FEATURE STORY FOOD SAFETY AND SUSTAINABILITY:
PERMISSION FOR RISK By Joelle Mosso, Associate Vice President, Science Programs
This is part one of a two-part series on food safety and sustainability.
The shift to risk-based regulations and standards has been rapid from a regulation perspective, leading to numerous updates and forms being produced to aid the industry in assessing and documenting their risk to meet compliance requirements. While new forms and checklists were made and training developed, it appears the root cause impeding the shift to true risk-based management is that no concerted effort to shift to a fundamentally different management or regulation style occurred at the same time. With the introduction of risk-based language in the regulation, the industry acted effectively the same, albeit with more paperwork and different terms used. Customers required the same information and had the same expectations of suppliers while regulators used similar decision-making and actions reminiscent of the prior regulatory era. In effect, the transition to risk-based food safety happened on paper, but food safety culture remained more-or-less entrenched in an era of zero-hazard tolerance. The paradigm shift to true risk-based management ultimately requires some amount of risk to be acceptable, and it recognizes that different systems, producers and products will have variable levels of risk. In a risk-based system, it does/will not matter how many risk assessment forms are completed since risk-based management only truly begins when we permit the food industry and food regulators to recognize that there is some acceptable amount of risk. "The food industry should have a goal of zero risk to consumers, and that must always be the target. However, while one
Risk-based management has been the on-trend phrase of the past decade within the food safety community. Globally, numerous regulations and food safety standards have adopted language that requires food-producing entities to assess their process and product, and then apply risk-based measures appropriate for the risk. This is a logical and scientifically supported theory – it makes complete sense to apply the most time and resources where gaps are identified and where our opportunity to minimize risk is the greatest. I have spent my academic and industry career chasing, supporting and helping execute this concept, supported by science and the best-informed guesses when available. I am an ardent believer that when risk-based programs are truly developed and implemented, we will find a more manageable and sustainable system of food production. The transition to risk-based management is a passion, and I work diligently to support the produce and food industry in incorporating those practices. However, one of the observations I have made throughout my career is that risk-based management and measures are straightforward only in textbooks, and the true application of risk-based management for food safety represents a quagmire of scientific and social complexity.
illness will always be too many, zero illness is also unattainable and building systems that only tolerate pass/fail or good/bad outcomes prevents identifying realistic ways to manage risk."
20 Western Grower & Shipper | www.wga.com March | April 2025
Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker