer,theconsumerandtheFASFC:

FASFC registered operators (with registered activities at primaryproduction and/orprocessing)havingdirect sales ofprimary and locallyprocessed primary products to consumers. Occasionally one registeredFASFCoperator(withregisteredactivityoftradeorretailsales)mayactasanintermediarytostockandtransferorsell(processed)primaryproductsto consumers butwithout performing anymanipulation on these locallygrown/producedproducts;

14

FASFC registered operators (with registered activity of food servingoperation but without FASFC registered primary production activity)serving (or selling) own grown crops, dairy or processed products toconsumers(guests);

Non‐FASFC registered individuals or hobby breeders who sell or setavailableowngrown/producedproductsathomeatgate.

Examplesof thesedirect interactionbetweenproducerandconsumerfordirectsale or serving of locally produced and/or locally consumed foods in the shortfoodsupplychainareshowninTable1.Intheshortfoodsupplychaintheactivityofagriculturalproductionandfurtherprocessingareoftencombinedonthesamesiteand/ormanagedbythesameowner.Packing,sortingorprocessingusuallytakesplaceatthefarmorthepremisesofthehobbybreederorindividual,usingmostofthetimeonthesiteharvestedcrops,rawmilkorrawmeatderivedfromownlive‐stockorfromagriculturalproductsderivedfromcloseproximity.Table1. Examples of thedirect interactionbetweenproducer and consumer inshort food supply chain.Modified fromRenting etal. (2003) asdefined for theFASFC Scientific Committee Symposium on ‘Food Safety of the Short SupplyChain’(November9th2012).

Face‐to‐faceorProximateShortFoodSupplyChainsFarmshopsorfarmautomatesFarmshopgroupsSubscriptionfarmingRegionalhallmarksSpecialevents,fairsFarmersmarketsDoortodoorsellingFarmgateorroadsidesalesPickyourownBoxschemes&collectivefoodbuyingteamsHomedeliveriesConsumercooperativesCommunity supported agriculture and urbanfarmingCookathomeGuesthouses,restaurants,daycarecenters’&foodserviceoperationscookingmealswithinputsfromowngardenorcommunitysupportedagricultureMailorderore‐commercetoprimaryproducer…

15

Thusinthepresentdefinition,theshortfoodsupplychainisexpandedfromthedefinition used in agriculture economy and rural development targeting inparticularfarm’sdirectsalesandfocusedatprimaryproductionactivitiesandonthesiteprocessing.IntheframeofthecurrentFASFCSymposiumthedefinitionof short food supply chain also targets individuals or guesthouses, restaurants,institutional catering facilities,day care centreofferingowngrowncropsdairy,meatandonthesitederived foodproducts toguests,visitorsandthusalso thefacetofaceorproximaterelationshipintheframeoffoodserving.Itshouldbenotedthatthereisafrequentblendingoftheconceptsoflocal,small‐scale andorganic, natural or artisanal, traditional and their associatedbenefits.Often foods traded in the short food supply chain in these face to face orproximate sales are defined by either locality or even the specific farmwheretheyareproducedandonsomeoccasionstheyarealsoreferredtoas“artisanal”or“traditional”or“terroir”products.Manyoftheseproductsdrawuponanimageof the farm and/or region as a source of quality.Direct linkages are also oftencreatedbetweenfarmingandruralnature,culturallandscapeandlocalresources.However,numerousoftheactualterroirorartisanal/traditionalproductsarenotor not uniquely sold in a direct face to face or proximate contact betweenproducerandconsumerbutalsoviatheconventional foodsupplychain(i.e.viasupermarkets, independentspecialityordieteticshops).Assuchtheseartisanal,traditionalorterroirproductsarenotautomaticallypartoftheShortFoodSupplyChain. This in particular holds for many of the regional products who havereceived a recognition of a protected “designation of origin” which are widelymarketednationalandinternationally.Thesameholdsfororganicfoodorotherecological or natural characteristics or labels attributed to food which link tobioprocesses(e.g.freerange,natural)whichmaybemarketedandbepartoftheshort food supply chain but which are also sometimes internationally sourcedandincreasinglyavailableintheconventional(long)supplychain(Rentingetal.,2003).GenerallyspeakingtheShortFoodSupplyChainsappearstobemainlytakenupbymedium‐sizedfarmbusinesses:aminimumproductionlevelisoftennecessarytomaketheactivityviableandgeneratesufficientincometofinanceinvestment,whereaslargevolumesaresometimesatoddswiththespecificanddifferentiatedprocessing and marketing structures involved. Sometimes activities in directsalesorservingoffoodinshortfoodsupplychainsisintegratedwithagritourism.Overall the landscapeof short foodsupplychains is scatteredandevolvingandlacksagooddefinition.Thereisalsothefactthatsomeindividualsmaydropinandoutof theshort foodsupplychaindependinguponseasonalityand timeorhave a hybrid system (partially selling at gate, partially to local shops or alsoprovidingdeliverytowholesalers,retailersoragri‐businesses).Theymayevolvewhengrowing involumefromtheshort foodsupplychainto the ‘conventional’supplychain.Thereisoftennostraightforwarddivisionbetweenproductionforlocal and non‐local market, nor should there be or is there evidence for a

16

differentiationongoodqualityandsafetyofthesefoodsfromshort foodsupplychains as defined above and conventional ‘long’ food supply chain (Ibery andMay,2005).In the short food supply chain, thewholeproduction fromprimaryproduct tillendproductanddistribution,isusuallymanagedbythesamepersonorthesameteam. Due to the broad range of tasks, specialization towards food safetymanagement ismostly not possible. As a consequence,most short food supplychainoperatorsorproductionunitsarestrugglingwiththecomplexityofthefoodsafetymanagementrules.However,thepeculiarityoftheshortfoodsupplychain,often related to fresh foods or restricted in the number of processing andtransactionstepsandemployeesinvolved,facilitatesefficientcommunicationandcontrol. As such there might be the option for simplified rules and controlsystems to be put in place. Furthermore guidance, training andnetworking forexchange of information provided by either public or private organizations tofarmersorbusiness intheshort foodsupplychainmayenhancethecapacitytocomply to the relevant food hygiene and other food safety regulations anddemandsforassuringsafeandhighqualityfoodstotheconsumer.

REFERENCES

Carey,L.,Bell,P.,Duff,A.,Sheridan,M.,Shields,M.2011.Farmers’Marketconsumers:aScottischperspective.InternationalJournalofConsumerStudies35(3),300‐306.Berlin, L., Lockeretz,W., Bell, R. 2009. Purchasing foods produced on organic, small and localfarms: amixedmethodanalysisofNewEngland consumers.RenawableAgriculture andFoodsystems.24(4),267‐275.Renting,H.,Marsden,T.K.,Banks, J.2003.Understandingalternative foodnetworks: exploringtheroleofshortfoodsupplychainsinruraldevelopment.EnvironmentandPlanningA.35,393‐411.Ibery, B., Maye, D. 2005. Alternative (shorter) food supply chains and specialist livestockproductsintheScottisch‐Englishborders.EnvironmentandPlanningA.37,823‐844.

17

FASFCPOLICYONFOODSAFETYINTHESHORTSUPPLYCHAIN

Ir.HermanDiricksDirector‐generalofthedirectorate‐generalControlPolicyoftheFASFCE‐mail:herman.diricks@favv.beSocio‐economic trends, consumer demands and increasing environmentalawarenesshaveentailedchangesinthewaysofpresentingandsupplyingfoodtotheconsumer.IntheapproachtowardsfoodsafetyatbothEuropeanandnationallevel, it is important to anticipate these societal developments. The EuropeanUnionasweknowittodayisbuiltondiversitywitheachcountryhavingitsownparticularities and specific needs. For this reason provisions with respect toflexibility and subsidiarity have been included in the European hygieneregulations.Thismeans that in somespecificcases thememberstateshave theauthoritytoadoptdowntheirownnationalruleswhileatthesametimeensuringthe achievement of the objectives of the European hygiene regulations. Thenationalauthoritieshave thebestunderstandingof thediversityand thesocio‐economicsituationintheircountryandthereforeareinthebestpositiontoadoptsuch rules in consultationwith the different target groups involved. Flexibilityand subsidiarity with respect to direct supply of foodstuffs to final consumersapplyto:

direct supply,byproducers,of small amountsofprimaryproducts to thefinalconsumerortolocalretailestablishmentsdirectlysupplyingthefinalconsumer;

directsupply,bytheproducer,ofsmallquantitiesofmeatfrompoultryandlagomorphsslaughteredonthefarmtothefinalconsumerortolocalretailestablishmentsdirectlysupplyingsuchmeattothefinalconsumerasfreshmeat;

hunters who supply small quantities of wild game or wild game meatdirectly to the final consumer or to local retail establishments directlysupplyingthefinalconsumer;

supplyof foodofanimalorigin fromaretailestablishment tootherretailestablishments if such supply is a marginal, localized and restrictedactivity.

TheBelgianFoodSafetyAgencyincludedspecificprovisionsinitscontrolpolicyin order to give small producers theopportunity tobenefit from this flexibilityand subsidiarity. National rules have been laid down with respect to theabovementionedactivities.At themoment,anewlegislativeactwithregardstodirect supply of products of animal origin at the production site to finalconsumers or to local retailers supplying directly to the final consumer is inpreparation.Inaddition,criteriaforflexibilityprovidedinEUregulationssuchas

18

“marginal, local and restricted activity” and “small amounts” have beeninterpretedinnationallegislation.Forinstance“local“hasbeendefinedassupplywithinan80kmradiusoftheproductionsite.Moreflexiblehygienerulesapplyto the direct supply of products of plant origin (potatoes, vegetables and fruit)and products of animal origin (milk, eggs, slaughtering of poultry and rabbits,fisheryandaquacultureproducts,wildgame).Theseruleshavebeendevelopedinconsultationwiththestakeholdersconcerned.Inadditiontothesespecifichygieneprovisions,theFoodSafetyAgencyhasalsoimplemented flexibilitywith respect to the European requirements concerningHACCPandtraceability.Foodbusinessoperatorswhoonlymarketprepackagedand/ornonperishable foodstuffswithoutperforminganykindofprocessingofthese foods do not have to implement the HACCP principles but only need toapplygoodhygienepractices.Certainotherfoodbusinessoperatorscanapplyasimplified HACCP system if they implement a guide to good practices that hasbeen approved by the Food Safety Agency. These operators do not have todeveloptheirownHACCPsystem.TheycanrelyontheHACCPplanprovidedinthe guide. In addition, the requirements for record keeping are limited to theregistrationofnon‐compliances.BesidestheHACCPflexibility,stronglysimplifiedadministrativeprocedureswithregardtotraceabilityareprovided.TheFoodSafetyAgencyhas takenthe initiative to furtherdevelopandsimplifythe approved guides in the sectors directly supplying to consumers (bakeries,butchershops,pubs,restaurants,hotels,dairyfarms,retailandnurseries).TheseguideswillbemadepubliclyavailableontheFoodAgencywebsitefreeofchargeandsupportfortrainingoftargetgroupswillbeprovided.Severalotherinitiativeshavebeentakentoinformfoodbusinessoperatorsactivein the short supply chain. A brochure on food safety requirements duringprocessingandmarketingoffoodonthefarmhasbeenpublishedrecently.Many other brochures are available to food business operators: e.g. on self‐checkinginsmallbusinesses,notificationrequirement,traceability,…TheFoodSafetyAgencywebsitecontainsguidelinesonmilkdispensermachines,includinghygienerulesandspecificrisksrelatingtotheconsumptionofrawmilk.Currently, consultations are ongoing with the agricultural sector on thepossibilitiesofloweringthesamplingfrequenciesfortheanalysisofwellwater.

19

SHORTFOODSUPPLYCHAININFLANDERS

Dr.AnnDetelderCoordinatorSteunpuntHoeveproductenKVLVE‐mail:adetelder@groepkvlv.be

FRAMEWORK

Short food supply chain is a sustainable marketing system with a directrelationshipbetweentheproducerandtheconsumer.Inmostcasestheproducersellsdirectlytotheconsumer.Thereisnorealdefinitionoftheshortfoodsupplychainsystembutthereareanumberofbasicprinciples:

Relationship producer – consumer: the farmer sells directly to theconsumer;

Limited number of links in the chain: the product is not distributedthroughwholesaledistributionorthefoodprocessingindustry;

Ownership: the producer/farmer can determine the price, productionmethodandsupply(fairpriceforafairproduct);

Local:locallygrownproductsaresoldlocally; Contactwiththeagriculture:consumersrediscovermodernagriculture.

Shortfoodsupplychaininitiativescanhavevariousforms.Farmproductscanbesoldonthefarmitself,inafarmshop,throughhomesales,atfarmersmarkets,ina neighborhood store in the immediate surroundings of the farm or throughcollectivesystemssuchasfoodteams,vegetablesubscriptionsorcooperativesoffarmers.Thefarmercanalsosellhisproductsinakioskalongthesideoftheroadortroughu‐pickfarms.Directsalesthroughlocalmarketsorothershortchainchannelsis,ofcourse,notanewconcept. 'Farmersmarkets'haveexisted forcenturiesandwere formerlyoneofthemainsourcesofincomeforfarmers.Byurbanization,intensificationinagriculture,betterpreservation techniquesand theemergenceof supermarketshowevermany farmersmarkets disappeared. The food chain is also becomingmoreglobalized,consumerfoodsareofferedfromallovertheworld.Farmproductsareproductsofagricultureorhorticulture,harvestedonthefarmand possibly processed and offered for sale directly to the consumer or thirdparties.Mainlyprimaryproducts,butalsoprocessedproductssuchasbutter,icecreamorfruitjuicecanbeassignedasfarmproducts.

20

The characteristic element of farm products is therefore not only theirorigin(thefarm),butalsothewaytheyaresold:throughtheshortchain.

NUMBEROFSHORTFOODSUPPLYCHAINSELLERSINFLANDERS

Short food supply chain marketing in Flanders is mainly the responsibility offarmers. They market their own primary or processed products through theirown farm shop, local (farmers) market, internet, small retail businesses,subscriptioninitiatives,…

Number of farms in Flanders (data through Ministry of Agriculture andFishery‐2011)

2011 %in2011FarmsinFlanders 25982 100.00%FarmsinAntwerp 3914 15.06%FarmsinFlemishBrabant 3045 11.72%FarmsinWest‐Flanders 9065 34.89%FarmsinEast‐Flanders 6872 26.45%FarmsinLimburg 3086 11.88%

Numberofshortfoodsupplychainfarmsin2012inFlanders(datathrough

theSteunpuntHoeveproducten1/KVLVvzw)

%relativetothenumberoffarmsFlanders 1321 100.00% 5.08%Antwerp 252 19.08% 6.44%FlemishBrabant 197 14.91% 6.47%West‐Flanders 409 30.96% 4.51%East‐Flanders 290 21.95% 4.22%Limburg 172 13.02% 5.57%

1The‘SteunpuntHoeveproducten’ofKVLVvzw(=AssistantCenterforfarmersstartinganddevelopingtheirshortfoodsupplychainmarketingactivity)isactiveinFlandersandinforms farmers concerning the legal framework of starting/developing a short foodsupplychainactivity(foodhygiene,selfcontrolsystems,foodlaw,marketinglegislation,landmanagement,fiscalmatters,costpricecalculationandprofitability,…)

21

Numberofshortfoodsupplychainfarmsin2011inFlanders(datathroughtheFASFC)

Selling manufacturedproducts

Selling primaryproducts

Total

Flanders 652 809 1461Antwerp 88 102 190FlemishBrabant 76 209 285West‐Flanders 241 188 429East‐Flanders 190 202 392Limburg 57 108 165

Number of short chain food supplier farms/sector in 2011 in Flanders(datathroughtheFASFC)

Meatmanufacturers

Dairy productmanufacturers

Manufacturersof cropproducts

Farmssellingprimaryproducts

Total

Flanders 99 447 106 809 1461Antwerp 10 66 12 102 190FlemishBrabant 15 36 25 209 285West‐Flanders 37 177 27 188 429East‐Flanders 28 130 32 202 392Limburg 9 38 10 108 165

MOTIVATIONSFORSTARTINGASHORTFOODSUPPLYCHAINSELLINGACTIVITYINFLANDERS

Shortchainsellingofprimaryand/ormanufacturedfoodproductsbyfarmsisanimportant way of broadening the farming activities. The main reason ofinitializing the activity of marketing its own products is an economic reason.Getting a reasonable income in Flanders in a farming business is not easy.Enlarging the scale size of the farm/the production is not always an easy orwanted solution so the marketing of own farm products can – for a certainnumberoffarms–beagoodalternative.Short chain selling of own farm products can also be a good option when theson/daughterwantstojointheparentsfarmingbusiness.Furthermore some farms are located close to a village centre/city and canthereforeprofitfromtheirlocationclosetotheendconsumer.

22

Shortfoodsupplychainsellingfarmsaremostlysmallscaledwithaverylimitednumber of people employed (familymembers). Rather seldom external peopleareemployedintheproductmanufacturing↔sellingactivity.

TYPESOFSHORTFOODSUPPLYCHAINSELLINGFARMS

Farmssellingprimarycropproducts:fruit,vegetables,rawmilk; Farmssellingmanufactureddairyproducts:desserts,ice‐cream,cheese,…; Farmssellingmeatproducts:sealedmeat,farmswithownbutchery; Farmssellingmanufacturedcropproducts; Alotoffarmscombineseveraltypesofproducts.

FOODSAFETYINTHESHORTCHAINSELLINGACTIVITYONFARMS

Foodsafety is linked to the typeofproduct.Meatanddairyproductsaremoresensitive products than primary products. Therefore the possible food safetyrisksarenotsimilaronalltheshortfoodsupplychainsellingfarms.

Farmssellingprimarycropproducts:fruit,vegetables,rawmilk

Theproduction of primaryproducts inBelgium/Flanders is regulatedbytheFederalFoodLawandmoreandabovebyqualityguides the farmers(IKM,vegaplan,…)havetocomplywithinordertodelivertheirproductsto the milk cooperation, the auction market or wholesalers. Most of thefarms sell only a limited percentage of their production directly throughshortchainfoodsupplymeans.Thereforetheprimaryproductssoldthroughtheshortchaincomplywithallthequalityandfoodsafetyregulationsastheproductssoldthroughtheregularchain.

The production of manufactured products in Belgium/Flanders is also

regulatedbytheFederalFoodLaw.Smallfarmbusinesseshavetocomplytothesameregulationsas largefoodindustries.Onlyonaadministrativeleveltheycanprofitfromsomefacilitations.

TheSteunpuntHoeveproductenorganizesonafrequentlybasiscourseson‘Hygiene and autocontrole (self‐checking)’ were the participants learnaboutfoodhygiene,therisksonfoodmanufacturing,riskanalysisandriskreduction. In collaborationwith the ILVO (TAD zuivel) and theKHK, theSteunpuntHoeveproductenadvisesfarmersonregulationsandhelpthemincaseofproblems.The Steunpunt Hoeveproducten underwrites the importance of a self‐checkingplanandqualitymanual.

23

The Steunpunt Hoeveproducten also encourages the half yearlybacteriologicalcontrolofthefarmmanufacturedproducts(organizationofthehalfyearlylabanalyses).Thebacteriologicallabanalyzeresultstendtobeverypositiveforthefarmers/manufacturersoffoodproducts.Examplefordairyproducts

Exceedance of enterobacteria: in ice cream, yoghurt andchocolatemousse

ExceedanceofE.coli:inbutterandbuttermilk Exceedanceofcoagulase+staphylococci:incheese ExceedanceofListeria:incheese

Somefarmersproducedairyproductsbasedonrawmilk.Thiscouldmeanahigherriskforpublichealthbutbacteriologicallabanalysisdonotshowsignificantlythishigherriskfactor.

POSSIBLECONSTRAINTSREGARDINGFOODHYGIENEANDPUBLICHEALTHINTHESHORTFOODSUPPLYCHAIN

Smallscale:primaryproduction/manufacturing/sellingarehappeningin1location so there could be a higher risk of cross contamination. Thispotentiallyhigherriskiscounteredbythefactthatthebusinessisrunby1ormaximum2persons,thelimitedvolumeoffoodproductandtheshortstoragetimeoftheproducts;

Artisanal products: farm manufactured products are often producedfollowing‘oldrecipes’withrespectfortraditionsandgoodtaste;

Investmentcapacity:secondhandmaterial,halfautomatedmachines; Useofwellwater:acertainnumberoffarms(10–15%havenoaccessto

tapwater);

24

Self checking system and risk analysis: farmers active in de short foodsupplychainbusiness cannotemploya ‘quality supervisor’ (↔ industry).Developing a self checking manual and risk analysis needs specializedknowledgeandskills.Specifictrainingsessionsandanindependentadvisecentre are essential in order to preserve food quality, food hygiene andpublichealth.

REFERENCES

‘Korte keten initiatieven in Vlaanderen’, een overzicht; Departement Landbouw,Departement Landbouw en Visserij, afdeling Monitoring en Studie; Geertrui Cazaux;april 2010; Rapport, 52 blz. Depotnummer: D/2010/3241/163;www.vlaanderen.be/landbouw.‘Strategisch Plan Korte Keten’; Vlaamse overheid, Afdeling DuurzameLandbouwontwikkeling; Beleidsdomein Landbouw en Visserij; Maayke Keymeulen;Depotnummer:D/2011/3241294;www.vlaanderen.be/landbouw.

25

THEPOLICYFORSHORTSUPPLYCHAINSINWALLONIA

Ir.DamienWinandyDirectorDirectionQualityDGARNESPW‐WalloonregionE‐mail:damien.winandy@spw.wallonie.be

ABSTRACT

Wallonia has supported short supply chains for several years using variousmeasures. Thismarketingmethod is developing but is still experiencingmanyobstaclesthatmustbeidentifiedinordertoimplementthetoolsneededforthedevelopmentofnewprojects.This lecture is a policy overview for short supply chains inWallonia outliningpotential developments and the resources to be implemented so that localproducerscandeveloptheirbusinessesbymakingbestuseoftheopportunitiesonofferandexpandingsalesthroughshortsupplychains.

SCOPE

Theroleofagricultureisnolongerconfinedtosimplyfeedingthepopulation.Ithas become multi‐functional and its existence and development affect theeconomy, the environment, the landscape and regional and sustainabledevelopment.Shortsupplychainscontributetothesevariousrolesbyhelpingtosupportfarms,andparticularlysmallfarms.Inaddition,moreandmoreconsumersareaskingquestionsaboutthesystemofmassconsumption.Theywanttobebetterinformedaboutwherethefoodstheyconsume are produced and who is involved in this production. Some areinterested in consuming seasonal products, local produce and rediscoveringheritagevarietiesoffruitsandvegetables.Thisconsumerquestioningalsocoversthe productionmethod, increasinglymotivating them to choose food producedusingenvironmentallyfriendly,fairtradeororganicfarmingmethods.Governmentsplayakeyroleinpromotingthisawarenessandinfluencingthesechanges. Thedevelopment policy for short supply circuits proves its value at alocalandregionallevelandtheWalloonRegionisnoexceptioninthisarea.

GENERALCONTENT

1. In July 2009, in its regional policy declaration, theWalloon governmentestablished thepolicy guidelinesunderlying its action for the2009‐2014period. For agriculture, it set out a major commitment to promote the

26

consumption of Walloon products and those produced using organicproductionmethods.

2. In order to translate policy issues into operational objectives, theadvantages and constraints of the marketing methods in short supplychains for farmers, consumers and society in general must firstly beunderstood.

3. ThecurrentsituationwithshortsupplychainsinWalloniaisspreadacrossawiderangeofpracticalexamplesthathelptoillustratethegreatdiversityof situations and the resulting wealth of product types. The reasons forsuchdiversityaregenerallyrelatedtolocalconditions,thepeopleinvolvedandthevariedsolutionsthattheychoosetoexplore.

4. The operational strategy implemented byWallonia is expressed throughvarious supportmeasures and its effectiveness ismeasured through theresultsrecorded.

5. Therearemanyobstacles to thedevelopmentof short supplychainsandthese are far from being removed at present. Accurate identification ofthese obstacles is essential in definingmissing tools and new initiativesthatwould be useful in helping various individuals and organizations todeveloptheirprojects.

6. TheconclusionofthispolicyoverviewforshortsupplychainsinWalloniawill primarily summarize potential developments and the resourcesneeded to implement themso that localproducers canseizeall availableopportunitiestohelpthemdeveloptheirbusinessesbymakingbestuseoftheseopportunitiesandexpandingsalesthroughshortsupplychains.

REFERENCES

Appétit’Champs:Diagnosticetpropositiondestratégiespourdévelopper,audépartdescollectivités,unefilièred’alimentationdurablesurleterritoiredeNamur,ECORESSPRL‐January2012.Circuitscourts,CRIOC‐June2010.Circuits courts pour la commercialisation des productions agricoles alimentaires : dequoi s’agit‐il ? Claustriaux J. J., Palm R., Lebailly P., Winandy S. University ofLiège/GemblouxAgro‐BioTech‐8December2010.ConsommationetcommercialisationenfilièrecourtedesviandesenWallonieGembloux‐29November2011.Déclarationdepolitique régionale2009‐2014 "Une énergiepartagéepourune sociétédurable,humaineetsolidaire"‐12July2009.Typologiecircuitscourts,CRIOC‐June2010.

27

Vade‐mecumde lavalorisationdesproduits agricolesetde leur commercialisationencircuitcourt,PublicServiceofWallonia‐DGARNE‐July2012.

28

FOODSAFETYPROBLEMSSPECIFICTOTHESHORTCHAINSELECTEDCASESTUDIESFROMTHENETHERLANDS

Dr.BennoterKuileSenioradvisormicrobiologyBuRONVWAGuestresearcherAmsterdamUniversity(TheNetherlands)E‐mail:benno.ter.kuile@vwa.nlWhenitcomestofoodstuffs,theterm“shortchain”istobetakenquiteliterally.Itoftendefinessaleat theplaceofproduction,suchas farmsorsmallworkshops,such as bakers and butchers. The place of production indicates somethingdifferent from the place of preparation. Restaurants or catering is not bynecessity considered short chain, only in the exceptional cases that they arelinkedtofarmsanduseproductsoftheirownland.Anothertermoftenusedfortheshortchainis“artisan”,denotingspecialskillsoftheproducerandtraditionalpreparationprocedures.In the Netherlands there are approximately 25,000 companies that areconsidered short chain foodproducers. Themobile group, selling atmarkets isthe largest (11,500), followed by the bakers (3,500) and butchers (1,800). Thetotal number has been steadily decreasing over the years. The short chain issubject to Regulation (EC) No 852/2004, which has been transformed intohygienecodesbytheirtradeorganizations.Examples of farm shops that sell products, in these cases cheese, that areproducedonthepremises.

29

In the eyes of the public the short chain is linked to all kind of positiveconnotations.Theyexpect theproductstobemorefresh,pure,healthy,natural,nutritious, better tasting and safe than their mainstream “industrial”counterparts. It is questionable whether any or all of these expectations arerealistic.Firstofallatermlike“pure”ispoorlydefinedandtasteisverypersonal.Whetherthenutritionalvalueisdifferentdependsonmanyfactors,thelengthofthe chain being only one of them and a short chain does not guarantee anincreasednutritional value. This presentationwill focus solely on the aspect offoodsafety.Themainstream food industry attempts to control the chain from farm‐to‐forkusingsuchinstrumentsasHACCPandGMP.Allmajorcompaniesemployqualitymanagersandfoodsafetyspecialists.Intheshortchainveryfewcompanieshavethe size that they can afford the services of professionals dedicated solely tosafety. Three examples ofmishaps that have occurred in the Netherlandsmayserveasexamplesofwhatcangowrongasresultofa lackofknowledgeinthisarea.In2006anunexplainedclusterofinfectionswitharareSalmonellaTyphimuriumfagetype560,wasdiscovered inTwente,anarea intheeastof theNetherlands.An investigationusingamongother things the addressesof the peopleaffecteddisclosedthattheclustercoincidedwiththesalesareaoftwosupermarkets.Oneof the few specific items that these supermarkets carried exclusivelywere theproductsofanearbycheesefarm.UsingstandardmethodologytheNetherlandsFood and Consumer Product Safety Authority (NVWA) did not discover the

30

Salmonella strain in the cheese. It was found, however, in a drainpipe in acowshed on the farm. No action was taken as this was considered insufficientevidence.Whentheoutbreakcontinued,theNetherlandsInstituteforHealthandtheEnvironmentusingmuch largersamplesizes found thestrain inaso‐called“old”cheesefromthisfarm.AninvestigationintohowtheSalmonellastraincouldhaveendedupinthecheese,revealedthatthefarmerdidnotalwayschangehisbootswhenhewalked fromthecowshed to thebuildingwhere thecheesewasmade.Hedidnotunderstandthelogicoftheruleandthoughtitwasunnecessaryandbothersome.A farmers wife who has a hobby making milk‐based deserts decides to startsellingcustarddirectlytocustomersatthefarm.Atfirstshefollowswell‐knownrecipes,but latershestarts toexperimentanddiscovers that lowering the finalheatingstep from90oC to80oC improves the tasteof thecustard.Thiscausesastring of complaints. People got sick because the lowered heating step doesn’teliminateBacilluscereus.Thehobby‐cookdidn’trealizethattheheatingstepisasafetymeasureaimedateliminatingspore‐formerslikeB.cereus.The local butcher looses customers to the nearby supermarket and decides toincrease business by selling homemade ready‐to‐eat dishes. Among these arefried‐rice dishes and a pea‐soup that contains meat. The turnover steadilyincreasesandtheentrepreneurdecidestoinvestinnewequipment.Hebuyshuge800 liter vessels, but economizes by omitting the optional cooling system. Thesoups and rice dishes are not cooled fast enough and during the cooling downperiodClostridiumperfringensoutgrowthoccurs.Thebutcherwasnotawareofthisrisk.Thereareseveralcommonfactorsintheseandalmostallothermishapsinshortchain food enterprises. The first one is that sufficient knowledge of foodmicrobiologyisnotalwaysavailablewithinthesesmallcompanies.Thissituationisinmanywayscomparabletohomecooking,wherelackofknowledgeleadstoriskysituations,thatcouldhaveeasilybeenpreventedatlowornocosts,hadthecook the correct insight in foodmicrobiology.A contributing factormaybe thenatureofHACCPplansandhygienecodes.Theseplansareoftensodetailedanddescribe procedures, such as receiving and opening a carton box ormeasuringthetemperatureofproductsinthefreezer,insuchdetailthatthetargetaudiencestopstotakeitseriously.Thefoodhandlersandpreparerscannotdistinguishtheessentialfromtheirrelevantrulesandregulatorsarenotalwayskeenenoughonweeding out unnecessary rules. The result is that food producers in the shortchain do not realize the risk attached to not exactly following prescribedprocedures,astheyhavenoinsightinandknowledgeoftheunderlyingfacts.TheNVWAcommissionedaresearchprojectin2005aimedatpinpointingtheseproblems.Partiallybasedon theoutcomeof this investigation aworkplanwasdesignedincludingsomenewmeasures.Thefirstonewas,assimpleasitsounds,

31

tomakeasurveytoensurethatallshortchainfoodestablishmentswereknownand their essential data, such as the nature of the business and the address,included in a database. Next they were categorized according to the risk theyposed,according to thekindofproductand,whenavailable, their trackrecord.Thegroupsweredesignatedas“green”forlowrisk,“orange” formoderateand“red” for high risks. The members of the green group are spot‐checked only,orangeregularlyandmostattentionisgiventotheredcompanies.Intheeventoffrequent violations, establishments are closed. An information leaflet on salesfrom home was drafted an distributed. Start‐up businesses can ask forcompliance assistance. An inspector will visit and make recommendations onhowtomakesuretheyactinaccordancewithallrules,freeofchargeandwithouttheriskofbeingfined.Intheinterestofefficiency,inspectorslimitthemselvestocheckingonly forobservanceofrulesthataffect foodsafety.Additional trainingwas given to inspectors of short chain establishments, to make sure that theywere able to make the correct judgments on the application of the rules andregulations.Finally,theoutcomeoftheinspectioneffortsaremeasuredbylinkingthe inspection data to disease load and health complaints associated to shortchainproducts.

32

SESSION2.FOODSAFETYOFTHESHORT

SUPPLYCHAIN

33

MICROBIOLOGICALSAFETYANDQUALITYASPECTSINRELATIONTOTHESHORTFOODSUPPLYCHAIN

L.Herman*,M.Heyndrickx1,K.DeReu1,E.VanCoillie1,M.Uyttendaele2,31ILVO2GhentUniversity3ScientificCommitteeFASFC*Speaker:Dr.LieveHermanHeadofdivisionILVO‐T&VMemberoftheScientificCommitteeoftheFASFCE‐mail:lieve.herman@ilvo.vlaanderen.be

INTRODUCTION

A number of microbiological safety aspects are related to food and foodproduction. According to the EU regulation 852/2004 (Anonymous, 2004) thesafetyof the foodchainhas tobecontrolled fromfarmto fork,eachstep in thefoodproductionchain taking its responsibility todelivera safe foodproduct tothe market. The safety is to be controlled based upon the principles of ‘GoodAgriculturalPractices’(GAP), ‘GoodManufacturingPractices’(GMP)and‘HazardAnalysisandCriticalControlPoints’(HACCP).Thisregulationisvalidforallfoodproduction, including the production by the short food supply chain. However,thecomplexityof legislation, the fact that thepersons in chargeareengaged inmultiplesimultaneousassignmentsandthelackofprofoundknowledgetoassessthe risks associatedwith their productsmay put a challenge to comply to andimplementallfoodsafetyregulations.Acollaborationbetweenallplayersinthefield,includingthescientificworld,ishighlyneeded.In this presentation, a balanced view bymeans of a SWOT‐analysis (strengths,weaknesses,opportunitiesandthreats)ispresentedonthetypicalcharacteristicsof the short food supply chain in relation to microbiological food safety andquality aspects, and in comparison to the more conventional (large scale)production. In this report, results of several scientific advices of the ScientificCommitteeoftheBelgianFoodSafetyAgency(FASFC)areincorporated,showingthe increasing topicality of the problem and the increasing demand forknowledgeandguidance.

STRENGTHSOFTHESHORTFOODSUPPLYCHAININRELATIONTOMICROBIOLOGICALSAFETYANDQUALITYASPECTS

CONTROLOFQUALITYANDSAFETYOFAGRICULTURALPRODUCTS

MicrobiologicalhazardsasSalmonella,Yersinia,CampylobacterandverotoxigenicE. coli on farms are related to animal carriage of these pathogens (and for

34

Salmonella sometimes with animal disease) and subsequent excretion in theenvironment; thesezoonoticpathogenscanbeexchangedbetweenanimalsandtheenvironmentandcanbespreadtothefieldsbycontaminatedirrigationwaterand manure. Listeria monocytogenes contamination can also circulate in theenvironment without animal infection or carriage. Control of thesemicrobiological hazards can be based on i) the knowledge of the animal statusconcerning disease and carriage of zoonotic pathogens; ii) the analysis of welldedicatedsamplestofollowthestatusatselectedpointsofattentionduringfarmproduction; and iii) a strict implementation of the best practices and hygienerulesduring cultivation, harvest andprocessing. In the short food supply chaintheactivityofagriculturalproductionandfurtherprocessingareoftencombinedonthesamesiteand/ormanagedbythesamepersonincharge.Packing,sortingor processing usually takes place at the farm, using most of the time on‐siteharvested crops, raw milk or raw meat derived from own livestock or fromagriculturalproductsderivedincloseproximity.Assuch,adherencetoGAPandcontrol of its raw materials for microbiological hazards is expected to be aninherentcentralfocuspointoftheshortfoodsupplychain.Areducedriskfortheintroductionofcertainemergingmicrobiologicalhazardsisexpected for the short food supply chain production due to its in general localsourcing of inputs (raw and auxiliary materials, feed) in comparison with theglobalizedfoodproduction.

ON‐SITEPROCESSINGANDDISTRIBUTIONOFFRESHLYHARVESTEDAGRICULTURALPRODUCTS

Intheshortfoodsupplychainitisintermsoflogisticsmorefeasibletomaintainashort and direct link between primary production (harvest,milking, slaughter)andsubsequentneedofstorageuntilfoodprocessingandthedistributiontotheconsumer. In general, this short time frame of storage can be considered asbeneficialforthemicrobiologicalqualityandsafetyoftheendproduct.Thiscanbededucedfromthefollowingexamples:

1. Prolonged storage of primary food products at low temperature beforeprocessing allows the outgrowth of Gram‐negative psychrotrophic andpsychrophilic microorganisms such as Pseudomonas in raw milk. SomePseudomonas bacteria are capable of producing thermo‐resistantextracellular proteases and lipases, which can cause spoilage andstructuraldefects inpasteurizedandultra‐high‐temperature‐treatedmilk(products). Outgrowth of Pseudomonas members occurs from thebeginningofthedairychain(farmtank)tilltheheatingprocessinthedairyindustry and is clearly dependent on the storage time (De Jonghe et al.,2011). On‐farm production does not need long storage of raw foodproducts.

35

2. Scientific studies show that the best way of protecting human infectionfromsalmonellosiscausedbycontaminatedeggsisofferedbylimitingthebacterialoutgrowthbydirectandconstantcoolingoftheeggsafterlay(DeReu,2006a;Messensetal.,2006).Thiswouldbeeasiertoorganizeintheshort food supply chain. In addition, the absence of temperaturefluctuations, which may occur more in long food supply chains withmultipletransactions,avoidseggshellcondensationandthusalsobacterialeggshellpenetration(DeReuetal.,2006b).Theimmediatecoolingofeggshas been recommended to be included in the Guides for the autocontrolsystemforactivitiesasthecollectivenursery(chréche)foryoungchilderen(Sci Com Advice 21‐2011), and the horeca sector (Sci Com Advice 02‐2006).

3. Patulinisamycotoxin,producedassecondarymetabolitebyseveralfungalspecies from which Penicillium expansum is the most important one onapples. Patulin production occurs during storage of damaged apples andpatulin contaminates the processed products as apple juice and applecompote (de Souza Sant‐Ana et al., 2008). Reducing the storage time ofapplesoffersthepossibilitytocontroltheproblem.

CONTAMINATIONFROMDIFFERENTMICROBIOLOGICALSOURCESMAYBE

MORELIMITED

Inmost cases, the short food supply chain limits processing to the agriculturalproductsproducedatthefarm;thisincontrarytomostconventionalprocessingunits where raw materials of multiple producers are entering the sameprocessing plant. It is expected that in the short food supply chain, thecontaminationoftheprocessingareawithapathogenwouldbelimitedtothosestrainscirculatingontheownfarmanditsenvironment.Potentialcontaminationsources can thus be more limited. This would also favor the strength of anyepidemiologicallinkincaseofhumanfoodborneillnessreportedandtracedbackto a contaminated farm product. The same may apply to the microbiologicalqualityofshortchainfoodproducts.Itwasforexampleobservedinsimulationsofthecooledrawmilkchainfromthefarmbulktanktothedairyplantsilothatthe overallPseudomonas diversitywas less in a cool stored sample of a singlefarmmilktankcomparedtoacoolstoredmixedsamplefromdifferentfarmmilktanks(DeJongheetal.,2011).Thismayhaveconsequencesforrawmilkqualityinprocessing,shelflifeandsafety,butmoreresearchisneededtohaveconsistentproofoftheseassumptions.

FOODSAFETYCULTUREANDINFORMALSYSTEMSCONTROLLINGADHERENCETOBESTPRACTICES

Short food supply chains are responding to a consumer demand for a largervariety of “quality” food products. Producers and consumers in the short foodsupply chain are concerned on values as taste, nutrition, freshness and in

36

generally quality, and thus intrinsically also safe food and food production. Alargeresponsibilityisexpectedfromtheemployeestowardstheirclientsduetopersonalcontactandalargercommitment.The adherence on a daily basis to good practices and hygiene is very muchinfluencedbyhumanbehaviorandcommitment.Asaconsequence,theshortfoodsupply chain may be characterized by an good food safety culture, which isintrinsicallymorepronetoadherencetogoodpracticesleadingtoriskreductionandhighqualityfoodswithoutformalprocedures(Douglasetal.,2011).

WEAKNESSESANDTHREATSOFTHESHORTCHAININRELATIONTOMICROBIOLOGICALSAFETYASPECTS

INCREASEDPOTENTIALFORCROSSCONTAMINATIONINCASEOFCOMBINEDORNEIGHBORINGACTIVITIES:ANIMALANDCROP

PRODUCTIONORPRIMARYPRODUCTIONANDFURTHERPROCESSING

Intheshortchain,theprimaryproductionismostlylocalizedonthesamesiteasthe further processing and distribution of the end products or there is a closecontactbetweentheseactivitiesonneighboringfarms.Severalreportsunderlinethepossibilityof endproduct contaminationdue to transferofpathogens fromanimalsandtheanimalenvironmenttofinishedfoodproductsreadytobesetonthemarket.Thiscontaminationcanoccurasapostcontaminationafterpasteurizationaswasthecase in theBelgianoutbreakofverocytoxinproducingE.coliO145andO26infections associatedwith the consumptionof on farmproduced ice cream (DeSchrijver et al., 2008). The pathogenic E. coli strains isolated from thecontaminated ice creamwere also found from the cows and the calves. Directcontamination from infected animals to end product is also possible. This hasbeen shown in a listeriosis outbreak in Swedendue to the consumption of on‐farm manufactured fresh goat cheese produced from raw milk of goats withsubclinicalmastitisexcretingL.monocytogenesdirectlyinthemilk.Onthisfarm,contamination in the environment caused the cross contamination of the cowmilkcheesesproducedatthesamefarmaswell(Eilertzetal.,2004).Crosscontaminationcanalsooccurfromanimalstofreshplantproducethroughcontaminatedirrigationwater.TheimportanceofthesafetyofirrigationwaterintheprimaryproductionisillustratedbythelargeE.coliO157outbreakinSwedenwith locallyproduced lettuce in2005 (Söderströmetal., 2008).The implicatedlettuce was contaminated by irrigation with water from a small streamwhichbecamecontaminatedwiththesamestrainofthepathogenalsopresentincattleat a farm upstream from the irrigation point. The importance of the quality ofirrigationwaterinprimaryproductionwasstressedbytheScientificCommitteeoftheFASFCintheadviceSciComFASFC28‐2009.Theadviceidentifiedtherisks

37

for food safety and formulated qualitative advices and a proposal formicrobiologicalguidelines.The importance of the safety of the processing water was illustrated by theoutbreak of campylobacteriosis by the consumption of locally produced andprocessed peas (Gardner et al., 2011). The peas became contaminated withCampylobacter jejunibywildbirdsgrazingatthefarm’speafields.Shelledpeas,obtained after processing, could have become contaminated due to processingwater which was inadequately disinfected. Especially in relation toCampylobactercontamination,allbroilerproducershavetobeawarethatamore‘natural’production,with longerbreedingperiods for chickens,with free rangebreeding and wild life grazing at the farm is demanding an appropriate foodsafety control system, based on proper knowledge of the risks and thecontamination sources. Campylobacter jejuni contamination of raw milk is animportantsafetyissueincountries(e.g.UK)wherethereisstillalargelocalrawmilkconsumptioninruralareas.

LACKOFFOODSAFETYKNOWLEDGE

In theshortchain, thewholeproduction fromprimaryproduct till endproductanddistribution,ismanagedbythesamepersonorthesameteamincharge.Dueto the broad range of tasks, specialization towards food safetymanagement ismostly not possible. As a consequence, most short chain production units arestrugglingwiththecomplexityofthefoodsafetymanagementrules.Thefoodsafetychallengesfacedatthefarmers’marketsareillustratingtheneedfor adequate food safetyknowledge. Farmer’smarketsoften sell theirproductsoutdoors and thus potentially exposed to environmental contaminants such asdirt, insects and pollution. Together with this, farmers’ markets may facechallenges in relation to food safety similar to other temporary food serviceestablishments as access to potable water, hand washing facilities, generalcleaning and disinfection of surfaces, electricity for refrigeration and sufficientcoolingcapacity.Theproblemsfacedbyfarmers’marketsareillustratedbythefollowingstudies:

Behnkeetal.(2012)investigatedthebehaviorofemployeesinrelationtohandwashing in farmers’markets and their results revealed thatproperhand washing between handling different objects including raw andprocessed products was infrequently practiced. At food markets, ingeneral,manyunpackagedfoodproductsarehandled,veryoftenthesameemployeesarehandling foodproductsandmoney. Inmanycasesproperhandwashingfacilitiesaremissing.

Worsfoldetal.(2004)foundthatalmost25%ofsurveyedfarmers’marketvendors were unable to correctly assess the risk associated with their

38

wares and that 84 % disagreed with the idea that their products couldcausefoodpoisoning.

GuzewichandRoss(1999)reviewedtheliteratureandfoundthat82%ofthereportedoutbreaksimplicatedfoodhandlersasthesourceofinfectionand that the majority of the outbreaks associated with food handlersinvolvedtransmissionofthepathogenbythefoodhandlers’hand.Thisissurely the case for noroviruses, responsible for 17.8% of all foodborneoutbreaksinEuropein2008.Agoodpersonalhygieneandrecognitionofthe disease at the human level are the basis to limit the transmission toconsumers.

