Search

⑴ Background——Forest food is a kind of safe and high-quality food with economic benefits, ecological benefits and social benefits, mainly including forest grain and oil, forest fruits and vegetables, forest beverages, forest medicinal materials and so on. However, it is not well known by consumers and has not gained absolute competitive advantages even though such concepts as ecological protection and green development are widely spread. There are still lack of international researches on forest food, domestic researches on forest food only focus on the current situations and problems of forest food industry development, there are lack of researches on the forest food standards.⑵ Methods——Firstly, the establishment and development process of forest food standards in China were reviewed. Then, by comparing the system at the beginning of the establishment of the forest food standards with the current system, structural problems in the current system were found. Finally, by comparing the forest food group standards and the national standards of organic food, the problem of forest food positioning was found.⑶ Results——Through multidimensional comparison, the following three problems are found: First, the current industry standards and group standards, to varying degrees, still invoke some industry standards that have been abolished, even though some standards have been revised several times. These standards have lost their forces of law. Second, the group standards for forest food are confusing, fragmented and lack of validity. At present, there are two similar concepts in the domestic consumer markets——“forest food” and “eco-forest food”. Both of them are the inheritance of the concept of forest food, but their standards are different in the classification of forest food, environment of production areas, production processes and other aspects. The contradiction of the two group standards reduces the validity of the standards and tends to confuse consumers, which is not conducive to the establishment of forest food markets. In addition, the group standards are lack of operability, exploration, guidance and innovation. Third, the positioning of forest food is ambiguous. There is a contradiction between the quality positioning and quality grade of forest food, which does not match. Vague positioning not only easily leads to false publicity, but also hinders the establishment of forest food brands and reduces the market shares of forest food. Due to the lack of basic standards for forest food in China, the abolished basic standards have no value for improvement, and it is difficult to reach a consensus in formulating industry standards and group standards in the future, which will inevitably lead to confusion and fragment of forest food standards. Moreover, the intrinsic meaning and pursuit of forest food determine its possible choice of quality positioning, so we should strictly grasp the bottom line of standards formulation and consider its contents from multiple levels and perspectives. Therefore, only reconstruction can solve the problem of the forest food standards.⑷ Conclusions and Discussions——First, in the reconstruction of forest food standards system, three principles should be followed: industry standards define basic standards, local standards determine specific indicators, and group standards lead the development direction. We should give full play to the basic role of industry standards, the promoting role of local standards and the guiding role of group standards and make all levels of standards coordinated and complementary. Second, reposition forest food as “organic food with forest elements”, that is, forest food is a kind of organic food. We classify forest food as organic food, which not only contributes to the formulation of the standards, but also helps forest food establish its brand image, increase consumers’ willingness to pay for it, and help forest food enter the international markets as high-quality agricultural products. This paper puts forward these suggestions on the standards reconstruction of forest food from the perspective of promoting the development of forest food industry. However, how to balance the development of forest food industry and ecological protection is worthy of further discussion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The usage and maximum residue limits (MRLs) for plant growth regulators (PGRs) in foodstuffs are social issues widely concerned by the public and various stakeholders. This paper overviews the latest updates on PGRs in the Chinese national food safety standard, MRLs for pesticides in foods (GB 2763—2019), and conducted a matching analysis with domestic PGR registration and application. Furthermore, the PGR MRLs among China, Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC), USA, Japan and EU were compared. The main findings and suggestions were given in this review. Firstly, the domestic standard covers almost half (41.7%) registered PGR active ingredients, which surpasses CAC.Secondly, the domestic standard basically contains staple crops, but the product categories and their classification stipulated in the standard are not as rich and detailed as those in EU and Japan. Especially for minor crops and foodstuffs of animal origin. The standard system for PGRs still needs to be further improved. Thirdly, the domestic standard is not aligned to international standards in some extent, and may have less influence on international trade. Finally, suggestions were put forward to improve the MRL standard system of PGRs, such as synchronising the MRL standard with the pesticide registration, and acting on the international convention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Considering the correct use of terminology, and model describing the dietary exposure of pesticide residues in food during the process of establishing pesticide maximum residue limits as Chinese food safety standards, and supporting dietary exposure assessment of pesticide residues in food, the author gives his understanding, and views of the status on definition of terminology, data selection, fitness of the models used, and appropriateness of conclusions during risk assessment. The paper is expected to trigger the discussion between the counterparts in order to better understand about the dietary exposure assessment, apply correctly the risk assessment principles, and promote the risk management of pesticide residues in food. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Considering the correct use of terminology, and model describing the dietary exposure of pesticide residues in food during the process of establishing pesticide maximum residue limits as Chinese food safety standards, and supporting dietary exposure assessment of pesticide residues in food, the author gives his understanding, and views of the status on definition of terminology, data selection, fitness of the models used, and appropriateness of conclusions during risk assessment. The paper is expected to trigger the discussion between the counterparts in order to better understand about the dietary exposure assessment, apply correctly the risk assessment principles, and promote the risk management of pesticide residues in food. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]