Global Food Safety Initiative

Last updated

The Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) is a private organization that works as a "coalition of action" from the Consumer Goods Forum (CGF) and brings together retailers and brand owners (manufacturers) from across the CGF membership. The GFSI operates under multi-stakeholder governance, with the objective to create "an extended food safety community to oversee food safety standards for businesses and help provide access to safe food for people everywhere". [1] GFSI's work in benchmarking and harmonization aims to foster mutual acceptance of GFSI-recognized certification programs across the industry, with the ambition to enable a "once certified, accepted everywhere" approach. [2]

Contents

About

The Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) is a business-driven initiative for the continuous improvement of food safety management systems, with the ambition to ensure confidence in the delivery of safe food to consumers worldwide. GFSI provides a platform for collaboration between some of the world's leading food safety experts from retailer, manufacturer, food service companies, service providers associated with the food supply chain, international organizations, academia, and government.

The initiative was launched in 2000 following a number of food safety crises and pending changes to public laws in the food sector, including EU food law. [3] With legal obligations for their supply chains, and compliance connected to liability, European retailers decided to use technical standards to comply with public law requirements. [4]

Since then, experts from all over the world have been collaborating in numerous technical working groups to tackle current food safety issues defined by GFSI stakeholders. Key activities within GFSI include the definition and control of minimum requirements for food safety certification programs and a robust benchmarking process. GFSI benchmarking and recognition of existing technical standards are used for food safety certification programs, with the objective to enhance confidence, acceptance, and implementation of third-party certification along the entire food supply chain.

Other important activities include the development of a capacity-building program for small and/or less developed businesses to facilitate their access to local markets, and a continuous focus on food safety auditor competence to bring industry experts in collaboration with key stakeholders to a common consensus on the skills, knowledge, and attributes that a competent auditor should possess.

In 2020, GFSI launched a program named The Race to the Top (RTTT), with the objective to address specific challenges in relation to lack of trust and confidence in GFSI-recognized certification. [5] This included food safety recalls for food manufacturers with GFSI-recognized certificates in the supply chains of their Consumer Goods Forum members. [6] [7] In 2022, IFS reported they had requested the legality of the RTTT to be reviewed by the Federal Cartel Office under antitrust and competition law. [8]

Benchmarking

Within GFSI, benchmarking is a procedure by which a food safety-related certification programme is compared to GFSI benchmarking requirements. [9]

In 2000, food safety was a top-of-mind issue for companies due to several high-profile recalls, quarantines, and negative publicity about the food industry. There was also extensive audit fatigue throughout the industry, as retailers performed inspections or audits themselves or asked a third party to do this on their behalf. These were often carried out against food safety schemes that lacked international certification and accreditation, resulting in incompatible auditing results. [10]

CEOs of global companies came together at the Consumer Goods Forum, knowing that under new pending EU food law, "unsatisfactory inspection results should lead to appropriate action". If they could demonstrate that technical standards avoid non-compliance to food law, enforcement authorities would be less likely to prosecute their companies in the event of food safety incidents within supply chains. [11] The CEOs agreed that consumer trust needed to be strengthened and maintained through a safer supply chain.

GFSI was created to achieve this through the harmonization of food safety standards that would help mitigate liability exposure for retailers and reduce audit duplication throughout the supply chain. At the time, there was no existing scheme that could be adopted by all. GFSI therefore chose to implement benchmarking, developing a model that determines equivalency between existing food safety schemes, whilst leaving flexibility and choice in the marketplace.

Benchmarking allows multiple certification programmes with GFSI recognition to enter the marketplace. This created strong competition among certification programme owners (CPO) who employ large marketing teams with annual growth targets. GFSI benchmarking implies equivalency, though the financial opportunities with certification programme fees [12] resulted in a perverse incentive, with CPOs working to differentiate themselves from their competitors. The unintended consequence of harmonization was fragmentation due to additional CPO entrants requesting recognition for monetary gain. Companies that have to choose a certification program often hire consultants to help them decide on the best scheme, which causes confusion for stakeholders. [13] [14]

GFSI is not a CPO and does not undertake any certification or accreditation activities. However, it is structured and designed to control the minimum requirements in schemes and therefore influence certification activities. GFSI represents its Consumer Goods Forum members, and their steering committee governance [15] have controlling interest to decide benchmarking requirements.

