Search

Label regulations on food products must be adhered by food industries, including SMEs. The lack of awareness or understanding of SMEs on food labeling regulation causes non-complience of SMEe food products with regulations. The objective of this study was to evaluate the level of compliance with labeling regulations and consumer awareness of the labels on SMEs food products in Kebumen. Purposive sampling was used to determine the sample size. The data from product labels was analyzed by content analysis techniques on four distinct groups of elements, i.e. technical labeling, label writing, minimal information, and information that cannot be included. SMEs products that met writing labeling requirement were 27% and those that fulfilled the minimum label information requirement (excluding halal provision) were 40.81%. The food product with halal label was only 18%.

First paragraph: In Regulation by Proxy: How the USDA Relies on Public, Nonprofit, and For-Profit Intermediaries to Oversee Organic Food in the U.S., Dr. David P. Carter, assistant professor of political science at the Uni­versity of Utah, provides a comprehensive analysis of organic food regulation in the United States. The regulation of organic food is complex, and, as the book title suggests, organic regulation involves many actors with various roles. Although the federal government, through the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), plays a role in organic certification, “the regulatory arrangement is not as simple as a regu­lator . . . regulating an industry activity . . .” (p. 7). Instead, The National Organic Program (NOP), a regulatory entity housed under the USDA’s Agri­cultural Marketing Service, relies on “an assortment of ‘regulatory intermediaries’” (p. 7) independent from the NOP to develop and enforce uniform national standards for organically produced agricul­tural products sold in the United States. As a result, the regulation of the USDA organic standard is “decentralized” such that organic food is regulated by proxy. . . .

Aim: Given the current gaps of scientific knowledge and the need of efficient application of food law, this paper makes an analysis of principles of European food law for the appropriateness of applying biological activity Machine Learning prediction models to guarantee public safety. Background: Cheminformatic methods are able to design and create predictive models with high rate of accuracy saving time, costs and animal sacrifice. It has been applied on different disciplines including nanotechnology. Objective: Given the current gaps of scientific knowledge and the need of efficient application of food law, this paper makes an analysis of principles of European food law for the appropriateness of applying biological activity Machine Learning prediction models to guarantee public safety. Results: It is concluded Machine Learning could improve the application of nanotechnology food regulation, especially methods such as Perturbation Theory Machine Learning (PTML), given that it is aligned with principles promoted by the standards of Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, European Union regulations and European Food Safety Authority. Conclusion: To our best knowledge this is the first study focused on nanotechnology food regulation and it can help to support technical European Food Safety Authority Opinions for complementary information.

Purpose This paper aims to discuss the limitations surrounding the yoghurt industry and challenges to producing a bio-yoghurt tablet. The paper looks into challenge facing the yoghurt industry, such as manufacturing and distribution, its short shelf life, heat-sensitivity and relatively heavy weight. It further looks into the selection of strains, excipients and storage conditions with special consideration towards maintaining the viability of the probiotics inside bio-yoghurt tablets. The paper also discusses yoghurt standards and definitions across various countries and suggests a more uniform standard be embraced across countries for ease of categorization and production. Design/methodology/approach The paper is divided into a few major sections; each exploring various aspects of the yoghurt industry. Topics discussed include challenges in yoghurt production and storage; processes involved in bio-yoghurt tablet production, e.g. maximising viability, choice of excipients and more; market trends of yoghurt consumption and potential; and various food standards in countries around the world with a focus on yoghurt. Findings The review finds that yoghurt is a segment of the food industry with big growth potential. Most of the problems associated with yoghurt, i.e. poor shelf life, and heavy weight, can be circumvented by transforming it into a bio-yoghurt tablet. The paper further identifies food standard variations among different countries around the world which could impede yoghurt manufacture and acceptance. Originality/value This paper looks the various challenges surrounding the increased uptake of yoghurt, specifically in the Asian markets and suggests a viable option to overcome this problem, i.e. the use of a bio-yoghurt tablet. Should the worldwide bodies come together and agree to a universal standard involving yoghurt, the industry may see an even bigger expansion.

The sale of raw drinking milk from cows is banned in Australia due to regulatory requirements that all milk must be pasteurised. Such a prohibition is based on concern about public health and safet...

This article considers the Planta food scare that gripped the Netherlands in 1960. A new synthetic emulsifier had been added to a brand of margarine—called “Planta”—and a large number of people bec...

The traditional role of food in promoting health and preventing illness is integral to many Asian cultures. This commentary provides a brief overview of health-related food products regulation in Asia. We cover regulations initiated to promote health and prevent chronic diseases and regulations of traditional medicine food products. We focus on specific regulations in Japan and Singapore that encourage the consumption of certain foods to promote population health and prevent chronic diseases. We also examine the complexity and difficulty of regulating traditional medicine food products in Malaysia and Singapore, where these products are important not just for health but also in promoting cultural traditions.

COVID-19 has brought to center stage the most important health issue of our era, largely ignored by policymakers and the public to date: non-communicable diseases (NCDs), the cause of 71% of deaths per year worldwide. People living with NCDs, and particularly those living with cardiovascular disease (CVD), are at higher risk of severe symptoms and death from COVID-19. As a result, the urgent need for policy measures to protect cardiovascular health is more apparent than ever. One example of “low-hanging fruit” in the prevention of CVD is the elimination of industrially-produced trans fatty acids (iTFA). Their removal from the global food supply could prevent up to 17 million deaths by 2040 and would be the first time an NCD risk factor has been eliminated.

Highlights • EU food law impacts the transformative potential of alternative proteins. • Insects and cultured meat are novel foods; several microalgae and macroalgae are not. • The GM Food Regulation applies to all genetically modified or edited foods. • The names of vegan products have caused controversy. • The principles of non-discrimination and proportionality are important for fairness. We ask how European food law impacts the transformative potential of alternative proteins, including single-cell proteins, plant-based novel proteins, cultured meat,macroalgae, and insects. The Novel Food Regulation may prove insurmountable for small companies, and it is demanding and time-consuming even for larger companies,dampening the transformative potential of all novel foods and traditional foods from third countries. Several microalgae and macroalgae are non-novel in the EU, which eases their way into the markets. The unclear novel food status of some potential green macroalgae species is a hindrance. All insects are novel, and none has EU-level authorization yet, although some Member States allow insect food. The GM Food Regulation is procedurally and scientifically demanding, and it forces GM labelling. The Regulation dampens the transformative potential of food GM technology. In addition to crops and fruit, GM Food Regulation applies to genetically modified or edited microbes,microalgae, cultured meat, and insects. The naming and labelling rules of plant-based products have caused controversy. From the business perspective, the health claims process is similarly challenging as the novel food process. EU food law must guarantee food safety and consumer rights while applying the principles of nondiscrimination and proportionality.

This chapter introduces the question of effective governance designs of food safety regulation. It presents reasons why the new scholarly attention to food regulation constitutes an opportunity to investigate a number of broader issues that have concerned regulatory governance scholars, including effectiveness of regulation, the interplay between monitoring and enforcement (and their consequences), quality of regulatory designs, and the effects of policy capacity on regulatory outcomes. In doing so, it introduces the main argument of the book, which is the complementarity of policy capacity theories with regulatory governance theories in explaining successes and failures. By using food safety regulation as an illustrative case, it identifies gaps in the literature, and it frames the present contribution in the landscape of comparative public policy.

To make well-informed choices, consumers need access to reliable and clear messages regarding the benefits of functional substances in food. This study identified foods with function claims (FFCs) in Japan that had a gap between actual labeling and efficacy information of functional substances not visible on their food package. Between April 1, 2015, to July 20, 2018, 1,310 FFCs were submitted to the regulatory agency and analyzed. The proportion of FFCs with a gap was highest in the health claim category of blood pressure management (79.5%), followed by neutral fat reduction in blood (75%) and suppression of blood sugar spikes (73.4%). These gaps are attributable to differences in food development strategy. Thus, to ensure the quality of benefit communication on FFC to consumers, scientific evidence regarding health claims of functional substances should be managed in an integrated manner.

Montevideo establishes the mandatory labeling of foods containing genetically modified material through the Departmental Decree No. 36.554, positioning Uruguay within the 65 countries that have incorporated this type of regulation.The Food Regulation Service, in its role of sanitary police, and through its Laboratory of Bromatology, in agreement with the Food Molecular Traceability Laboratory (Faculty of Sciences, University of the Republic), carried out the analysis of 206 products made with ingredients derived from corn and/or soybean, during the 2015-2017 period, within the framework of compliance with the aforementioned Decree.The strategy used consisted of the application of molecular techniques (Real Time PCR), for the detection of common sequences present in the transgenic events of soybean and corn, and the subsequent quantification of the content of GM material, in relation to an established labeling threshold of 1%.As a result of this study, it was found that 36.9% of the analyzed foods presented sequences derived from genetically modified plant organisms (GMOs); and in 95% of the cases, its content exceeded the threshold established for its labeling.This study, constitutes the first approach to the knowledge of different transgenic elements distribution in food commercialized in Montevideo.These results provide valuable information to both the consumer, for decision making about the food to be consumed, and also for the official control organizations, which must enforce the regulations.This type of work has demonstrated, once again, the importance of the interrelation between academy and state agencies, in the generation of knowledge and in the implementation of new analytical methodologies, as well as in the training of qualified human resources and in the compliance with current regulations.

The sale of raw cow milk for human consumption is banned in Australia due to regulatory requirements that all milk must be pasteurised for safety reasons. However, some dairy farmers produce raw milk for sale as ‘bath milk’, a product labelled ‘for cosmetic purposes only’ but which is often bought for drinking. This situation is mirrored in other countries where raw milk is banned, and it is highly contentious, yet while there is significant literature examining why people drink raw milk, there has been little analysis exploring the views and practices of these farmers. Drawing notably on the theoretical work of Annemarie Mol and John Law around ontological multiplicity, this paper explores the accounts of a number of such farmers in Victoria, Australia. It finds that these farmers explicitly rejected the normative definition of raw milk as inherently dangerous, along with the associated regulatory framework. Instead, they developed their own structured practices that were designed to produce a version of raw milk that could be drunk, but which existed outside of the food regulation system. This situation highlights how practices can enact different versions of a food and, at the same time, the challenge for food safety regulation in being able to engage with, and account for, alternative and more complex versions of food and risk.

From local community centers, to the halls of Congress, the future of America’s food policy is taking center stage. Increases in diet-related health issues, growing populist attitudes about hyperlo...

Whole grains are a key component of a healthy diet, and enabling consumers to easily choose foods with a high whole-grain content is an important step for better prevention of chronic disease. Several definitions exist for whole-grain foods, yet these do not account for the diversity of food products that contain cereals. With the goal of creating a relatively simple whole-grain food definition that aligns with whole-grain intake recommendations and can be applied across all product categories, the Healthgrain Forum, a not-for-profit consortium of academics and industry working with cereal foods, established a working group to gather input from academics and industry to develop guidance on labeling the whole-grain content of foods. The Healthgrain Forum recommends that a food may be labeled as "whole grain" if it contains ≥30% whole-grain ingredients in the overall product and contains more whole grain than refined grain ingredients, both on a dry-weight basis. For the purposes of calculation, added bran and germ are not considered refined-grain ingredients. Additional recommendations are also made on labeling whole-grain content in mixed-cereal foods, such as pizza and ready meals, and a need to meet healthy nutrition criteria. This definition allows easy comparison across product categories because it is based on dry weight and strongly encourages a move from generic whole-grain labels to reporting the actual percentage of whole grain in a product. Although this definition is for guidance only, we hope that it will encourage more countries to adopt regulation around the labeling of whole grains and stimulate greater awareness and consumption of whole grains in the general population.