Otheralternativemarketinginitiatives,elaboratedintheshortfoodsupplychainsuchastheuseofvendingmachinesandwebshoppingareleadingtoaspecificset of precautionswhich have to be taken to guaranteemicrobiological safety.Concerning the use of vendingmachines for selling rawmilk on farm, specificrequirementswere elaborated by the FASFC (Anonymous, 2009), stressing theimportance of governance of cold temperature and (restricted) holding time ofthe rawmilk in thevendingmachine.TheFASFCSciComstressed in itsadvice02‐2012,theimportanceofprovidingsufficientinformationto theconsumeronthemicrobiological risks related to the consumptionof rawmilk, especially forvulnerablegroupssuchaselderly,youngchildren,pregnantwomanandimmune‐compromisedpersons.

HIGHRELATIVECOSTFORMICROBIALTESTINGTOCOMPLYTOMICROBIALCRITERIAORFORBASELINEDATAONMICROBIALSAFETY

Each system for ensuring food safety includes the demand for a number ofnecessaryanalyses.Therequestedmicrobial testing is relativeexpensive foranoperatorintheshortfoodsupplychainduetotherelativesmallscaleproductionand the combination of various activities (primaryproduction andprocessing).Asaconsequence,therelativecostsarehigh.Guidanceandsupportbypublicorprivate networks may help in the elaboration of a dedicated sampling plan(products to be analyzed, along with frequency of analysis and selection ofmicrobial parameters) to verify food safety and provide guarantees for placingsafefoodonthemarket.An example of the complexity of microbiological testing is the microbiologicalcriterion defined for the presence of Listeria monocytogenes in end products(Anonymous, 2005). The criterium defines as end product limit “<100 cfu L.monocytogenes cells per ml or per g” when the producer can proof that L.monocytogenes is not able to grow further in the product. This proof can bedelivered on theoretical basis (based on pH and/or aw value, and shelf life). Incase there are indications for possible growth, confirmation of no growth bychallengetestshastobedelivered(Anonymous,2008a;Anonymous,2008b;SciCom FASFC 09‐2006). If the theoretical argumentation and/or the challenge

39

proof are missing or insufficiently elaborated, the criterion of “absence of L.monocytogenesin25gormlofproduct”hastobeapplied,whichisthecaseformanyproducersintheshortchain.

INCREASINGCENTRALIZATIONANDGLOBALIZATION

Ithastobetakenintoaccountthatalsointheshortfoodsupplychainproduction,globalization is introduced e.g. due to import of feed, additives, fertilizers andseeds. Examples of possible introduced emerging hazards are: rare Salmonellaserotypes(relatedtofeedandfertilizerimport(Lietal.,2012;Milesetal.,2009;Smith et al., 1982)), antibiotic resistance genes present in pathogens andcommensalbacteriacirculatingon the farm(SciComFASFC29‐2010,18‐2012)andforexamplepathogenicE.coli introducedbyseeds.ThelatterbecameclearduringtherecentoutbreakwithEscherichiacoliO104:H4inthespringof2011inGermany and the related cluster in France, which was traced back to on‐farmsproutproductionandtheuseofcontaminatedseedswithorigin inEgypt.Thisoutbreakstressedthepossibledrasticeffectsofseedcontaminationandthustherole of input materials which are not under direct control of the farmer.InvestigationoftheoutbreakstrainshowedthatwedealtwithanewpathogenicE. coli strain (indicated as an entero‐aggregative enterohemorrhagic E. coli(EAHEC), an EAEC‐VTEC or an AggVTEC by Buvens and Piérard (2012)), notpreviously isolated as human foodborne pathogen (Sci Com FASFC 15‐2012).Recently, specific requirements forhygiene in theproductionofsproutedseedswereelaboratedbytheFASFC(Anonymous,2012).In the short food supply chain of meat, animals are usually slaughtered in acentralized slaughterhouse whichmakes also the short chain meat productionvulnerable for contamination from multiple sources. For animal products,contaminationofprocessingareasandproductswithmultiplepathogenicstrainsare often encountered in slaughterhouses and meat processing plants for pigsand poultry. Multiple Salmonella strains were detected in several pigslaughterhouses and on pig carcasses (Botteldoorn etal., 2003); the samewasalsoobservedinpoultryslaughterhousesandbroilercarcasses(Heyndrickxetal.,2007).

OPPORTUNITIESANDCHALLENGES

An increasing number of cooperative processing initiatives andnewmarketingformatsarebeingintroducedintheshortfoodsupplychain,whichgiveanextradimensionbothtotheabovementionedstrengthsandweaknesses.Theycanbeon the one hand regarded as opportunities to improve the specificmicrobiologicalsafetyissueoftheshortfoodchain,buttheynevercomewithoutnewchallengeson theotherhand.Cooperative initiatives lead to a larger scaleproductionwhen itcoincideswithco‐processingofproductsofseveralprimaryproducers. To guarantee microbiological food safety in these more complex

40

cooperation initiatives and production units with the possibility of multipleinputsandthuspotentialsourcesofcontamination,amoreadvancedtraceabilitysystemandsystematicmanagementoffoodsafetybaseduponHACCPwouldberecommended. Many short chain meat producers are looking for small scaleslaughterhouses,someofthemsetupascooperativeinitiatives.Mostproducersintheshortmeatchainarealsoaimingtolimitthetransporttimeoftheanimalsto the slaughterhouse which may reduce the shedding of pathogens such asSalmonella,andprovidemeatprocessingafterslaughterintheslaughterhouseintheir own processing plants. These initiatives may limit the multiplecontamination sources found in conventional large scale slaughterhouses andprocessingplants.Thepeculiarityoftheshortchainisofferingalsosomeopportunitiesconcerningproduct quality characteristics as taste, freshness, nutritional value andmicrobiological food safety. Generally food processing techniques such as heattreatmentare applied to ensuremicrobiological safety and toprolong the shelflifeoffoodproducts.Duetothedirectlinkbetweenandcombinationofactivitiesof primary production, processing and selling, the short chain offersopportunities for i)better controlof thequalityof agriculturalproductsduringproduction, at harvest and postharvest storage; ii) shortening the time periodneeded between harvest or processing and sale; iii) direct communication andinformal transfer of knowledge internally between employees, but also face tofacefromvendortoconsumeronstorage,handlingandpreparationthusenablingthemarketingof less intensiveprocessed foodproductswithbalancedproductquality and microbiological safety; iv) guidance, training and networking forexchanging information provided by either public or private organizations tofarmers or businesses in the short food supply chain, whichmay enhance thecapacitytodeliverhighqualityandsafefoodstotheconsumer;andv)simplifiedrulesandcontrolsystemstobeputinplace.Thisisillustratedbysomeexamples:

Intheproductionofprocessedfruitproductsasfruitjuices,amorelimitedprocessing of high quality primary products can lead to an improvedpreservationofvitamins,anti‐oxidantsandphenolcomponents.

TheSciComadvice15‐2011stressedthemicrobiologicalrisksoftherawmilkconsumptionmainlydue tozoonoticagentscarriedby thecattle.Asmajorbenefitof rawmilkandrawmilkprocessedproducts, thesuperiortastewasidentified.Theshortchainoffersopportunitiestocontroltheriskof zoonoticagents in the rawmilkbycarefulmonitoringof theagentsatthecattlelevel.

41

REFERENCES

Anonymous2004.Regulation(EC)No852/2004oftheEuropeanparliamentandofthecouncil of 29 April 2004 on the hygiene of foodstuffs. http://eur‐lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2004:139:0001:0054:en:PDF.Anonymous 2005. Commission regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 on microbiologicalcriteria for foodstuffs. http://eur‐lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2005:338:0001:0026:EN:PDF.Anonymous2008a.GuidancedocumentonListeriamonocytogenesshelf‐lifestudiesforready to eat foods, under Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 of 15 November 2005 onmicrobiological criteria for foodstuffs, Commission of the European Communities,SANCO/1628/2008 ver. 9.3 (26112008).http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/biosafety/salmonella/docs/guidoc_listeria_monocytogenes_en.pdf.Anonymous 2008b. Technical guidance document on shelf‐life studies for Listeriamonocytogenes in ready‐to‐eat‐foods, CRL for Listeria monocytogenes, version 2 –November 2008.http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/biosafety/salmonella/microbio_en.htm.Anonymous 2009. Automaten voor de distributie an rauwe melk: hygiëne‐eisen.http://www.favv.be/dierlijkeproductie/dierlijkeproducten/omzendbrieven/_documents/2009‐11‐16_bijlageomzendbriefeisenmelkautomaten_NL.pdf.Anonymous 2012. Omzendbrief betreffende de verplichte specifiekehygiënemaatregelen voor de productie van kiemgroenten.http://www.favv.be/plantaardigeproductie/plantaardigeproducten/_documents/2012_07_03_Omzendbrief_Kiemgroenten_Versie1_R08_v4_NL_FINAL.pdf.Behnke,C.,Seo,S.,Miller,K.2012.Assessing foodsafetypractices in farmers’markets.FoodProt.Trends32:232‐239.Botteldoorn, N., M. Heyndrickx, N. Rijpens, K. Grijspeerdt and L. Herman. 2003.Salmonella on pig carcasses: positive pigs and cross contamination in theslaughterhouse.J.Appl.Microbiol.95:891‐903.Buvens, G., Piérard, D. 2012. Infections with verotoxin‐producing Escherichia coliO157:H7andotherserotypes,includingtheoutbreakstrainO104:H4.ActaClinBel67:7‐12.DeJonghe,V.,Coorevits,A.,VanHoorde,K.,Messens,W.,VanLandschoot,A.,DeVos,P.,Heyndrickx, M. 2011. Influence of storage conditions on the growth of Pseudomonasspeciesinrefrigeratedrawmilk.Appl.Environ.Microbiol.77:460‐470.

42

DeSchrijver,K.,Buvens,G.,Possé,B.,VandenBranden,D.,Oosterlynck,O.,DeZutter,L.,Eilers,K.,Piérard,D.,Dierick,K.,VanDamme‐Lombaerts,R.,Lauwers,C.,Jacobs,R.2008.Outbreakofverocytoxin‐producingE.coliO145andO26infectionsassociatedwiththeconsumptionoficecreamproducedatafarm,Belgium,2007.Eurosurveillance13:1‐4.De Reu, K. 2006a. Bacteriological contamination and infection of shell eggs in theproductionchain.PhDthesis,UniversityofGhent,250p.De Reu, K., Grijspeerdt, K., Heyndrickx,M.,Messens,W., Uyttendaele,M., Debevere, J.,Herman,L.2006b.InfluenceofeggshellcondensationoneggshellpenetrationandwholeeggcontaminationwithSalmonellaentericaserovarEnteritidis.J.FoodProt.,69,1539‐1545.DeSouzaSant’Ana,A.,Rosenthal,A.,deMassaguer,P.R.2008.Thefateofpatulininapplejuiceprocessing:areview.FoodRes.Int.41:441‐453.Douglas A., Powell, Casey J. Jacob, Benjamin J. Chapman. 2011. Enhancing food safetyculturetoreduceratesoffoodborneillnessFoodControl22,817‐822.Eilertz,I.,Danielsson‐Tham,M.L.,Hammarberg,K.E.,Reeves,M.W.,Rocourt,J.,Seeliger,H. P., Swaminathan, B., Tham,W. 2004. Isolation of Listeriamonocytogenes from goatcheeseassociatedwithacaseoflisteriosisingoat.FoodbornePathog.Dis.1:154‐159.Gardner,T.J.,Fitzgerald,C.,Xavier,C.,Klein,R.,Pruckler,J.,Stroika,S.,McLaughlin,J.B.2011.Outbreakofcampylobacteriosisassociatedwithconsumptionofrawpeas.CID53:26‐32SciCom FAVV 18‐2012. The contribution of the food chain to the transfer ofantibiotic resistance to humans.http://www.favv.be/wetenschappelijkcomite/adviezen/_documents/ADVIES18‐2012_NL_DOSSIER2007‐08.pdf;http://www.favv.be/comitescientifique/avis/_documents/AVIS18‐2012_FR_DOSSIER2007‐08.pdf.Griffith,C.J., Livesey,K.M.,Clayton,D.A..2010.Foodsafety culture: theevolutionof anemergingriskfactor?BritishFoodJournal112,4,426‐438.Guzewich, J.,M.Ross.1999.Whitepaper:evaluationofrisksrelatedtomicrobiologicalcontaminationofready‐to‐eatfoodbyfoodpreparationworkersandtheeffectivenessofinterventions tominimize thoserisks.FoodAndDrugAdministration,Center forFoodSafetyandAppliedNutrition.Heyndrickx,M., Herman, L. Vlaes, L., Butzler, J.‐P.,Wildemauwe, C., Godard, C. andDeZutter, L. 2007. Mutiple typing for the epidemiological study of the contamination ofbroilerswithSalmonellafromthehatcherytotheslaughterhouse.J.FoodProtection70:323‐334.

43

Li,X.,Bethune,L.A,.Jia,Y.,Lovell,R.A.,Proescholdt,T.A.,Benz,S.A.,Schell,T.C.,Kaplan,G., McChesney, D. G. 2012. Surveillance of Salmonella prevalence in animal feeds andcharacterization of the Salmonella Isolates by serotyping and antimicrobialSusceptibility.FoodbornePathog.Dis.,June26inpress.Messens, W., Grijspeerdt, K., Herman, L. 2006. Eggshell penetration of hen’s eggs bySalmonellaentericaserovarEnteritidisuponvariousstorageconditions.Br.Poult.Sc.47:554‐560.Miles, J.M., Summer, S.S., Boyer, R.R.,William,R.C., Latimer, J.G.,McKinney, J.M. 2009.Internalization of Salmonella enterica serovar Montevideo into greenhouse tomatoplantsthroughcontaminatedirrigationwaterorseedstock.J.FoodProt.74:849‐852.SciCom FAVV 02‐2006. Scientific evaluation of Guide for the introduction of anautocontrol system in the catering sector. http://www.favv.be/home/com‐sci/doc/avis06/ADVIES_02‐2006.pdf; http://www.favv.be/home/com‐sci/doc/avis06/AVIS_02‐2006.pdf.SciCom FAVV 09‐2006. Evaluation of a protocol for challenge tests for Listeriamonocytogenes. http://www.favv.be/home/com‐sci/doc/avis06/ADVIES_09‐2006.pdf;http://www.favv.be/home/com‐sci/doc/avis06/AVIS_09‐2006.pdf.SicComFAVV28‐2009.Thequalityofirrigationwaterusedinprimaryplantproductionand food safety.http://www.favv.be/wetenschappelijkcomite/adviezen/_documents/ADVIES28‐2009_NL_DOSSIER2008‐02.pdf;http://www.favv.be/comitescientifique/avis/_documents/AVIS28‐2009_FR_DOSSIER2008‐02.pdf.SciComFAVV29‐2010.Adviceonindicationsforthefoodrelatedtransferofantibioticresistance from animals to humans : study of resistance profiles and phage types ofSalmonella Typhimurium from pigs and poultry, pork and broiler meat and humans.http://www.favv.be/wetenschappelijkcomite/adviezen/_documents/ADVIES‐_29‐2010_NL_Dossier2007‐08.pdf;http://www.favv.be/comitescientifique/avis/_documents/AVIS29‐2010_FR_Dossier2007‐08.pdf.SciCom FAVV 15‐2011. Advice on the risk‐benefit evaluation of raw cow milkconsumption and the effect of heat treatment on these risks and benefits.http://www.favv.be/wetenschappelijkcomite/adviezen/_documents/ADVIES15‐2011_NL_DOSSIER2010‐25.pdf;http://www.favv.be/comitescientifique/avis/_documents/AVIS15‐2011_FR_DOSSIER2010‐25.pdf.

44

SciComFAVV21‐2011.Adviceontheevaluationof theautocontrolguide for the foodsafety in collective host community of early childhood.http://www.favv.be/wetenschappelijkcomite/adviezen/_documents/ADVIES21‐2011_NL_DOSSIER2011‐20.pdf;http://www.favv.be/comitescientifique/avis/_documents/AVIS21‐2011_FR_DOSSIER2011‐20.pdf.SciComFAVV02‐2012.Adviceonaprojectofroyaldecreeonthehygienicconditionsrelated to the direct supply by an animal keeper or by another producer of primaryproducts, or a hunter of small quantities of some foods of animal origin to the finalconsumer or of wild game to the retail that delivers directly to the final consumer.http://www.favv.be/wetenschappelijkcomite/adviezen/_documents/ADVIES02‐2012_NL_DOSSIER2011‐30.pdf;http://www.favv.be/comitescientifique/avis/_documents/AVIS02‐2012_FR_DOSSIER2011‐30.pdf.SciComFAVV15‐2012.Prevention,detection,fasttracingandmanagementofoutbreaksof human pathogenic Verotoxin producing Escherichia coli in the food chain.http://www.favv.be/wetenschappelijkcomite/adviezen/_documents/ADVIES15‐2012_NL_DOSSIER2011‐18.pdf;http://www.favv.be/comitescientifique/avis/_documents/AVIS15‐2012_FR_DOSSIER2011‐18_000.pdf.SciComFAVV18‐2012.onthecontributionofthefoodchaintothetransferofantibioticresistance to humans.http://www.favv.be/wetenschappelijkcomite/adviezen/_documents/ADVIES18‐2012_NL_DOSSIER2007‐08.pdf;http://www.favv.be/comitescientifique/avis/_documents/AVIS18‐2012_FR_DOSSIER2007‐08.pdf.Smith, H.W., Tucker, J.F. 1982. Salmonella organisms in garden fertilizers of animalorigin.J.Hyg.89:125‐128.Söderström, A., Osterberg, P., Lindqvist, A., Jönsson, B., Lindberg, A., Blide‐Ulander, S.,Welinder‐Olsson,C.,Löfdahl,S.,Kaijser,B.,DeJong,B.,Kühlmann‐Berenzon,S.,Boqvist,S., Eriksson, E., Szanto, E., Andersson, S., Allestam,G.,Hedenström, I., Ledet‐Muller, L.,Andersson,Y.2008.A largeEscherichiacoliO157outbreak inSwedenassociatedwithlocallyproducedlettuce.FoodbornePathog.Dis.5:339‐349.Worsfold,D.,P.Worsfold,Griffith,C.2004.AnAssessmentoffoodhygieneandsafetyatfamersmarkets.Int.J.Environ.HealthRes.14:109‐119.

45

CHEMICALASPECTSOFFOODSAFETYANDQUALITYINTHESHORTSUPPLYCHAINS

L.Pussemier*,L.Herman1,3,X.VanHuffel2,A.Huyghebaert31ILVO2FASFC3ScientificCommitteeFASFC*Speaker:Dr.ir.LucPussemierOperationaldirectorCODA‐CERVAVice‐chairoftheScientificCommitteeoftheFASFCE‐mail:luc.pussemier@coda‐cerva.be

ABSTRACT

Many chemicalsmay impact food quality and safety during the progress of theingredientsthroughoutthefoodchain.Someofthosechemicalsareundesirablein foodbut theycanenter the foodchainat several critical stepswhilst,on theotherhand,someusefulorbeneficialchemicalscanbelostduringsomespecificsteps of the food chain. Those two phenomena can lead to potential negativeimpacts on public health. The first group of hazardous chemicals ismade of i)environmentalpollutants(POPs,heavymetals),ii)agriculturalinputs(pesticides,veterinarydrugs,fertilizers),iii)toxiccompoundsofwhichtheentryinthefoodchain depends on some specific crop management practices or weatherconditions(mycotoxins,toxicweedsorseeds),iv)contaminantsthatarespecifictotheprocessusedforfoodpreparation(acrylamide,benzene)orcontaminantsthat are released from technological aid agents (dioxins, metals), and v)contaminants that can be released from severalmaterials in contactwith food(plasticizers, heavy metals, chemical constituents released by several packingmaterials).Ontheotherhandthebeneficialfood(micro‐)constituentsthatcanbelostbelong to thegroupof vitamins, essential elements,plant antioxidants, etc.Local foods stemming from the short food supply chainsmay differ from theirlong chain counterparts in severalways thatwill be analyzed inmoredetail inthispresentation.

INTRODUCTION

Whendealingwithfoodsafetyandfoodquality,itisimportanttopresentawholepicture andnot focusor restrict ourselves to someparticular hazardsor traits.Firstofall,itisnecessarytolookatallparametersabletoinfluencethepresence(orabsence)ofharmful(orbeneficial)chemicalsfrom“stabletotable”bylookingsuccessively at the production environment, the mode of crop production(conventional,organic,etc.)aswellasatthechemicalsoriginated(ordestroyed)duringfoodprocessing,storageandpackaging.Inaddition,itisalsoimportantto

46

beabletodiscriminaterelevantfromnon‐relevanttraitsandtocriticallyanalyzewhataretherealconsequencesonfoodsafetyandonfoodquality.Also,knowingwhatisgoodorlessgood,itmaybeveryusefultoadaptourbehaviorandhabitsinordertoextractthebestfromeachsituationandavoidtheworstcases.Finally,it also worth considering that health is not only determined by negative orpositivedeterminantssuchascontaminantsandmicro‐nutrientsbutalsobythewayoflivingincludingthewell‐beingandphysicalactivity,forinstance.

HARMFULANDBENEFICIALCHEMICALSTHROUGHOUTTHEFOODCHAIN

Local foodand feedareproduced in the localproductionenvironment. Insomecases, the quality of the local environment can be bad for several reasonsincluding the quality of soil, air andwater used for crop production or animalrearing.Hence,HeavyMetals(HMs)andPersistentOrganicPollutants(POPs)canaccumulate in the food chain.Awell‐known example is cadmium in vegetablesand some animal products (kidneys from bovines) near non‐ferrous metalproductionsitesintheCampineregion(Vrommanetal.,2008;Waegeneersetal.,2009).Onthecontrary, the localenvironment(soils) inWesternEuropecanberelatively poor in some useful nutrients such as selenium so that the exclusiveintakeof local foodcouldbesomewhat lowcompared torecommendeddietaryallowance values (SHC, 2009). The bad environmental quality of water andsediments from local rivers can lead to contamination ofwild fish such as eels(BelpaireandGoemans,2007).Thecontaminationofsomeanimalproductsbyenvironmentalcontaminantscanalso be influenced by the mode of production as it can be seen from thecontaminationofeggswhenthehensarerearedinfreerangesystems(SciComadvice2002/35).Agriculturalinputswillbeusedinadifferentwayaccordingtothe mode of production. Organic crops will contain less synthetic pesticidesresidues and sometimes also less nitrates (Pussemier et al., 2006). Foodprocessingandcookingwill,ontheotherhand,contribute topesticideresiduesdissipation, hence reducing the human intake of those chemicals (Claeys etal.,2011).The crop productionmanagement associated to badweather conditions can inturn lead to other kinds of contaminations. Hence, at harvest, cereals can becontaminated by several Fusarium toxins, especially under non ploughconditions, in some crop rotation favoring cereals, and when rainy conditionsoccurduringandafterthefloweringofwheat,forexample.Noneffectivesortingof apples inorder todiscard the rotten fruits is also a verydangerouspracticeleading to the production of apple juice contaminated by patulin (Baert et al.,2006;Gillardetal.,2009).Abadmanagementofcropproductionmayalsoresultinthepresenceofundesirableweedsrichintoxiccompoundsthatwillindirectlyoraccidentlycontaminatethecrop,andsothefoodorfeedtobeproducedwithsuch raw materials. A last example is the greening of potatoes (and their

47

subsequent contamination by solanine) when the tubers are not thoroughlycoveredbyasoillayerduringthegrowingofthecrop.When theharvest isdone, there are still someotheroccasions that can lead tofurtheralterationsof thechemicalcomposition.Firstofall, the longer the freshproducewillbestoredorprocessedthehigherwillbethedepletionorlossesofvitamins and other useful micro‐nutrients. On the other hand some othercontaminants can appear during storage, processing and cooking. One canmention ochratoxin A (bad storage conditions), additives (to extend thepreservation), chemical contaminants suchasbenzeneandacrylamide (processcontaminants)(SciCom,2010;SciCom,2008).Last but not least, the packaging of food ingredients and foodstuffs as well asother materials which can come in contact with food (kitchen utensils) canfurther lead tocontamination.Specialcaremustbe takenwith theshortchainsbecausetheprobabilitythatnon‐foodgradematerialswillbeusedishigherhere.Forexample,recycledpaperorcardboardmayposeproblemsaswellastheuseofhandicraft‐maderecipients(ceramics,forexample).

INWHICHWAYDOLOCALFOODANDSHORTSUPPLYCHAINSINFLUENCETHECONTAMINATIONRISKSBYCHEMICALCONTAMINANTS?

The impact of local foodon theoccurrenceof specificharmful effectshasbeenillustrated in some limited cases. Theproblems linked to the presence of POPs(dioxins,PCBs,etc.)arewelldocumentedforeggs(freerangehensbelongingtoprivate owners; Goeyens et al., 2008), wild fish (especially eels; Belpaire andGoemans,2007),heavymetals(especiallycadmiuminvegetablesandinkidneysofbovines;Vrommanetal,2008,Waegeneersetal.,2009).Asfarasmycotoxinsareconcerned,thecaseofpatulininapplejuice(handicraft‐madeandorganic)iswelldocumented(Baertetal.,2006;Gillard,2009).Astothecerealmycotoxins(Fusarium toxins), it seemsthat thepicture ismuchmorecomplexand that thesituationcanvarydramaticallyfromoneyeartoanotherandfromonelocationtoanother(Larondelleetal.,2005;Pussemieretal.,2006).Pesticidesandnitrates,whilstgenerallythemostfearedbytheconsumers,doactuallynotrepresentanimportant health risk since the levels of residues left at harvest are very low(Claeys et al., 2008) and also since those residues levels will further decreaseafterfoodprocessing(Claeysetal.,2011).Noclearcutinformationisavailableontheotherkindsofcontaminants.

INWHICHWAYDOLOCALFOODANDSHORTSUPPLYCHAINSINFLUENCETHECONTENTOFBENEFICIALORGANICMICRO‐CONSTITUENTANDESSENTIAL

ELEMENTS?

Some of the short food supply chains are characterized by the fact that fruits,vegetables,breadandanimalproducts(milk,cheese,meat)aremadefromfresh

48

ingredients or are minimal processed so that they are rich in vitamins,antioxidants,fibersandessentialelements.Thosepropertiescanevenbeslightlymore present when the food products originate from the organic productionsystem(FoodStandardsAgency,2009;Pussemieretal.,2006).

ATENTATIVEBALANCEOFDELETERIOUSANDBENEFICIALEFFECTS

Takingintoconsiderationthebestdocumentedcasesdescribedintheliterature,itispossibletoprovideaglobalpictureofthesituationasillustratedinFigure1.Thewaybywhich the local foodand theshortsupplychainswill influence thisglobal picture depends on each specific situation. A historical pollution of thelocal environmentwill impactmore specifically situations illustratedbyarrowsa)andb).The presence of toxins, on the other hand, will depend on crop managementpractices aswell as onweather conditions during the summerwhilst pesticideresidueswill be under control if good agricultural practices are respected and,more especially, if the organic productionmode is implemented. For the shortsupply chains products that are sold fresh or after minimal processing, thesituations represented by the arrows d‐f) will be less encountered, which is aclearargumentforthepromotionoftheseproductionanddistributionchains.

49

Figure1:Chemicalchangesinfoodaccordingtothepositioninthefoodchain.

Exam

plesofwelldocum

entedcaseswithpotentialsignificanthealthim

pactareindicatedwitharrow

sa‐b,f(i.e.contaminationof

vegetablesbycadm

iuminpollutedareas(a),dioxinsineggsfromfreerangehens(b)andacrylam

ideinchips,coffeeandbiscuits(f)).

Exam

plesofw

elldocum

entedcaseswithnoclearhealthim

pactareindicatedwitharrow

sc‐eandg(i.e.patulininhandicraft‐made

applejuice(c),phthalatesincannedfood(d),bisphenolAinpolycarbonatebottles(e),andlossofvitaminsandotherorganicmicro‐

nutrientsinvegetablesstoredatroomtemperature(g)).

49

50

CONCLUSIONS

In terms of food safety and food quality, there can be some slight differencesbetween the foodstuffs distributed via the conventional (long) chains and thefoodwhichcanbedirectlyobtainedfromthelocalproducers.Sometimesthiscanlead to less safe situations (presence of environmental contaminants or toxinsstemming fornon‐appropriate cropmanagement techniques)but this ismostlyanexceptionthatcanbeavoidedbyagoodeducationoftheproducerandoftheconsumers. On the other hand, contaminants stemming from more complexprocessesandlong‐termstorageofthefoodstuffswillgenerallybelesspresentintheshortsupplychain(especiallyintheorganicproduction)ifappropriatefood‐gradematerials(utensils,packaging)areselectedtohandlethefood.Inaddition,by buying fresh and less processed products, the consumer will improve thenutritionalqualityofitsfood.Lastbutnotleast,self‐productionofvegetablesandfruit will be even better for the health of the consumer thanks to some extraphysicalactivityrequiredfortheirproduction.

REFERENCES

Baertetal.(2006)OccurrenceofPatulininorganic,conventional,andhandcraftedapplejuicesmarketedinBelgium.J.ofFoodProtec.69(6):1371‐1378.Belpaire and Goemans (2007) Eels: contaminant cocktails pinpointing environmentalcontamination.ICESjournalofMarineScience,64(7):1423‐1436.Gillard etal. (2009)Quantification of patulin in Belgian handicraft‐made apple juices.WorldMycotoxinJournal.2(1):95‐104.Goeyens et al. (2008) Contaminatie van eieren afkomstig van kippen gehouden bijparticulieren.ReportoftheCONTEGGstudypublishedby“Contractueelonderzoek‐FODVolksgezondheid,VeiligheidvandeVoedselketenenleefmilieu”,Brussel(58p).Claeys etal. (2008) Exposure assessment of the Belgian population through fruit andvegetableconsumption.FoodAdditives&Contaminants,25(7)851‐863.Claeysetal.(2011)ExposureofseveralBelgianconsumergroupstopesticideresiduesthroughfreshfruitandvegetableconsumption.FoodControl22:508‐516.Food Standards Agency (2009) Organic review published (available atwww.food.gov.uk/news/neewsarchive/2009/jul/organic).Pussemier et al. (2006) Chemical safety of conventionally and organically producedfoodstuffs(2006)1714‐21.

