Position Paper: The Global Good Safety Initiative

The position paper at the link below was published by GFSI in January of this year. For those of you who are interested in the harmonisation of food safety standards throughout the world will find it a good read:

Position Paper: The Global Good Safety Initiative (PDF)

Regards,
Simon

Thank you Simon. I have this observation...
From the document:

“There are currently four recognized manufacturing schemes:

BRC - British Retail Consortium Global

Food Standard (Version 5)

Dutch HACCP (Option B)

IFS – International Food Standard

SQF 2000 – Safe Quality Food Program

SQF 1000

NZ GAP (New Zealand)”



I’m not familiarized with all of them, but if ISO-22000 is too generic, Why is not accepted as a recognized standard?



From the document (page 11)

“These differences (-not detailed-) mean that it’s not easy for a retailer to accept ISO 22000 as being equivalent.”



I just don’t understand. Why do they talk about harmonisation if they don't accept the most generic standard.

Dear Erasmo,

I presume the (undetailed) reasons are –

However, the GFSI Technical Committee, writing in September 2007, noted some areas of
difference, including accreditation processes, best manufacturing practice and ownership
(and hence liability). They also identified the ability for private standards to change quickly
in response to emerging issues as a difference. The development processes supporting
international standards are slow in comparison.

One of these at least is apparently a major difficulty from the para. following the above; the difficulty is perhaps bit more precisely stated in the link in Laurimer’s thread –

The difference of ISO-22000 with a lot of other standards is that it requires a food manufacturer to have good practices / pre-requisite programmes in place but it does not have a list specifically stating them.

and

But the retailers are not yet in favour or ISO-22000 because it misses the specific list with good practices.

( http://businessassur...-a-step-closer/ )

I guess (especially UK perhaps?) the retailer's need for evidence of "due diligence" may also be closely linked to the above.

Rgds / Charles.C

Another article about ISO-22000 and GFSI
http://www.irca.org/...8/FFrancis.html

Another article about ISO-22000 and GFSI
http://www.irca.org/...8/FFrancis.html

And from that article:

A group of manufacturers is currently working to create an ISO 22000 piece, a prerequisite programme (PRP) document, which can be used in conjunction with ISO 22000. PRPs are the conditions that must be established in the food chain and the activities and practices that must be performed to establish and maintain a hygienic environment. As Catherine Francois says, 'ISO 22000 would then meet all the GFSI requirements and will probably be submitted at the end of this year.'

And wouldn't that be good. Everybody wins!

Thanks for your input Charles/Erasmo.

Regards,
Simon

Just an update on CIES business see this article:

CIES Elects New Chairman

As you can see there are a lot of big hitters on board with this initiative.

Regards,
Simon

Dear All,

Regarding this quote -

A group of manufacturers is currently working to create an ISO 22000 piece, a prerequisite programme (PRP) document, which can be used in conjunction with ISO 22000. PRPs are the conditions that must be established in the food chain and the activities and practices that must be performed to establish and maintain a hygienic environment. As Catherine Francois says, 'ISO 22000 would then meet all the GFSI requirements and will probably be submitted at the end of this year.'

ISO must love this !

An alternative viewpoint (the "ISO" one perhaps) is in my earlier (non-ISO) link -

This (= ISO-22000) standard is a generic standard for Food Safety Management Systems that can be used by all organisations in the food supply chain. It is a state of the art standard developed by HACCP experts from 25 countries. The strength of ISO-22000 is that it is not sector specific and it provides tools to manage food safety and to achieve supply chain assurance. The difference of ISO-22000 with a lot of other standards is that it requires a food manufacturer to have good practices / pre-requisite programmes in place but it does not have a list specifically stating them. And to be honest, it is impossible to make this list for all sectors and covering all specific stakeholders requirements.

In the red/blue corners - (Generic ISO) vs ( Prescriptive GFSI)

ISO is it’s usual scope ambitious (eg the “food”standard is also applicable to certain types of equipment) but unintelligible self. GFSI is considerably more user-friendly to read IMO but then it also has a far more narrowly focussed objective, harmonised or otherwise. How much of that objective is purely self-interest remains to be seen.

Interesting times.

Rgds / Charles.C

Dear All,

Regarding this quote -



ISO must love this !

An alternative viewpoint (the "ISO" one perhaps) is in my earlier (non-ISO) link -



In the red/blue corners - (Generic ISO) vs ( Prescriptive GFSI)

ISO is it’s usual scope ambitious (eg the “food”standard is also applicable to certain types of equipment) but unintelligible self. GFSI is considerably more user-friendly to read IMO but then it also has a far more narrowly focussed objective, harmonised or otherwise. How much of that objective is purely self-interest remains to be seen.

Interesting times.

Rgds / Charles.C

I think generic ISO 22000 with prescriptive industry codes will win, along with GFSI.

Interesting times indeed.

Regards,
Simon