The glycaemic index (GI) is a food metric that ranks the acute impact of available (digestible) carbohydrates on blood glucose. At present, few countries regulate the inclusion of GI on food labels even though the information may assist consumers to manage blood glucose levels. Australia and New Zealand regulate GI claims as nutrition content claims and also recognize the GI Foundation’s certified Low GI trademark as an endorsement. The GI Foundation of South Africa endorses foods with low, medium and high GI symbols. In Asia, Singapore’s Healthier Choice Symbol has specific provisions for low GI claims. Low GI claims are also permitted on food labels in India. In China, there are no national regulations specific to GI; however, voluntary claims are permitted. In the USA, GI claims are not specifically regulated but are permitted, as they are deemed to fall under general food-labelling provisions. In Canada and the European Union, GI claims are not legal under current food law. Inconsistences in food regulation around the world undermine consumer and health professional confidence and call for harmonization. Global provisions for GI claims/endorsements in food standard codes would be in the best interests of people with diabetes and those at risk.

Background\ud Food regulatory bodies play an important role in public health, and in reducing the costs of food borne illness that are absorbed by both industry and government. Regulation in the food industry involves a relationship between regulators and members of the industry, and it is imperative that these relationships are built on trust. Research has shown in a variety of contexts that businesses find the most success when there are high levels of trust between them and their key stakeholders. An evidence-based understanding of the barriers to communication and trust is imperative if we are to put forward recommendations for facilitating the (re)building of trusting and communicative relationships.\ud \ud Methods\ud We present data from 72 interviews with regulators and industry representatives regarding their trust in and communication with one another. Interviews were conducted in the UK, New Zealand, and Australia in 2013.\ud \ud Results\ud Data identify a variety of factors that shape the dynamic and complex relationships between regulators and industry, as well as barriers to communication and trust between the two parties. Novel in our approach is our emphasis on identifying solutions to these barriers from the voices of industry and regulators.\ud \ud Conclusions\ud We provide recommendations (e.g., development of industry advisory boards) to facilitate the (re)building of trusting and communicative relationships between the two parties.

This study examined the effect of food regulations under the current criteria (e.g., 100 Bq/kg for general foods) established approximately a year after the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant (FDNPP) accident. Foods are monitored to ensure that foods exceeding the standard limit are not distributed, ~300,000 examinations per year have been performed especially since FY2014. This study comprehensively estimated the internal exposure dose resulting from the ingestion of foods containing radioactive cesium using the accumulated monitoring results. Committed effective dose was conservatively calculated as the product of the radioactive concentration randomly sampled from test results, food intake, and dose coefficient. The median, 95th, and 99th percentile of the dose were 0.0479, 0.207, and 10.6 mSv/y, respectively, in the estimation with all test results (without regulation), and 0.0430, 0.0790, and 0.233 mSv/y, respectively, in the estimation with results within the standard limits (with regulation) in FY2012. In FY2016, the dose with and without regulation were similar, except for high percentile, and those doses were significantly smaller than 1 mSv/y, which was adopted as the basis for the current criteria. The food regulation measures implemented in Japan after the FDNPP accident have been beneficial, and food safety against radionuclides has been ensured.

Background In line with calls for action from international health organizations, Chile implemented in June 2016 a set of regulations to tackle the obesity epidemic. The new regulation includes the mandatory use of front-of-package warning labels on packaged foods/beverages high in energy, sugars, saturated fats and sodium. Additionally, such foods cannot be sold nor offered in daycares/schools and cannot be promoted to children under 14yo. The law is targeted to children; thus, this study examined mothers’ understanding, perceptions, and behaviors associated with the regulation one year after its implementation, using a qualitative approach. Methods Nine focus groups of mothers (7–10 people each) of children (2-14yo) were conducted in July 2017 in Santiago-Chile. They were stratified by socioeconomic status (SES) and children’s age. Macrocodes were developed by three researchers, combining an iterative process of deductive and inductive thematic analyses. Quotations representing each category were selected. Results Mothers understood the new regulation as a policy to fight child obesity and were aware that products with more labels were less healthy than products with fewer labels. Attention and use of labels in the buying decision-making process ranged from participants who did not pay attention to others who relied on them as a quick shortcut (mostly from middle and upper-SES); many mothers indicated changing their purchase habits only when buying new products. Mothers declared that young children accepted school environment changes while teens/preteens resisted them more. Many mothers agreed that schools have become key promoters of food behavioral change. Mothers were less aware about the food marketing regulations. Mothers declared that they perceived that the regulation was changing the perceptions, attitudes and behaviors toward healthier eating patterns. Conclusion After the first year of implementation, the regulation was well known by mothers of diverse SES and different children ages. The degree of use of warning labels was heterogeneous among participants, but most of them agreed that their children, particularly the youngest have positive attitudes toward the regulation and have become promoters of change in their families. Many mothers also expressed that they perceived an important shift toward healthier eating, which may lead to a change in eating social norms. This information contributes to better understand how regulatory actions may influence people’s consumer behaviors.

