Evaluation of a simplified approach in food safety management systems in the retail sector: A case study of butcheries in Flanders, Belgium and Lancashire, UK

The EFSA BIOHAZ panel published a scientific opinion proposing a new approach in food safety management, adapted to the needs of small retail businesses such as grocery, butcher, bakery, fishmonger and ice cream shops. The opinion is aiming at a more hands-on development and maintenance of their food safety management system, based on prerequisite programs and hazard analysis critical control point-principles. In this paper, the added value of the EFSA opinion is evaluated by comparing requirements with existing legislation and applied guidelines relevant for butchers, and to assess perceptions about introduced changes by this opinion for small independent butcheries in Flanders, Belgium and in North-West England, UK as a case study. Results show that the conditions for flexibilities, as stated in the EFSA opinion, could lead to difficulties in interpretation among Member States. Also, the hazard analysis approach applied in the two main UK guides to good practice appeared to be similar to the simplified approach proposed by EFSA. For Belgium, the main difference is that in the Belgian guide to good practice hazards are ranked and critical control points are identified for the preparation and selling of fresh meat, minced meat and meat preparations. The specification of prerequisite programs and related activities in the EFSA opinion can be an important step towards harmonization among EU Member States. Assessing the perceptions of ten UK and ten Belgian butchers revealed that the hazard analysis approach and the thirteen prerequisite requirements proposed by EFSA, are generally positively experienced by the butchers. However, the introduction of the proposal ‘Monthly microbiological tests’ to verify cleaning and disinfection activities is rejected by all the Belgian butchers and by the majority of the UK butchers. This proposal will not ease their job and the necessity of these tests should be reconsidere

Belgian results from the monitoring of pesticide residues in food

This dataset contains the analytical results of pesticide residues measured in the food products analysed by the national competent authorities. Pesticide residues resulting from the use of plant protection products on crops that are used for food or feed production may pose a risk factor for public health. For this reason, a comprehensive legislative framework has been established in the European Union (EU), which defines rules for the approval of active substances used in plant protection products, the use of plant protection products and for pesticide residues in food. In order to ensure a high level of consumer protection, legal limits, so called “maximum residue levels” or briefly “MRLs”, are established in Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. EU-harmonised MRLs are set for all pesticides covering all types of food products. A default MRL of 0.01 mg/kg is applicable for pesticides not explicitly mentioned in the MRL legislation. Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 imposes on Member States the obligation to carry out controls to ensure that food placed on the market is compliant with the legal limits.   A sample is considered free of quantifiable residues if the analytes were not present in concentrations at or above the limit of quantification (LOQ). The LOQ is the smallest concentration of an analyte that can be quantified with the analytical method used to analyse the sample. It is commonly defined as the minimum concentration of the analyte in the test sample that can be determined with acceptable precision and accuracy. If a sample is contains quantifiable residues but within the legally permitted limit (maximum residue level, MRL), it is described as a sample  with quantified residue levels within the legal limits (below or at the MRL) A sample is considered non-compliant with the legal limit (MRL), if the measured residue concentrations clearly exceed the legal limits, taking into account the measurement uncertainty. It is current practice that the uncertainty of the analytical measurement is taken into account before legal or administrative sanctions are imposed on food business operators for infringement of the MRL legislation.</p