51

SciCom(2008)Advice25‐2008oftheScientificCommitteeoftheFASFConacrylamide.ExposureoftheBelgianpopulation,contributionofdifferentfoodstuffandmethodologyfordefiningactionlimits(dossierSciCom2007/37).SciCom(2010)Advice09‐2010oftheScientificCommitteeoftheFASFConcarcinogenicand/or genotoxic risks in food: process related contaminants (dossier Sci Com2007/09bis).SHC (Superior Health Council) (2009). Nutritional Recommendations for Belgium,n°8309.Vrommanetal. (2008)Cadmium in the foodchainnearnon‐ferrousmetalproductionsites.FAC(partA)25:293‐301.Waegeneersetal. (2009)TheEuropeanmaximum level forCd inbovinekidneys is inBelgiumonlyrealisticforcattleupto2yearsofage.FAC26(9):1239‐1248.

52

CONTROLOFTHEFOODSAFETYOFTHESHORTCIRCUITS:THEEXPERIENCEOFTHECELLQUALITYOFFARMPRODUCTS(CQPF)

SUPPORTINGTHEPRODUCERSINWALLONIA

Prof.ir.MarianneSindicProf.UniversityofLiège/GemblouxAgro‐BioTechE‐mail:marianne.sindic@ulg.ac.be

INTRODUCTION

In 1993, the European Union, in order to guarantee food hygiene and safety,proposed tostandardize food legislationsofallMemberStates.All foodstuffs infree movement in Europe were concerned, regardless their production phase.The Council Directive 93/43/EEC on the hygiene of foodstuffs was adopted, itreplacedtheanalysisonfinishedproducts(slowness,sampling,cost)byamorepreventive approach. This new approach is based on the application of GoodHygienic Practices and the HACCP principles. Their aim is to reduce potentialhealth risks by identifying hazards and defining critical control points at thedifferentstepsofproduction.Its transposition into Belgian law may create difficulties for many small andmediumenterprisesbecauseitinvolvespolicyandbehaviorchange,andrequiresadifferentapproachtoproduction.Aware of the potential consequences that this regulation may produce on theviabilityoftheseenterprises,theDepartmentoffoodtechnologyoftheGemblouxAgriculturalUniversity took the leadand launched in1995,with thesupportofthe Walloon Region, the French‐Speaking Community and the Federal funds,some projects in order to help artisans and farmers to comply with thislegislation. Since 2003, farmers have been obliged to comply with newinfrastructure requirements and to implementproceduresbasedon theHACCPprinciples.Hazardanalysisandassessmentofassociatedriskintheirownfarmsrequiremethodologicalandtechnicalknowledgeandinvestigationsthatfarmerscannotachieveeasily.Inreactiontothissituationthatmayendangerthesurvivalofmanyfarms,theGemblouxAgro‐BioTechoffersconcreteandpracticalsupportinordertoadaptthemethodtotherealityofthefield.

BACKGROUNDOFTHECQPFPROJECT

Withthesedifferentprojectsimplementedtosupportfarmersinvariousaspectssuch as dairy technology, administrative assistance and implementation ofHACCPprograms,theWalloonRegionwantedtoputtogetherthedifferentskills

53

withinacommonprojectinordertooptimizesupporttofarmers.Thisledtothecreationofthe«CelluleQualitéProduitsfermiers»(CQPF)in2006.Thisprojectprovidesa”one‐stopshop”packageofservicesforfarmerswhowanttodiversifytheiractivitiesbytransformingtheirrawmaterials.Onthisbasis, thisproject isaddressed to every single actor who works in the field of transformation andvalorizationofrawmaterialsfromtheWalloonagriculture.

MISSIONANDTYPEOFSUPPORT

Providing local self‐made products represents a good means to improve theprofitability of the farms by increasing the added value of raw materials. Inaddition,producersconsideritasawaytoclawbackapartoftheprofitmarginthat is currently obtained by food processing and distribution industries. Theproject supports those already in business and those who are considering adiversification activity or retraining. On the other hand, many economicdevelopmentstakeholdersinWallonia(GAL,ADL,Créa‐Job, ...)alsobenefit fromtheexpertiseacquiredbytheactorsoftheCQPFproject.The mission of the “Cellule Qualité des Produits fermiers” is defined in aframeworkconventionsignedbytheWalloonMinisterofAgriculture.Whichaimistohelpproducers/processorsonthefarmtobringthequalityoftheirproductsinto compliance with legal and/or market requirements. Food safety isconsideredasapriority.Theactionoftheprojectmustallowa“one‐stopshop”approach:inotherwordstoallowthefarmertofindinonesingleplacetheanswerstoanytypeofquestion:about his diversification activity, or about starting such an activity, or aboutsustainability/developmentofsuchanexistingactivity.Thesupporttodiversificationprojectsisdividedin3polesofactivity:

Foodsafety/hygienesupport,providedbytheULg‐GxABT Atechnologicalsupport,providedbyCARAHandEPASC Aneconomicsupport,providedbyACW

Saveurs Paysannes, also partner of the CQPF project, conducts special studiesrelated to shortmarketing circuits. The coordination of the project is providedwithin the ULg‐GxABT (Laboratory Quality and Safety of Food Products) byProfessorMarianneSindic.Theoriginalityoftheprojectliesinthestronginteractionsbetweenthedifferentexpert teams, related to the problems encountered. For example, a hygienicproblemonadairyproductcanbelinkedtoalackoftechnologicalmasteryoftheprocess.Thetechnologicalteamisneededtosolvetheproblem,inadditiontothefood safety/hygiene team.Moregenerally, thedirector indirect involvementof

54

multiplepartnersisarealassettoprovidethefarmeranintegratedsupportthatcoversthemajorityofrequiredactions.

FOODSAFETYSUPPORT

ConcerningFoodsafety,differentservicesareproposedthroughdifferentphases:Designphaseofadiversificationproject:

Advice concerning design of food premises (advice and verification ofhygienicmeasures,verificationofthecompliancewithregulation);

Informationandtrainingtobasicsoffoodhygiene; Information about food safety assurance systems (interpretation of

legislation,productspecifications,productlabel,…).Diversificationprojectstart‐up:

Supportforadministrativeactions(toobtainFASFCauthorizations); Implementation of self‐control involving basic hygienemeasures, HACCP

andtraceabilitysystem.Thissupportisrealizedduringseveralmeetings; Information linked to self‐control of food safety assurance systems

(interpretationoflegislation,productspecifications,productlabel,…).Follow‐up:

Microbiologicalandchemicaltesting(outsourcedservice); Interpretationoftestingresults; Microbiologicalcontaminationproblemssolving; UpdatingthedocumentationrelatedtoFoodsafetyassurancesystem.

Sinceitscreationin2006,theCQPFhasinformedandsupportedmorethan1000producers.Forexample,intheyear2011,thedifferentfollow‐upsrealizedbytheFoodsafetyteamaredividedasfollows:

TheDairysectorrepresented68%ofinterventions:cheese,butter,yogurt,icecream,etc.;

Meat sector (11%): butcher on the farm, small slaughterhouses, cuttingplants,preparationofpackagesofmeat;

Vegetable sector (12%): fruitsandvegetablesprocessing (cannedsoups,jams,wine,oil,juice,...);

Cateringsector(2%)restaurantsonthefarm,makingmeals.

55

SOMEPECULIARITIESOFLOCALFOODPRODUCTIONINACONTEXTOFSHORTMARKETINGCIRCUIT

Transformation for a short marketing circuit is mainly characterized by thefollowingelements:

Acraftproductionsystem,withlimitedproductionvolumes(noproductionautomation,norautomaticcleaningsystem,norasepticlines,...);

A desire to distance from standardized industrial products. In the dairysector,theproductsaremostlymadewithrawmilk;

Thenumberofemployeesworking in the farmon this typeofprojects islimited. It rarely exceeds the legal limits allowing flexibility in theimplementationofthefoodsafetyassurancesystem;

Afarmerproducer/processorhaslimitedfinancialresourcestomanageitssystem: he has no QA manager, nor own laboratory performing theanalyzesatalowercostthanoutsourcing,...;

The implementation of a food safety assurance program has beenmandatorysince2003onafarm,whiletheproductionoffarmproductsisancestral. With these programs new constraints appear which causesproducersmisunderstanding;

Adirectrelationshipwiththeconsumerisakeyfactorintheproductionofaqualityproduct,bothfromanorganolepticandhygienicpointofview;

Productionvolumessignificantlylowerthanthoseencounteredinthefoodindustry;

Transforming raw materials, with a few or no intermediaries. Theproductionchainisthereforeshortenedandthetraceabilitylesscomplex.

MICROBIOLOGICALTESTRESULTS

TheFoodsafetyandhygieneteamoftheCQPFensures,asmentionedabove,theImplementation of basic hygiene measures, HACCP and traceability system inaccordance with the EU and the Belgian food legislation. The EU Regulation853/2004laysdownspecifichygienerulesforfoodofanimaloriginandtheEURegulation 2073/2005 gives the microbiological criteria for foodstuffs. Theseregulations state that microbiological tests have to be carried out regularly toensureproductssafety.Microbiological results accumulatedoveraperiodof6 yearswill bepresented.Theseresultswereobtainedduringthefollow‐upoffarmersproducingrawmilkproducts, for three dairy products: cheese, butter and yoghurt. Resultsconcerningmeatproductswillalsobepresented.Wecomparedtheresultswithsafety standards set by the European legislation. All the tests have beenperformedinaccreditedlaboratory.

56

DIFFICULTIES

Diversificationofactivitiesintheagriculturalworldreflectstheneedtoimprovefarm incomes, to increase its profitability, but also to ensure its viabilityconsidering the increase of production costs. Transformation of primaryproductioncangeneratehighermarginsthanthoseofthesaleofrawmaterials,andcanthereforegenerateadditional income.Weshould identify,however, thedifficultiesencounteredonthegroundbydistinguishingoldandnewprocessors.Concerningtheolderones,manyfarmshavebeenproducingrawmilkbutterforyears. The arrival of new legal constraints (HACCP and hygiene programs andrequirements),thenecessitytoupgradeorevenrebuilttheirfacilitiesaswellastheobligationtoperformmicrobiologicaltestshavescaredanddiscouragedalotofsmallproducers.Conceptssuchasmandatorynotificationandpossibleproductrecall also raised doubt in the minds of many producers who, through directsales,aremuchmoreexposedtotheircustomersandtotheirreactions.Concerning new diversification projects, the investments to bemade aremoreandmore important,andso itbecomesmoreandmoredifficult torecouptheirinvestment. In addition to the costs and the time required to obtain access tosome professions or skills, the cost of the tests and of the implementation ofHACCP programs have to be considered. All this, before they get any financialreturn.Regulation is also complex andmultiplewhen a diversification project is to belaunched: building permits, environmental permits, upgrading premises, taxobligations,…This requires an important human and financial investment andadequateandappropriatesupport.

CONCLUSIONS

Thankstothepresenceonthefieldandtotheavailabilityofengineersinvolvedintheproject“CelluleQualitédesProduitsfermiers”,theysucceededinsupportingfarmerswhoweremotivatedandeagertoreachthe legal foodsafetystandardsand to produce high quality products. Hundreds of small‐scale producers havebeensupported,morethanhalfbelongtothedairysector.This action has been recognized both nationally and internationally (Prixéconomique de la Province de Namur, drafting of guides for the application ofHACCPprinciples,...)itrepresentsaninnovativewaytosupportartisans.In order to support these structures there are still a lot of needs. We haveobserved a growing demand of farmers: training basics of food hygiene(legislations,hygienicmeasures,HACCPprinciples,…),implementationofHACCPprograms, food technology, design of production facilities, microbiological

57

problems solving. The expressed needs on the ground show the usefulness ofCQPFeveryday.Theultimatepurposeofthisprojectistoallowproducerstomakethetraditionalandlocalproductsdurableandmaintaintheirorganolepticcharacteristics.Thisisthe reason why traditional production techniques should be maintained,ensuring, at the same time, food safety. The sustainability of the projectcombininghygienic, technological andeconomic support liesmore thanever inthe agenda. We hope that the support provided by the Walloon Region willcontinueintheinterestofourproducers.

58

SESSION3.THESHORTSUPPLYCHAINANDTHE

SOCIETY

59

SHORTCHANNELSINFRANCE:DOTHEYMEATCONSUMERSCONCERNS?

Prof.dr.PierreSansProf.NationalVeterinarySchoolofToulouse(France)E‐mail:p.sans@envt.fr

INTRODUCTION

Short circuits areundergoinga significantdevelopment inFrance: the formsofexchangebetweenproducersandconsumersdiversifyandtradingvolumesgrow.Thiscommunicationaims:

1. toclarifywhatweconsiderasashortcircuitinFranceandtogiveanupdatedoverviewoftheirplaceinFrenchagriculture;

2. to identify the expectations of consumers who use this mode ofsupply;

3. tohighlightadaptationsofsanitaryregulationsincaseofSC.

DEFINITIONANDIMPORTANCEOFSHORTCHANNELSINFRANCE

DEFINITION

Theshortchain(SC)isdefinedas"awaytomarketagriculturalproductseitherthrough direct sales from producer to consumer, or by indirect sales providedthat there is only one intermediate" (Collective, 2009). Therefore, this recentdefinition defines the SC in terms of close relationships (interaction betweenproducers and consumers). However, it is often accompanied by geographicproximity(proximity–orlocal–shortchannels),thedistancechosenbetween50and 100 km depending on authors (Aubry and Chiffoleau, 2009). This lastdimensionistakenintoaccountbysafetyregulationsregardingSC(seebelow).ThereisawidevarietyofsellingformswithintheSC(Figure1and2).

60

Figure1.Directsale.

Figure2.Oneintermediarysale.

IMPORTANCE

Data from the last French census of agriculture (2010) are useful to view theimportanceofSCintheagriculturallandscape:21%offarmerssoldthroughSCin 2010 (against 16 % in 2005 and 15 % in 2000). Vegetable and honeyproducersaremostengagedinthistypeofdistribution(approximately50%ofthem).TheimportanceofSCvariesbyregion(Figure3and4):FarmersinSouth‐EasternFrancemoreoftenusethistypeofsalethanthenationalaverage.

61

Figure3.Numberoffarmssellingatleastoneproductthroughshortchannelsbyregion.

Source:GeneralCensusofAgriculture,2010

Figure4. Shareof farms selling at leastoneproduct through short channelsbydepartment.

Source:GeneralCensusofAgriculture,2010

Finally,withinthedifferentsellingformstroughSC,farmsellingisthemostpopular(Table1).

62

Table1.RelativeimportanceofSCsellingforms(exceptwine;rankingregardingturnover).Type Sellingform %offarmsinvolved 1strank* 2nd** 3rd**Direct Farm 50% 31% 23%Direct Openmarket 19% 19% 10%Oneintermediary Retailer 13% 16% 18%Direct Roundselling 6% 7% 7%

DirectProducers collectivestore 5% 8% 8%

Oneintermediary Supermarket 4% 5% 7%Direct Boxschemes 2% 4% 5%Direct Fair 1% 4% 7%Oneintermediary Restaurants 1% 4% 8%Direct Mailorder 0.5% 2% 4%Oneintermediary Catering 0.3% 1% 3%*:rankingbyturnover**:percentageoffarmssellingmorethanoneproductinshortchannelsSource:GeneralCensusofAgriculture,2010

WHYDOFRENCHCONSUMERSBUYINSHORTCHANNELS?

Thanks inparticular toconsumer focusedresearch,conducted in thecontextofprogramsdedicatedtoSC1,webetteridentifyconsumermotivationstobuyinSC.MerleandPiotrowski(2012)proposethreemainreasons:

Lookingfortastyandauthenticproducts.Consumersassociatethisspecialtastewiththefreshnessoftheproducts,particularproductionsystemsandtherespectofseasonalityproduction;

Reducing safety hazards: recent food crises have heightened consumersensitivity to food safety hazards. Buying local products is seen by someconsumers as a way to reduce the risk by assuming that productionmethodsarelessintensiveandguaranteesaferproducts;

1 See for example, projects Coxinel (http://www.psdr‐coxinel.fr/spip.php?rubrique64) orLiproco(http://liproco‐circuits‐courts.com/).

63

Makingsensebythewayofcivicengagementandcreatingsociallinks.Thepurchase of products and SC ismotivated by the desire to support localagriculture (and/orsmall farms), todefendproductionpracticesbutalsotointeractwiththeproduceronhisjob.Itisawaytopromotesustainableagriculture regarding its threedimensions: environmental, economic andsocial.

Hedonism and citizen commitment are therefore strong forces to purchase SCproducts.Thecreationofgeographicaland/or relationalproximity (Pralyetal.,2009;Herault‐Fournier etal., 2012) generates andmaintains confidence in theproducts (and their production system) purchased by consumers (Vincq et al.,2010). It overcomes the constraints that this type of supply chain can have(narrow range of products, distance, restricted opening hours, contractualengagement,sometimeshigherprices,...).

SHORTCHANNELSANDFOODSAFETY

As a foodstuffs producer, a farmer selling through SC has to comply withEuropean Commission (EC) regulation on foodstuffs hygiene (especiallyregulations(EC)No852/2004&853/2004).However,duetothecharacteristicsof theseoperators,Frenchfoodsafetyauthorities implementedspecialrulesfortheirapproval.In case of direct delivery to consumer (no intermediary), a simple registration(insteadofapproval),managedbytheDepartmentpublicauthority, isrequired.Producersthatprocessprimaryproductsbeforesellingthemmustcomplywiththe recommendations of Good Practice for Hygiene guidelines. Specific rulesregarding transport have to be respected. For example, in the case of meatproducts,an isothermvehiclecanbeused forsale if thedistancebetweenfarmandmarketplacedoesnotpass80km(asthecrowflies).Beyondthisdistance,itisnecessarytobeequippedwitharefrigeratedvehicle.In the case of a sale to an intermediary, producer is considered as a retailer.Regardinganimalproducts,heshallnotoperateunlessthecompetentauthorityhasapprovedhisestablishmentwiththeexceptionofthosecarryingoutonly:(a)primary production; (b) transport operations; (c) the storage of products notrequiring temperature‐controlled storage conditions; or (d) some retailoperations.Nevertheless,evenformeatproducts,derogationtoapprovalcanbedeliveredbyFrenchauthority if sale toan intermediary isamarginal, localizedandrestrictedactivity.Concretely,3conditionsareimposed:

themaximumamountforeachcategoryofproductsoldtootherretailestablishmentsdoesnotexceedafixedquantity;

foreachproductcategory, thisquantitydoesnotrepresentmorethan30%ofthetotalproductionoftheestablishment(forthiscategory);

64

the distance between seller and purchaser establishments does notexceed80km(asthecrowflies).

The French competent authority hasmade some effort to consider the specificcharacteristicsofSC.Informationandfarmerstrainingprogramsarecarriedoutin recent years. They aim to promote the development of SC business throughnew areas (catering for example) guaranteeing a high level of food safety toconsumer.

CONCLUSION

ShortchannelsareundergoingasignificantdevelopmentinFrance.Duetotheirdiversityandspecificcharacteristics,theymeettheneedsofagrowingsegmentof thepopulationseekingproximitywithproducersandauthenticity.Thankstoupdated and more complete data coming from the recent General Census ofagriculture,itshouldbepossibletohaveabetterviewoftheeconomicrealityofthese channels and to continue supportingproducers involved in SCmarketingonimportanttopics(logistics,processingplantapproval,marketingtools,...).Bystrengtheningtheactivityandskillsofproducers,SCshouldimprovetheirabilitytomeetconsumersdemand.

REFERENCES

Aubry C. et Chiffoleau Y. (2009) Le développement des circuits courts et l’agriculturepériurbaine: histoire, évolution en cours et questions actuelles. InnovationsAgronomiques,5,53‐67.Chaffotte L. et Chiffoleau Y. (2007) Vente directe et circuits courts: évaluations,définitionsettypologie,Cahierdel’Observatoiren°1,INRA,Montpellier,fév.2007,8p.Collectif (2009)Rapportdugroupede travail«Circuitscourtsdecommercialisation».Rapport au Ministre de l’agriculture, 24 p. Disponible au:http://agriculture.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/rapport_du_gt_circuits_courts0409.pdf.Delpal F. et Hatchuel G. (2007) La consommation engagée s’affirme comme unetendancedurable.CredocConsommationetmodesdevie,n°201.Herault‐Fournier C., Merle A. et Prigent Simonin A.H. (2012) Comment lesconsommateurs perçoivent‐ils la proximité à l’égard d’un circuit court alimentaire.Management&Avenir,n°53,p16‐33.Journal Officiel de la République Française (JORF) Arrêté du 27 avril 2007modifiantl’arrêtédu8juin2006relatifàl’agrémentdesétablissementsmettantsurlemarchédesproduitsd’origineanimaleoudesdenréescontenantdesproduitsd’origineanimale.

65

Journalofficieldel’Unioneuropéenne(JOCE)Règlement(CE)N°853/2004duParlementEuropéen et du Conseil du 29 avril 2004 fixant des règles spécifiques d'hygièneapplicablesauxdenréesalimentairesd'origineanimale.Merle A. et Piotrowski M. (2012) Consommer des produits alimentaires locaux:commentetpourquoi?DécisionsMarketing,67(àparaître).PralyC.,ChazouleC.,DelfosseC.,BonN.etCornéeM.(2009)Lanotionde«proximité»pouranalyserlescircuitscourts.XLVIèmecolloquedel’ASRDLF,Clermont‐Ferrand,17p.VincqJ.L.,MondyB.etFontorbesJ.P.(2010)Laconstructiondelaqualitéfiabledanslesréseauxalimentairesdeproximité.Economierurale,n°318‐319,p5‐19.

66

DIRECTMARKETINGFROMPRODUCERSTOCONSUMERS:ECONOMICASPECTSANDKEYSUCCESFACTORS

E.Wauters*,K.Mondelaers1,M.Crivits11ILVO*Speaker:Dr.ErwinWautersResearcherILVO‐L&MGuestProf.AntwerpUniversityE‐mail:erwin.wauters@ilvo.vlaanderen.be

ABSTRACT

This paper presents a theoretical exploration of the farm economics of directmarketingchannels,takingintoaccountbothincomeandrisk.Itsummarizestheavailableempiricalliteratureonthefarm‐economicimpactofsellingthroughanalternativemarketingchannel.Itsmajorconclusionisthatthequestionifandtowhat extentdirectmarketing improves farmers’ incomeand incomestability isanempiricalone.Empiricalevidenceismixed,butconfirmstheconclusionsfromour theoretical elaboration, wherewe show the importance of (1) consideringmarketing costs, especially fixed marketing costs, associated with differentmarketingchannels,astheymightbesubstantialandoffsetthehigherpriceand(2) the importance of scale of sales as marketing costs are incurred for allproducts supplied, regardless of whether they are sold and unsold productsmightshiftfarmersfrombeingexposedtopriceriskstoseveremarketrisks,withcomparable results on income. Good managers with the required skills andpassion, though, should be able to exploit direct marketing channels in aprofitablemanner.

INTRODUCTION

Direct marketing from producers to consumers has received considerableattention in recent years. Surprisingly, whereas direct marketing started as areaction of, mostly, small‐scale farmers to the increasing price squeeze(difference between prices and costs) and the market power of retailers andmerchantsinconventionalmarketingchannels,mostattentioninthelastdecadewas going to the socio‐ecological aspects of directmarketing.Directmarketingchannels have been associated with ecological benefits such as a reduction incarbon emission, a reduction in energy and pesticide use. The fact that a largeshare of direct marketing farms produce under an organic or other ecologicallabel has probably contributed to this. Socially, direct marketing channels arethought to benefit farmers’ pride, enhance the development of social capital,reinforceproducer‐consumerbondsandbuilduptrustandimage.Further,directmarketing channels fill up structural holes (Burt, 1992) of the conventional

67

channels. These structural holes in conventional channels are formed whencertain producer and consumer demands with respect to, for instance,authenticity,socialcontact,diversity,taste,becomeunfulfilled,inpartduetothetendencyofconventionalmarketingchannels towardsefficiencyanduniformity(VanderPloeg,2011).Recently, attention has shifted again to the potential of alternative marketingchannelstoprovideanadditionalsourceofincome,toprotect–small–farmersfromtheforcesoftheconventionalmarket,toincreasemarginsovercostsandtoprotectfarmersfromvolatileinternationalcommoditymarkets.This paper presents the economics of alternative marketing channels from atheoretical ad empirical point of view. Whereas some of the theoreticalconsiderations are based on general farm economics, most of the elementsspecifically related to alternative marketing channels are based on foreignliterature. To the best of our knowledge, economic analyses of alternativemarketing–withtheexceptionoftheanalysisbyDeRegtetal.(2010)–haveyettobecarriedoutinBelgium.Vecchio(2009)alsonotesthat,whilethereisalotofliterature from the U.S. (see Brown, 2002), economic studies on Europeanfarmers’marketsisverylimited.

ECONOMICSOFDIRECTMARKETING:THEORETICALCONSIDERATIONS

IMPACTONINCOME

Wefirstpresentasimpletheoreticalmodelreflectingthechoicebetweenadirect(d) and conventional (c) marketing channel, for the very simple case of oneproductwithtotalproductionQandtwomarketingchannels,thedirectandtheconventionalchannel:

,

Where NR is net return, Pd and Pc output price in the direct and conventionalchannel,QdandQcoutputallocatedtothedirectandconventionalchannel,CcandCdmarketingcostsperunitproductforbothchannelsandCallotherproductioncosts(independentofthechoiceofchannel).Marketingcostscomprisenotonlypurecostsofmarketingtheproduct,butall‘production’coststhatareimpliedbychoosingaparticularchannel.Solvingthefirstorderconditionsyields

68

where and are the marginal marketing costs (cost for one unit ofadditionaloutputsold)forthedirectandconventionalchannel.Thisshowsthatthe economicdesirability of selling throughdirectmarketing channelsdependson the price differences and on differences in marketing costs. Often theadvantages with respect to price are highlighted, while the differences inmarketingcostsareneglected.Several aspects might cause marketing costs per unit of sold product to besubstantial. First of all, labor requirements can vary considerably acrosschannels. Producers often‐times fail to account for labor costs associated withseveraltypesofdirectmarketingchannels.Farmers’marketorstaffedfarmshopsoftenrequiresignificantlaborhours.Second, whereas marginal costs normally tend to decrease as the volumeincreases, several marketing costs have a fixed nature, i.e. they do not changewhen sales through that particular channel change. Costs such as promotion,sanitary requirement, taxes,market entry fees, shopmaintenance are all coststhat remainunchangedwhen the levelof salesdecrease.Hence,whensalesarelow, average and marginal marketing costs per unit sold are high, potentiallyoffsettingthehigherpricereceivedatdirectmarketingchannels.Acertainscaleofsalesisnecessarytocoverthefixedmarketingcosts,whichiscontrarytooneof theoftenmentionedadvantagesofdirectmarketing, thatdirect farmingmayallowfarmerstobeginfarmingatvolumesthatmightotherwisebetoosmallforconventionaloutlets.Whereasthissimpletheoreticalmodelclearlyshowstheimportancetoconsidernot only the difference in price received but also the difference in marketingcosts,itisdeficientforafulldetailedanalysisforthreereasons.First,themodelfailstoaccountforthefactthatQdishighlyuncertain(notallproductssuppliedtothedirectmarketingchannelsaresold),which,combinedwiththeperishablenatureofmanyoftheproductstypicallymarketedthroughshortcircuitchannels,mayimposehighadditionalcosts,asmarketingcostsareincurredforallproductssupplied,regardlessofwhetherthey’reactuallysold.Inacase‐studybyHardesty(2007),upto20%oftheproductssuppliedtoafarmers’marketwasleftunsold,a major marketing cost of this particular channel. Second, the model fails toaccount for factors such as the producer’s level of risk aversion, lifestylepreferencesandotherattributesthatmayaltertheoptimalchoice.However,aswedealwiththemereeconomicaspects,this isbeyondthescopeofthispaper.Third,themodelalsoneglectspotentialimpactofchoosingadifferentmarketingchannel on C, the cost of production considered independent of the choice ofmarketingchannel.“C”consistsofnormalproductioncostssuchaslabor,seeds,pesticides, feed, fertilizer, energy, etc. While the model considered these costsindependent of the choice of marketing channel, changes might occur. Thenecessitytomaintainalargediversityofproducts,forinstance,candecreasethe

69

efficiencyofeachindividualproductthroughafailuretoprofitfromeconomiesofscale. Further, thevery samenecessitymight cause the farmer tobeobliged tomaintaindiverseproductioninfrastructure,whichincreasesthefarmsfixedcosts.In comparison to conventional sales channels, the type of transaction in directsaleschannelsdifferssubstantially,asthereisashiftfrombusinesstobusinesstobusinesstoconsumertransaction.AccordingtoWilliamson(1985),transactionsdifferinthedegreetowhichrelation‐specificassetsareinvolved,theamountofuncertaintyaboutthefutureandaboutotherpartiesinvolved, thecomplexityoftrading arrangements and the frequencywithwhich transactions occur. In thecaseofdirectselling,relation‐specificassetsaremoreimportant,astheyneedtobe developed between the direct selling farmer and each individual customer.The uncertainty also differs considerably, as elaborated in the next paragraph.The complexity of the trading arrangements increases with the number ofproductssupplied.Typically,directsaleschannelsoffermoreproductscomparedto their conventional counterparts. For the same amount of products sold, thefrequency of transactions also has to increase considerably, as conventionalproductsaresoldinbulktobuyers,incontrasttothedirectsaleschannelwhereonlysmallamountsarepurchased.Asaconsequence,transactioncosts,whicharecosts relating to the search for information, negotiation, monitoring andenforcementofthetransaction,increasesignificantly.Learningeffects can causemarketing costs todecreaseover time, asproducersgainmoreexperience,e.g. theycanreduce laborcostsrelatedtostaffinga farmshopwhenlearningaboutpeaktimesinsales.

DIRECTMARKETINGASARISKMANAGEMENTSTRATEGY

Uematsu andMishra (2011) note that, even if directmarketing has a potentialnegative impact on income, farmers may still choose to continue their directmarketing strategiesbecause it is apotential riskmanagement instrument thatprotectsfarmersfromunexpecteddecreasesinoutputpricesanddiversifiestheirincome. Indeed, farmers who sell their products through direct marketingchannelshavemuchmore control over theprice of their products.However, itmustbenotedthat,throughdirectmarketing,farmersareshiftingfrompricerisktomarketrisk.Indeed,severalcircumstancesmaycausefarmerstosellmuchlessthan theyanticipated, effectively causing incomes todecrease, just aswouldbethecasewithpricerisks.Usingconventionalmarketingchannels,pricesformostoutputs and inputs are highly uncertain and production (yield) is uncertain aswell (due to for instanceweather conditions and pests). Sales, however, are inmost cases certain; conventional marketing channels will, normally, buy allproduce. In directmarketing channels, the relative certainty of output price isoftenconsideredtheonlydifference.However,anequallyimportantdifferenceistheuncertaintyofsales.Whenpricesarecertain,butsalesarehighlyuncertain,grossrevenuemightbeequallyriskyindirectmarketingchannels(Figure1).