The United States’ Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) revises the US Food and Drug Administration's regulatory authority. While expanding FDA's authority, the legislation replicates and relies on private systems of standards and third party audits, albeit with modifications. This article argues that public and private actors develop food safety regulations within multiple types of institutional venues, including private standards regimes, courts, congresses, and government regulatory agencies. It examines how interactions within each of these venues are shaped by stakeholders’ interests, and how the relevant subset of interactions within these venues ultimately shaped the FSMA. The article concludes by offering insights into what consequences these interactions and outcomes may have on the roles and capacities of affected stakeholders in food safety governance.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to report how food regulators communicate with consumers about food safety and how they believe consumers understand their role in relation to food safety. The implications of this on the role of food regulators are considered. Design/methodology/approach – In total, 42 food regulators from Australia, New Zealand and the UK participated in a semi-structured interview about their response to food incidents and issues of food regulation more generally. Data were analysed thematically. Findings – Food regulators have a key role in communicating information to consumers about food safety and food incidents. This is done in two main ways: proactive and reactive communication. The majority of regulators said that consumers do not have a good understanding of what food regulation involves and there were varied views on whether or not this is important. Practical implications – Both reactive and proactive communication with consumers are important, however there are clear benefits in food regulators communicating proactively with consumers, including a greater understanding of the regulators’ role. Regulators should be supported to communicate proactively where possible. Originality/value – There is a lack of information about how food regulators communicate with consumers about food safety and how food regulators perceive consumers to understand food regulation. It is this gap that forms the basis of this paper.

Bacillus cereus contamination is one of the major problems for food safety in Korean fermented soybean pastes. A one-sample inspection is not sufficient to determine the overall level of contamination. The aims of this study were to propose new statistical sampling plans for B. cereus in Korean fermented soybean pastes. The acceptable probability over 95% is considered suitable for sampling plan. We suggest statistical sampling plans for B. cereus A (n=5, c=2, m=3, and M=4), B (n=5, c=0, and m=4), or C (n=5, c=1, m=4, and M=5) in Korean fermented soybean pastes based on the B. cereus standard in current Korean Food Code and the median and mean value from the 150 pastes estimated in this study. The statistical sampling plans for B. cereus proposed in this study will provide an advanced food regulation and permit harmonization with international food standards.

This chapters begins the substantive discussion of food regulation by looking at enforcement authority of the two primary food agencies in the U.S. By beginning with the enforcement authority later, subjects on prohibited acts will be placed in the context of risks and consequences. Introduction of the enforcement powers also enables instructors to test students using practical scenarios from Form 483s, Warning Letters, and Regulatory Control Actions. The discussion addresses the recent reorganization by the FDA. This chapter covers the full suite of enforcement actions available to the FDA and FSIS. It includes a detailed examination of constitutional and statutory defenses to inspections and enforcement actions.

This Special Issue aims to develop a deeper understanding of the interplay between public and private actors in the regulatory governance of food. It starts from the observation that the traditional concept of law as command-and-control legislation and law enforcement by national governmental bodies, including inspectorates and courts, is not adequate to capture today's world of food governance. Nowadays, a broad range of public and private entities acting at national and international level seek to shape and influence the production, trade and handling of food and the risks involved therein. Drawing on data from Europe and the United States, the contributions to this Special Issue seek to unravel the intimate, yet complex ties between public and private actors within governance arrangements regulating food safety and sustainability. The articles are focused around the various phases of the policy cycle for food governance, thus addressing the interaction in stages of agenda-setting and rule-making, adoption and implementation, monitoring and enforcement, and evaluation and review. In descriptive terms, each contribution lays out the ‘who’ (actors), the ‘what’ (activity), the ‘why’ (rationale) and the ‘how’ (instruments) of food governance. In evaluative terms, the papers discuss and explain the results and challenges of the design of the public private governance arrangements. Jointly, the contributions offer original and invaluable empirical insights explaining the rise, design and challenges of mixed governance arrangements in the food sector.

Resumo Este artigo aborda a dinâmica das práticas da vigilância sanitária de alimentos no Brasil, destacando as suas particularidades quanto aos riscos e modalidades de intervenção, assim como ressaltando os recentes instrumentos adotados para o controle dos riscos relativos à composição nutricional dos alimentos e suas repercussões no âmbito institucional. Instituída no Brasil desde a Primeira República, essa prática vem se remodelando ao longo dos anos, tanto pela complexidade crescente dos riscos, quanto pela introdução de novos instrumentos institucionais. Nos últimos anos, evidencia-se um esvaziamento da competência regulatória quando da adoção dos instrumentos, acordos e termos de compromisso, firmados entre o governo e as indústrias para lidar com os riscos de ordem nutricional dos produtos alimentícios. Instrumentos construídos sem a participação dos consumidores, com elasticidade de prazos para cumprimento pelas indústrias e ineptos para a fiscalização, denotando retrocessos na construção democrática e na prática da regulação sanitária de alimentos no Brasil. Abstract This article addresses the dynamics of Brazilian food control practices, highlighting their special risk-related features and the types of intervention, as well as the recently adopted instruments to control risks related to the nutritional composition of food and their institutional repercussions. Food regulation in Brazil dates back to the First Republic. The practice has been remodeled over the years, due to both the increasing complexity of the risks and the introduction of new institutional operational mechanisms. In recent years, with the adoption of instruments such as agreements and terms of commitments established between government and industry and designed to control risks, it has become possible to identify widening gaps in regulatory competence. The adoption of mechanisms without the participation of consumers, with elastic deadlines for compliance by industries and insusceptible to inspection, represents a setback in the democratic process and the practice of health regulation of food currently under way in Brazil.

In this paper, I first provide definitions of nutrient profiling and of a nutrient profile model. I set out the purposes of nutrient profiling: both general and specific. I give two examples of nutrient profile models that have been developed for regulatory purposes by the Food Standards Agency (FSA) in the UK and the WHO for its European Region – the UK FSA/Ofcom and the WHO-Euro models – and compare the way the models are constructed and function, how they have been developed, the extent to which they have been tested and validated and their use in regulation. Finally I draw some conclusions about the future use of nutrient profiling for regulatory purposes. I argue that its full potential has yet to be realised and give some reasons why. I pose some urgent research questions with respect to nutrient profiling.

BACKGROUND Competitive foods remain prevalent in schools even though the majority of states' laws have addressed this for several years. Whereas updated federal standards take effect during school year 2014-2015, aspects of competitive food regulation will remain relegated to the states and districts and concerns exist about compliance with the federal standards. This study examined compliance provisions codified into state law that focused on incentives, monetary penalties, or contracts which could provide examples for other jurisdictions. METHODS Codified statutory and administrative laws effective as of January 2013 for all 50 states and the District of Columbia were compiled using Boolean searches in Lexis-Nexis and Westlaw. All laws were analyzed by 2 study authors to determine the presence and components of relevant provisions. RESULTS Eighteen states' laws contained compliance mechanisms including financial and/or programmatic incentives (5 states), contract provisions (11 states), and monetary penalties for noncompliance (7 states). Five states' laws contained a combination of approaches. CONCLUSIONS Compliance measures help to strengthen competitive food laws by providing state agencies with an enforcement mechanism. Enforcing such provisions will help to create healthier school environments. This study will provide useful insight for governments at all levels as they implement competitive food laws.

In In Food We Trust, Courtney Thomas aims to write “a story that challenges us to reconsider what we believe we know about food safety, its regulation, and our system of government” (p. 2). As Thom...

The concentrations were ranged from1.35±0.16to2.22±0.34 µg/g (dry weight) and2.65±0.34to4.36±0.53 µg/g (dry weight) for Cd and Pb, respectively, in blood cockleAnadara granosafrom four sites of Sabang River, namely, Kampung Sambir, Kampung Tambirat, Beliong Temple, and Kampung Tanjung Apong, which are located at Asajaya, Sarawak, Malaysia. All values exceeded safety limits set by Malaysian Food Regulation (1985). It may be the cause of serious human health problems after long term consumption. Thus, consumer should have consciousness about such type of seafood from mentioned sites and need further investigation.

Objective: To investigate the level of support among Western Australian adults for food control policies to improve diet, reduce obesity and protect the environment. Methods: Attitudes towards government food control policies on food labelling, food advertising, and the supply of environmentally friendly food data were pooled from two Nutrition Monitoring Survey Series telephone surveys of 2,147 adults aged 18–64 years collected in 2009 and 2012. Descriptive and logistic regression analyses were conducted using survey module of STATA 12. Results: The majority of adults believe it is important that government regulates food policy options under consideration: nutrition information on food labels (97% versus 2% who think it is not important); health rating on food labels (95% versus 3%); food advertising (83% versus 11%); and the supply of environmentally friendly food (86% versus 9%). Conclusions: Community perception is that government control or regulation of food labelling, food advertising and the supply of environmentally friendly food is important. Implications: Curbing excess weight gain and related disease burden is a public health priority. Australian governments are considering food regulatory interventions to assist the public to improve their dietary intake. These findings should provide reassurance to government officials considering these regulatory measures.

This article aims to provide a brief introduction to the food legislation and enforcement system in Belgium. It provides an overview of the history and context of the regulatory framework and summarizes fundamental food safety, labeling and advertising compliance requirements in the production and commercialization of food and available enforcement mechanisms.

This chapter introduces the part dedicated to answers from agri-food regulation to emerging interests of consumers.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationships between regulatory changes, returns on equity and stock market valuations for Canadian food and non‐food agribusinesses.Design/methodology/approachTwo empirical approaches are employed. First, an event study is used to evaluate the impact of official regulatory announcements on the stock market valuations of selected Canadian agribusinesses. Next, an approach introduced by Mishra et al. using the Du Pont expansion is applied to investigate the effect of regulations on firms' accounting profits. Data on Canadian food and non‐food agribusinesses are collected from Bloomberg, Thompson One Banker and SEDAR.FindingsThe event study demonstrates that official regulatory announcement dates do not correspond with abnormal stock market returns for Canadian firms, while the Du Pont model yields mixed evidence with respect to their accounting profits.Research limitations/implicationsThis paper only considers publicly traded companies. As a result, survivorship bias may exist. Future research should include privately held and cooperative firms.Social implicationsFood regulations can influence firm profits and shareholder wealth, so understanding how government actions influence agribusiness is important when considering the total costs of current and future food policy.Originality/valueThe interaction between policy and the financial performance of Canada's publicly traded agribusinesses is an under‐researched area and no studies have examined Canadian data. The results of this study are valuable to both policy makers and researchers.

Battles over the labelling of genetically modified organisms, the use of hormones in livestock production, and geographic indicators reveal persistent differences between the EU and US within the regulatory domains of environment, agriculture and food safety. Comparative studies have shown that culturally specific accountings of risk have fuelled different approaches to regulatory problems across the two jurisdictions. An analysis of organic regulation suggests that these characterisations remain useful, but should not be oversold. Differences in regulatory culture, as well as differences in explicit goals and mechanisms, set organic food regulation on different paths in the EU and US. However, whereas such differences have led to polarisation in other domains of food regulation, there has been relative convergence with respect to organic standards. Drawing on theories of regulatory convergence, this paper argues that polarisation was averted due to the ability, ultimately, of social movements working wit...

The approach used by food regulation agencies to examine the literature and forecast the impact of possible food regulations has many similar features to the approach used in nutritional epidemiological research. We outline the Risk Analysis Framework described by FAO/WHO, in which there is formal progression from identification of the nutrient or food chemical of interest, through to describing its effect on health and then assessing whether there is a risk to the population based on dietary exposure estimates. We then discuss some important considerations for the dietary modeling component of the Framework, including several methodological issues that also exist in research nutritional epidemiology. Finally, we give several case studies that illustrate how the different methodological components are used together to inform decisions about how to manage the regulatory problem.

Food safety is a concern for parents of infants, and healthcare professionals are often questioned by them about this topic. Baby food European regulation ensures high levels of safety and is more rigorous than common food regulation. Maximal limit for pesticides in baby food demonstrates the high level of requirements. This limit must be below the 10 ppb detection threshold, whatever the chemical used. Other contaminants such as nitrates are also the subject of greater expectations in baby food. Food safety risks control needs a specific know-how that baby food manufacturers have acquired and experienced, more particularly by working with producers of high quality raw material.

In 2002 New Zealand and Australia initiated a joint food regulatory approach, codified in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code. Prior to drafting of the joint Code a series of risk assessments were carried out by Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ; then Australia New Zealand Food Authority). This included a review of the maximum permitted concentrations of non-metals in food, including mycotoxins. On the basis of this review, just three classes of mycotoxins were included in the joint Food Standards Code: aflatoxins, in peanut and tree nuts; ergot, in cereal grains; and phomopsins, in lupin seeds and products of lupin seeds. Both countries apply import controls on the basis of aflatoxins standards, but not ergot or phomopsins. New Zealand and Australia are moving domestic food regulation from an inspection-based system to a risk-based approach. Consequently, instead of the responsibility for food safety being placed on regulatory authorities to find any problems, responsibility is moved to the persons in charge of the food operation who must be proactive in the way they manage food safety and suitability and must demonstrate how they manage food safety. There is evidence in both Australia and New Zealand for increasing industry mycotoxin monitoring to support a risk-based approach. Analysis of domestically produced foods and non-regulated imported foods for mycotoxins by regulatory bodies is mainly carried out to support risk assessment activities.

The primary role of the extensive and complex modern food legislation is to protect the consumer. Providing a framework for industry and enabling free trade are secondary aims. In the EU the 2006 Regulation on nutrition and health claims made on foods was adopted in December 2006. This Regulation defines detailed lists of permitted claims with precise conditions, requires foods making claims to meet specific nutrient profiles and requires the submission of a dossier for approval of new health claims. Nutrient profiles and an initial list of existing health claims will not be agreed until January 2009 and January 2010 respectively. The uncertainty about profiles and the initial list of claims as well as the prescriptive nature of the Regulation will have a major impact, some negative but some positive, on food innovation. Worldwide legislation on nutrition and health claims continues to develop. The current paper also provides an outline of some other key pieces of European legislation that affect food innovation. However, currently, all this legislation remains in development and up-to-date information can be sought from the reference material provided.

This study with Australian consumers investigated how appealing different health claims combined with particular food carriers were to Australian consumers, and compared the results of a similar study with Dutch consumers. 149 shoppers considered up to 30 different food concepts, rating how ‘attractive’, ‘believable’, and ‘new and different’ they found each concept and their ‘intention to try’. Each variable was significantly related to intention to try ( p

Genetically engineered (GE) crops, multi-ingredient foods derived from one or more GE ingredients, and GE agricultural inputs are regulated in the United States under a “Coordinated Framework” that was literally cobbled together in the early 1990s. Via this Framework, responsibility is spread across three federal agencies for the assessment and management of potential risks arising from the planting of GE crops, the raising of GE animals, or uses of GE inputs. The Framework was incomplete and conceptually flawed from the beginning. Despite multiple, piecemeal efforts to update aspects of GE risk assessment and regulatory policy, the Coordinated Framework survives to this day largely unchanged. Its shortcomings are recognized in both the scientific and legal communities, but meaningful reforms thus far remain out of reach, blocked by the intense controversy now surrounding all things biotech. Five generic reforms and another five specific initiatives are described to create a more robust, science-driven GE regulatory infrastructure in the U.S.