70

In addition, in direct selling, the farmer applies an individual riskmanagementstrategy, in contrast to farmers selling in the conventional channels, oftenapplyingacollectiveriskmanagementstrategy. Indirectselling,ashock inoneproduct category (e.g. a bad harvest) is absorbed by offering different productcategoriestothecustomer,spreadingtheriskacrossdifferentproducts.Second,the risk of losing a single buyer is spread across many other buyers. Inconventional sales channels, only one product is marketed bymany suppliers.Shocksarehenceabsorbedcollectivelythroughthepricemechanism.

Production

Price/unitSales

Gross revenue

Costs

Profitability

Production

Price/unitSales

Gross revenue

Costs

Profitability

Figure1.Priceriskinconventionalmarketingchannels(left)versusmarketriskindirectmarketingchannels.Anothermechanismthatalters thenatureof therisk involved is trust.Thewaytrustisachievedindirectmarketingisalsofundamentallydifferentcomparedtoconventional sales channels. Given the increasing distance in conventionalchannels between producers and buyers, eventually consumers, public andprivate institutions such as certification, traceability and labeling needed to bedevisedtocreate thenecessarytrust. Indirectmarketing, these institutionsarereplaced by the farmer, who materializes the trust ‘in persona’. The shortdistancebetweenproducerandcustomer creates trust,which isseenasoneofthecornerstonesofdirectselling.Giventheabsenceofmore‘objective’measuresoftrust(suchasacertificate issued)comparedtotheconventionalchannel, thedirectsellingfarmerishoweververysusceptibletochangesinthistrust.Asingleshock(forexampleafoodscare)candestroythetrustbaseofthecustomers.Asthisisthecornerstoneofdirectselling,theadverseeffectsonprofitabilitycanbesubstantial.In conclusion, the theoretical farm‐level impact of direct marketing is unclear.The analysis, however, clearly shows the importance of (1) consideringmarketing costs for each channel, especially fixed marketing costs; (2)consideringthescaleofsales,assuppliedproductsthatareleftunsoldrepresent

71

amajormarketingcostandinducesashiftfrompricerisktomarketrisk,ratherthanreducingrisk.

ECONOMICIMPACTOFDIRECTMARKETING:THEFACTS

Alltheoreticalconsiderationsregarded,thequestionifandtowhatextentdirectmarketing contributes to farm profitability remains an empirical one. Goodmanagersundergoodcircumstancesshouldbeabletodevelopaprofitabledirectmarketing business. In this section, we summarize the available empiricalliteratureontheeconomicimpactofdirectmarketing.Itmustbenotedthatfarmeconomicanalysesoftheimpactofdirectmarketingarescarce.Several studies have investigated the specific marketing costs associated withdifferent channels. A major conclusion from most of these studies is theimportanceofmarketinglaborcosts.Significantcostsofdirectmarketingandon‐farmprocessing,especiallythoserelatedtotimeandlabor,canpresentobstaclesto expansion of local food sales (Biermacher etal., 2007; Lawlessetal., 1999).Interviews with farmers in New York (LeRoux et al., 2010; Uva, 2002) andCalifornia(Hardesty,2008;KambaraandShelley,2002) indicated thatshortageof labor related specifically to marketing activities is consistently reported byfarmers as being a barrier to direct marketing. In Belgium, this finding wasconfirmedbyDeRegtetal.(2010)whofoundthat,whenavalueonownunpaidlaborwasset,netprofitoffarmprocessingwasnegative.Verhaegen and van Huylenbroeck (2001) performed a qualitative analysis ofcostsandbenefitsofparticipationindirectsalechannels,andfoundthatallcostswere compensated for by higher price, revenue and reduced uncertainty.Tegtmeier andDuffy (2005) surveyeda largenumberof community supportedfarmsandfoundthatnetreturnstolandweremuchhigherthanforconventionalsoy, corn and wheat growers. However, over half of the surveyed populationresponded negatively to the question whether CSA provided them with a fairwage.

KEYFACTORSFORECONOMICSUCCESS

Based on the theoretical considerations and the evaluation of the empiricalliterature, anumberof key factors for economicprofitabilitymaybe identified.Here,weconcentrateoninternalkeyfactors,orkeyfactorsthatcanbecontrolledby the farm manager: (1) type of direct marketing; (2) scale of sales; (3)managerialability;(4)passion,attitudeandeffort.

DIVERSIFICATIONOFMARKETINGCHANNELS

Severalauthors(e.g.Hardesty,2007;HardestyandLeff,s.a.)showthatmarketingcosts, and hence the profitability of direct marketing may vary a lot across

72

differentmarketingchannels.LeRouxetal. (2010),usingacase‐studyapproachin the U.S., provided a ranking of alternative marketing channels. Communitysupported agriculture ranked first followed by selling to local restaurants andgroceries; farmers’ markets ranked last. This does imply that farmers shouldchoose the best marketing channel for their business; rather – and especiallygiven the perishable nature of most crops and the uncertainty of farm sales –farmers should adopt a feasible mixture of alternative marketing channels.Diversification in marketing channels – one of which may include theconventional channel – may offer the largest return, taking into accountassociatedrisk.

SCALEOFSALES

Marketingcosts(allcostsassociatedwithaparticularmarketingchannel)canbesubstantial anda lotof thesecost items included inmarketingcosts (e.g. labor,sanitary and hygiene requirements, promotion, building maintenance, marketstand, entry fees to markets) have a fixed character (they do not vary withvarying sales), so maintaining a minimum scale of sales is crucial for theprofitabilityofdirectmarketing.

MANAGERIALABILITY

Asinallsectors,economicperformanceofalternativemarketingvariesalotwithmanagerial ability. Decisions have to bemade based on reliable budgets, riskshavetobemanagedandfarmersshouldhaveanideaonminimumsales.Further,tomarket farmproducts directly to consumers, farmers need awhole array ofnew skills previously not needed, such as selling, marketing and social skills(Jervell,2003).

FARMCHARACTERISTICS

Farm characteristics have their impact on the profitability of direct marketingthrough an indirect impact on the size of marketing costs. The location of anindividual farm, for instance, greatly determines costs, such as transportation,promotion,associatedwithdirectmarketing.

PASSION,ATTITUDEANDEFFORT

Whencomparingtheeconomicperformanceoffarms,andtryingtoexplainthesedifferenceusingwholeseriesoffarmandfarmercharacteristics,thereisalwayssome share of the difference left unexplained. Scholars agree that someof thatshare is attributable to a mere difference in passion, attitude and effort. Webelieve that is definitely the case for the farm‐level economic impact ofalternativemarketing.Laborrequirementaresignificantsuchthattheimpactofreducedeffortcanbesubstantial.

73

CONCLUSION

Direct marketing has the potential to increase farmers’ profitability and allowsmaller farmers to maintain their farm business. However, success is notguaranteed anddirectmarketingmay imposehigh additional costs to the farmbusiness.Thequestionwhetherdirectmarketingisprofitableisanempiricaloneandhastobesolvedbyeachindividualfarmerseparately.The limitedavailableevidencesuggestsprofitabilityisdependentonthechoiceofmarketingchannel,farmcharacteristics,scaleofsales,managerialabilityandpassion.

REFERENCES

Biermacher,J.T,Upson,S.,Miller,D.C.,Pittman,D.2007.EconomicChallengesofSmall‐ScaleVegetableProductionandRetailinginRuralCommunities:AnExamplefromRuralOklahoma.JournalofFoodDistributionResearch38,1‐13.Brown, A. 2002. Farmers' market research 1940‐2000: An inventory and review.,AmericanJournalofAlternativeAgriculture17(4),167‐176.Brown,C.,Miller,S.2008.Theimpactsoflocalmarkets:areviewofresearchonfarmersmarketsandcommunitysupportedagriculture(CSA).AmericanJournalofAgriculturalEconomics90(5),1298‐1302.Burt,R.S.1992.StructuralHoles:TheSocialStructureofCompetition.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.De Regt E., Deuninck J. & D’hooghe J. 2010. Economische rendabiliteit vanhoeveproductie: een verkenning, Beleidsdomein Landbouw en Visserij, afdelingMonitoringenStudie,Brussel.Jervell,A.M.2003.Addingvaluethroughdirectmarketing–managementdimensionsofdifferentmarketingchannels.Farmmanagement.ProceedingsofNJFseminarNo.345,October2‐4,2002.Hardesty, S. 2007. Producer returns in alternative marketing channels. Small FarmsProgram,DepartmentofAgricultureandResourceEconomics.UniversityofCalifornia–Davis.Hardesty, S.D. 2008. The Growing Role of Local Food Markets. American Journal ofAgriculturalEconomics90,1289‐1295.Hardesty, S., Leff, P. s.a. Determining marketing costs and returns in alternativemarketingchannels.Kambara, K.M., and C.L. Shelley. 2002. The California Agricultural Direct MarketingStudy,CaliforniaInstituteofRuralStudies,Davis,CA.

74

Lawless, G., Stevenson, G.W., Hendrickson, J., Cropp, R. 1999. The Farmer‐Food BuyerDialogue Project, UWCC Occasional Paper No. 13, University of Wisconsin‐MadisonCenterforCooperatives,Madison,WI.Leroux,M.N., Schmit, T.M,Roth,M., Streeter,D.H. 2010.Evaluatingmarketing channeloptionsforsmall‐scalefruitandvegetableproducers.RenewableAgricultureandFoodSystems25(1),16‐23.Tegtmeier, E., Duffy, M. 2005. Community Supported agriculture (CSA) in the UnitedStates:aregionalcharacterization.LeopoldCenterforSustainableAgriculture.Uva,W.L.2002.AnAnalysisofVegetableFarms’DirectMarketingActivitiesinNewYorkState.JournalofFoodDistributionResearch33,186‐189.Van der Ploeg, J.D. 2011. Newly emerging nested markets: a theoretical framework.Presentation at the III Colloquium on family farming and rural development, PortoAlegre,Brazil,November17,2011.Vecchio,R.2009.EuropeanandUnitedStatesfarmers’markets:similarities,differencesand potential developments. Paper presented at the 113th EAAE Seminar “A resilientEuropean food industry and foodchain ina challengingworld”,Chania,Crete,Greece,September3‐6,2009.Verhaegen,I.,VanHuylenbroeckG.2001.Costsandbenefitsforfarmersparticipatingininnovativemarketing channels for quality food products. Journal of Rural Studies 17,443‐456Williamson, O.E. 1985. The economic institutions of capitalism. New York, NY: FreePress.

75

SUMMARYANDCONCLUSIONS

A.Huyghebaert*,X.VanHuffel1,C.Verraes1,L.Pussemier2,31StaffdirectionforriskassessmentFASFC2CODA‐CERVA3ScientificCommitteeFASFC*Speaker:Prof.em.dr.ir.AndréHuyghebaertChairoftheScientificCommitteeoftheFASFCProf.em.GhentUniversityE‐mail:andre.huyghebaert@ugent.beFoodchoicesare,inadditiontofoodsafetyandnutritionalvalue,alsoinfluencedby other quality attributes such as freshness, sensorial properties, minimalprocessing,authenticity,sustainability,animalwelfare,ethicalvalueandothers.Theperceptionof thequalityor the image, is toa largeextenddetermining forthe preference for a particular food. However, it is evident that economicalfactorsalsoplayaveryimportantrole.In an environment where food security is not one of the first concerns ofconsumers,perceptionofthequalityplaysaroleinthedevelopmentsthatwerereviewedinthesymposiumoftoday.Forsomeyearsthereisgrowinginterestinlocalfoodproductionandinthelocalshort supply chain. Consumers are looking for authentic and sustainable foodproducts, associated with a better safety and with other recognized qualityfactors.Theshortsupplychainhasalsoabetterimageintermsofsocialcontactswithlocalproducers,ecologicalbenefitssuchasareductionincarbonemission,energyexpenditureanduseofpesticidesandfertilizers.For farmers, the short supply chainprovides additional income.Thisparticularsystem is also beneficial for the image of agriculture, especially in an urbancontext.Adirectcontactbetweenthelocalproducerandtheconsumerisatypicalcharacteristicofthisdistributionsystem.Themarketingofthelocalfoodisveryoftenaccompaniedbyanexchangeofinformationabouttheproductanditswayofproduction.Theshortsupplychain issupportedbymanyauthoritiesand isbecomingmoreandmore popular. However it is striking that food safety aspectswere almostneverdebated.ForthisparticularreasontheScientificCommitteewasorganizingthis symposium with the objective to contribute to a better information ofconsumers,producersandpolicymakers.Whendebatingabouttheshortsupplychainoraboutlocalfoodproductionit isimportanttoclearlydefinethesubject.Dependinguponthecontextofthedebate,

76

arangeofdefinitionshasbeenproposed.Forthepurposeofthissymposiumtheshortsupplychainwasdefinedas“directsaleoffoodproductstotheconsumerwithnoorlimitedintermediatesteps”.Producers,aswellas for theconventionalmarketas for theshortsupplychain,havetocomplywithEuropeanandnationallegislation,basedupontheprinciplesofGAP,GMP,GHPandHACCP.HoweversomeflexibilityisforeseenformemberstatestoimplementtheEuropeanregulationsinregardtotheshortsupplychain.In Belgium, food sold via the short supply chain is subjected to the same legalsafetystandardsasproducts fromtheconventionalchain.Noparticularcontrolactionsareorganizedfortheshortsupplychain.Fromascientificpointofview,itisgenerallyacceptedthattheshortsupplychainis somewhat vulnerable to food safety problems. Very often one person is incharge of several tasks including the food safety requirements. Regionalinitiatives have been taken in order to comply with the relevant legislation:“Steunpunt Hoeveproducten” in Flanders and “Cellule Qualité des Produitsfermiers” inWallonia. In theNetherlands, theNVWA commissioned a researchproject to control and support producers. In France there are special rules forshortsupplyproducers.Asforotherfoodsupplysystems,theshortsupplychainisfacedwith,intermsoffood safety and quality, particular threats and opportunities. The short storagetime,inadditiontothesmallvolume,isconsideredasanadvantagewithregardto microbiological hazards. There is however a particular risk due to thepossibility of cross contamination as production is usually combined withdistribution. A similar observation applies for chemical hazards. The quality ofthe local environment and the agricultural practices play a determinant role. Itcanhoweverbeexpectedthattheshortchainandtheminimalprocessingfavorthenutritionalquality.Theshortchainoffersdefinitepossibilitiesforabetterincomefortheproducer.Properties of theproducts like freshness, taste, image andethical values are ofutmostimportance.Itishoweverintheinterestofconsumersandofproducersofshortsupplychainfoodstomaintainandtofurtheroptimizethesafetyofthefoodstuffsinordertopreservetheexcellentimageofthefoodsconcerned.