GFSI objectives:

Recognition

GFSI has recognized a number of food safety management programs that fulfill the criteria of the GFSI benchmarking requirements. [9] These are regularly revised by GFSI to reflect improvements in best practices. GFSI is not a CPO in itself and does not carry out any accreditation or certification activities.

The status of recognition is achieved through a comprehensive benchmarking process. [17] Once a standard has gained formal recognition by the GFSI steering committee, this standard is deemed to meet all of the requirements in the GFSI benchmarking requirements. [9]

Certification according to a GFSI-recognized certification programme can be achieved through a successful third-party audit against any of the following certification programs, recognized by GFSI: [17]

Up-to-date information on the status of CPO benchmarking and recognition is published on the GFSI website. [18] Some CPOs are registered as nonprofit organizations and others as for-profit.

Conformity assessment

The third-party audit of certification programs with GFSI recognition is performed by accredited certification bodies. GFSI allows certification programs to choose which conformity assessment requirements certification bodies must follow. The two options are:

Certification programmes following ISO/IEC 17021 must also meet the requirements of ISO 22003-1 certification of food safety management systems; ISO 22003-2 certification of food safety systems is supplemental to ISO/IEC 17065.

ISO 17021 and ISO 17065 follow ISO/IEC 17000 for vocabulary and general principles, [19] which defines the terms "conformity assessment scheme" and "scheme". This term is referenced by regulators. [20] In 2018, GFSI introduced a new term, Certification Program Owner, to refer to scheme owners. Additionally, GFSI raised an objection to the term "scheme" in the Codex Committee Electronic Working Group for Codex Draft Principles and Guidelines for the assessment and use of voluntary third-party assurance programs. [21] This resulted in a new term, "vTPA", being introduced.

A comparative study of schemes explains an ISO 17065 scheme as product certification, which is prescriptive, and an ISO 17021 scheme as a management certification, and non-prescriptive. [22] A paper from the Food and Agriculture Organization, with a review of literature (Wolff and Scannell, 2008; FAO, 2009a; IIED, 2009; WTO, 2010), highlighted concerns that included private food safety standards being prescriptive rather than outcome-focused. [23]

Industry influence and motivation

Under the umbrella of GFSI, eight major retailers (Carrefour, Tesco, ICA, Metro, Migros, Ahold, Wal-Mart, and Delhaize) operate as a private sector-led Multi-Stakeholder Initiative (MSI), also referred to as mult-istakeholder governance. Major retailers came to a common acceptance of the GFSI benchmarked food safety certification programs in June 2007. [24]

The motivation for retailer- and brand-owner influence over benchmarking requirements for CPOs is focused on their legal liability, mostly related to food safety failures within supply chains. [25] Under EU food law, retailers and brand owners have a legal responsibility for their brands, and the main reason GFSI was founded at the time was to comply with the legal obligation to check suppliers. [26] This legal obligation stimulated a parallel development of private standards as self-regulation tools, adding to the global food sector's burden, as the requirements were focused on liability mitigation against EU food law. [27] Retailers were cautious to avoid potential scandals, which resulted in taking the lead on technical committees and with governance over standard-setting organizations such as IFS and BRCGS. [28] [29]

Concerns around self-regulation and corporate governance in the absence of government regulation have been raised by the Institute for Multi-Stakeholder Initiative Integrity, with conclusions that private-sector MSIs adopt weak or narrow standards that better serve corporate interests than rightsholder interests. [30] [31]

Divided opinion within GFSI

Brand owners, who are more focused on manufacturing food, and retailers, who are more focused on selling food, have divided opinions on schemes with GFSI recognition. The majority of brand owners who are GFSI members [32] implement FSSC 22000 in their manufacturing facilities. This includes Barilla, Cargill, Coca-Cola, Danone, Kraft Heinz, Mondelez, PepsiCo, and Nestle. FSSC 22000 is based on an international standard (ISO 22000) and follows ISO 17021.

Brand owners choose FSSC 22000 for two reasons: Firstly, food manufacturing is a process industry, and ISO 17021 is a process-based approach to food safety, which complements process manufacturing. Secondly, some brand owners have implemented ISO-integrated management systems in their manufacturing facilities, which are designed for integration with ISO 9001 Quality, ISO 14001 Environmental, and ISO 45001 Occupational Health & Safety standards. [33] [34] [35] [36] [37]

In 2007, the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development and the World Trade Organization jointly organized an informal information session on private standards. A proposal was made to GFSI to adopt ISO 22000 as a single international standard for the reasons of impartiality, independence, consensus, and no scheme-owner fees. There was strong opposition from scheme owners, as their schemes would likely become obsolete if an international standard was adopted. [38]

Retailers rejected the proposal due to their close relationships with scheme owners using private standards. [39] The proposal was raised again in 2020, and GFSI restated their position not to have one standard for the food industry. [40] Promoting ISO 22000 for food and farming would mean reducing the power of global retailers in terms of control over standards. [41]

GFSI conference

GFSI hosts an annual conference in different regions, including Europe, North America, and Asia. [42]

YearCityCountryRegion
2001GenevaSwitzerlandEurope
2002GenevaSwitzerlandEurope
2004BarcelonaSpainEurope
2005RomeItalyEurope
2006ParisFranceEurope
2007MunichGermanyEurope
2008AmsterdamThe NetherlandsEurope
2009BarcelonaSpainEurope
2010Washington D.C.USANorth America
2011LondonUKEurope
2012OrlandoUSANorth America
2013BarcelonaSpainEurope
2014AnaheimUSANorth America
2015Kuala LumpurMalaysiaAsia
2016BerlinGermanyEurope
2017HoustonUSANorth America
2018TokyoJapanAsia
2019NiceFranceEurope
2020Seattle [43] USANorth America
2022BarcelonaSpainEurope
2023AtlantaUSANorth America
2024Singapore [44] SingaporeAsia

Related Research Articles

ISO 14000 is a family of standards by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) related to environmental management that exists to help organizations (a) minimize how their operations negatively affect the environment ; (b) comply with applicable laws, regulations, and other environmentally oriented requirements; and (c) continually improve in the above.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hazard analysis and critical control points</span> Systematic preventive approach to food safety

Hazard analysis and critical control points, or HACCP, is a systematic preventive approach to food safety from biological, chemical, and physical hazards in production processes that can cause the finished product to be unsafe and designs measures to reduce these risks to a safe level. In this manner, HACCP attempts to avoid hazards rather than attempting to inspect finished products for the effects of those hazards. The HACCP system can be used at all stages of a food chain, from food production and preparation processes including packaging, distribution, etc. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) require mandatory HACCP programs for juice and meat as an effective approach to food safety and protecting public health. Meat HACCP systems are regulated by the USDA, while seafood and juice are regulated by the FDA. All other food companies in the United States that are required to register with the FDA under the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002, as well as firms outside the US that export food to the US, are transitioning to mandatory hazard analysis and risk-based preventive controls (HARPC) plans.

Quality Assurance International (QAI) is a U.S.-based international organic certification company that is authorized by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) as "a USDA-accredited certifying agent that operates globally to certify organic operations to National Organic Program standards." It is a for-profit corporation, established in 1989, and headquartered in San Diego, California. It is one of the world's largest certifiers, operating in the United States, Canada, Latin America, European Union, and Japan.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ecolabel</span> Labeling systems for food and consumer products

Ecolabels and Green Stickers are labeling systems for food and consumer products. The use of ecolabels is voluntary, whereas green stickers are mandated by law; for example, in North America major appliances and automobiles use Energy Star. They are a form of sustainability measurement directed at consumers, intended to make it easy to take environmental concerns into account when shopping. Some labels quantify pollution or energy consumption by way of index scores or units of measurement, while others assert compliance with a set of practices or minimum requirements for sustainability or reduction of harm to the environment. Many ecolabels are focused on minimising the negative ecological impacts of primary production or resource extraction in a given sector or commodity through a set of good practices that are captured in a sustainability standard. Through a verification process, usually referred to as "certification", a farm, forest, fishery, or mine can show that it complies with a standard and earn the right to sell its products as certified through the supply chain, often resulting in a consumer-facing ecolabel.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Certified wood</span> Wood product from a responsibly managed forest

Certified wood and paper products come from responsibly managed forests – as defined by a particular standard. With third-party forest certification, an independent standards setting organization (SSO) develops standards for good forest management, and independent auditing companies issue certificates to forest operations that comply with those standards.

Accreditation is the independent, third-party evaluation of a conformity assessment body against recognised standards, conveying formal demonstration of its impartiality and competence to carry out specific conformity assessment tasks.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">ISO 22000</span> Food safety standard

ISO 22000 is a food safety management system by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) which is outcome focused, providing requirements for any organization in the food industry with objective to help to improve overall performance in food safety. These standards are intended to ensure safety in the global food supply chain. The standards involve the overall guidelines for food safety management and also focuses on traceability in the feed and food chain.

GLOBALG.A.P. is a farm assurance program, translating consumer requirements into Good Agricultural Practice. EurepGAP is a common standard for farm management practice created in the late 1990s by several European supermarket chains and their major suppliers. It is now the world's most widely implemented farm certification scheme. Most European customers for agricultural products now demand evidence of EurepGAP certification as a prerequisite for doing business.

An environmental audit is a type of evaluation intended to identify environmental compliance and management system implementation gaps, along with related corrective actions. In this way they perform an analogous (similar) function to financial audits. There are generally two different types of environmental audits: compliance audits and management systems audits. Compliance audits tend to be the primary type in the US or within US-based multinationals.

A technical standard is an established norm or requirement for a repeatable technical task which is applied to a common and repeated use of rules, conditions, guidelines or characteristics for products or related processes and production methods, and related management systems practices. A technical standard includes definition of terms; classification of components; delineation of procedures; specification of dimensions, materials, performance, designs, or operations; measurement of quality and quantity in describing materials, processes, products, systems, services, or practices; test methods and sampling procedures; or descriptions of fit and measurements of size or strength.

The United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS) is the sole national accreditation body recognised by the British government to assess the competence of organisations that provide certification, testing, inspection and calibration services. It evaluates these conformity assessment bodies and then accredits them where they are found to meet relevant internationally specified standards.

Sustainability standards and certifications are voluntary guidelines used by producers, manufacturers, traders, retailers, and service providers to demonstrate their commitment to good environmental, social, ethical, and food safety practices. There are over 400 such standards across the world.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">NSF International</span> American standardization organization

NSF is a product testing, inspection, certification organization with headquarters in Ann Arbor, Michigan. NSF also offers consulting and training services worldwide.

DQS Holding GmbH based in Frankfurt am Main is the holding company of the worldwide DQS Group. The group provides assessments and certifications of management systems and processes of any type.

Environmental certification is a form of environmental regulation and development where a company can voluntarily choose to comply with predefined processes or objectives set forth by the certification service. Most certification services have a logo which can be applied to products certified under their standards. This is seen as a form of corporate social responsibility allowing companies to address their obligation to minimise the harmful impacts to the environment by voluntarily following a set of externally set and measured objectives.

The Consumer Goods Forum (CGF) is a global, industry-led network that brings together over 400 member companies, including retailers, manufacturers, and other stakeholders from 70 countries in the consumer goods industry. It focuses on driving positive change and greater efficiency within the industry by addressing global challenges like sustainability, consumer health, and ethical supply chain practices. Among its significant initiatives is the Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI), an industry-driven approach to food safety and quality.

Harmonization is the process of minimizing redundant or conflicting standards which may have evolved independently. The name is also an analogy to the process to harmonizing discordant music.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Kiwa NV</span>

Kiwa is a Dutch company in the testing, inspection and certification (TIC) sector, providing testing, inspection, certification, consultancy and training services across various markets, including built environment, (cyber) security, renewable energy, food, feed & farm, water and health care. Kiwa is headquartered in Rijswijk, the Netherlands, and its over 10,000 employees operate across a global network of office and advanced testing laboratory locations in 35 countries.

ISO 22301:2019, Security and resilience – Business continuity management systems – Requirements, is a management system standard published by International Organization for Standardization that specifies requirements to plan, establish, implement, operate, monitor, review, maintain and continually improve a documented management system to protect against, reduce the likelihood of occurrence, prepare for, respond to, and recover from disruptive incidents when they arise. It is intended to be applicable to all organizations, or parts thereof, regardless of type, size and nature of the organization.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Taiwan Quality Food Association</span>

The Taiwan Quality Food Association (TQF Association) is a juridical association responsible for the management of the Taiwan Quality Food (TQF) Product Certification Scheme, which is in compliance with GHP, GMP and HACCP standards requirements, and also to provide guidelines and support for the food industry to voluntarily implement food safety management system. TQF Association's five main core functions are as follow:

  1. Harmonization of TQF certification with international food safety standards.
  2. Authorization of independent and impartial third-party certification bodies to assess compliance with TQF standards.
  3. Supervision and monitoring of certification bodies for the TQF Product Certification Scheme by an independent and impartial third-party accreditation body Taiwan Accreditation Foundation.
  4. Implement unannounced and unscheduled annual surveillance auditing.
  5. Promotion of a comprehensive upgrade on the professional competences of the food industry.

References

  1. ↑ "Overview". myGFSI. GFSI. Archived from the original on 30 October 2021. Retrieved 3 November 2021.
  2. ↑ "Recognition". MyGFSI. Retrieved 3 November 2021.
  3. ↑ "Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the council" (PDF). Official Journal of the European Union L 31, 1/2/2002: 1–24. L 31/1: 1–24. 2002. Archived (PDF) from the original on 9 July 2021. Retrieved 14 October 2021.
  4. ↑ Van der Meulen, B (2009). Reconciling food law to competitiviness. Report on the regulatory environment of the European food and dairy sector. Wageningen Academic Publishers. ISBN   9789086860982. Archived from the original on 21 November 2021. Retrieved 21 November 2021.
  5. ↑ "Stakeholder Consultation – Implementing GFSI's Conceptual Framework for 'The Race to the Top'". mygfsi.com. GFSI. 5 May 2020. Archived from the original on 21 September 2021. Retrieved 21 September 2021.
  6. ↑ Torfs, Michaël (14 July 2018). "Greenyard recalling products in 80 countries after reports of nine listeria deaths". vrt.be. Archived from the original on 20 September 2021. Retrieved 14 July 2018.
  7. ↑ "FDA Investigated Multistate Outbreak of Salmonella Mbandaka Infections Linked to Kellogg's Honey Smacks Cereal". fda.gov. FDA. 9 September 2020.
  8. ↑ "Important Notification about GFSI suspension". ifs-certification.com. Archived from the original on 23 January 2023. Retrieved 9 December 2022.
  9. 1 2 3 "Harmonisation". MyGFSI. Archived from the original on 10 November 2021. Retrieved 10 November 2021.
  10. ↑ Kellermann, Martin (2019). "3.3 Private Standards". Ensuring Quality to Gain Access to Global Markets: A Reform Toolkit (PDF). Washington, DC: International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank and Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB). p. 53. ISBN   978-1-4648-1372-6. Archived (PDF) from the original on 26 April 2023. Retrieved 25 June 2023.
  11. ↑ Martinez, M.G; Fearne, A; Caswell, J.A; Henson, S.J (2007). "Co-regulation as a possible model for food safety governance: opportunities for public-private partnerships". Food Policy. 32 (3): 299–314. doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2006.07.005. Archived from the original on 25 November 2021. Retrieved 25 November 2021.
  12. ↑ "BRC service fee increase 2022". techni-k.co.uk. Techni-K. 2 March 2021. Archived from the original on 21 April 2023. Retrieved 17 April 2023.
  13. ↑ Washington, Sally (2011). Private standards and certification in fisheries and aquaculture. FAO. ISBN   978-92-5-106730-7. Archived from the original on 29 September 2021. Retrieved 29 May 2020.
  14. ↑ Horlock, David. "Collaborate, innovate and accelerate; how standards build consensus and facilitate trade". bsigroup.com. BSI. Archived from the original on 1 October 2021. Retrieved 2 October 2021.
  15. ↑ "Governance". mygfsi.com. Consumer Goods Forum. Archived from the original on 6 October 2021. Retrieved 14 October 2021.
  16. ↑ "Mission And Objectives". GFSI. Archived from the original on 20 April 2012. Retrieved 18 April 2012.
  17. 1 2 "GFSI-Recognized CPOs Undergoing Benchmarking Against V2020". GFSI. Archived from the original on 28 February 2021. Retrieved 20 March 2021.
  18. ↑ "Certification Programme Owners". MyGFSI. Archived from the original on 5 November 2021. Retrieved 12 November 2021.
  19. ↑ "ISO/IEC 17000:2020(en) Conformity assessment — Vocabulary and general principles". iso.org. ISO. Archived from the original on 17 June 2016. Retrieved 25 November 2021.
  20. ↑ "Commission Communication — EU best practice guidelines for voluntary certification schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs". eur-lex.europa.eu. Archived from the original on 6 October 2021. Retrieved 6 October 2021.
  21. ↑ "draft Principles and Guidelines for the assessment and use of voluntary Third-Party Assurance (vTPA) programmes" (PDF). fao.org/. Codex Alimentarius Commission. Archived (PDF) from the original on 6 October 2021. Retrieved 6 October 2021.
  22. ↑ Pop, S.Z.; Dracea, R.; Vlădulescu, C. (February 2018). "Comparative Study of Certification Schemes for Food Safety Management Systems in the European Union Context" (PDF). Amfiteatru Economic. 20 (47): 9–29. doi:10.24818/EA/2018/47/9. Archived (PDF) from the original on 1 March 2022. Retrieved 26 September 2021.
  23. ↑ Private Food Safety Standards: Their Role in Food Safety Regulation and their Impact. Food and Agriculture Organization. 2010. p. 10. Archived from the original on 29 September 2021. Retrieved 9 July 2010.
  24. ↑ Wellik, Rhonda (2 April 2012). "Global Food Safety Initiative Improves Organizational Culture, Efficiency in Food Industry". Food Quality and Safety. Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Archived from the original on 14 April 2021. Retrieved 20 March 2021.
  25. ↑ van der Meulen, Bernd (2011). Private food law Governing food chains through contract law, self-regulation, private standards, audits and certification schemes (PDF). Wageningen Academic. p. 97. ISBN   978-90-8686-176-7. Archived (PDF) from the original on 9 July 2021. Retrieved 6 July 2021.
  26. ↑ Willem Paul de Mooij (December 2022). "IFS boss outraged by suspension: 'GFSI unjustly shames us'". vmt.nl. Archived from the original on 24 June 2023. Retrieved 24 June 2023.
  27. ↑ Christodoulou, Maria (October 2015). Study on the evaluation of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 ("the General Food Law Regulation") (PDF). European Commission, Directorate-General for Health and Food Safety. Archived (PDF) from the original on 14 July 2023. Retrieved 24 June 2023.
  28. ↑ "Members of the IFS International Technical Committee". Standard for auditing product and process compliance in relation to food safety and quality (PDF) (8 ed.). IFS Management GmbH. April 2023. p. 4. Archived (PDF) from the original on 30 May 2023. Retrieved 27 August 2023.
  29. ↑ "BRCGS Governance". brcgs.com. Archived from the original on 3 May 2023. Retrieved 6 July 2021.
  30. ↑ Not Fit-for-Purpose The Grand Experiment of Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives in Corporate Accountability, Human Rights and Global Governance. San Francisco: Institute for Multi-Stakeholder Initiative Integrity: MSI Integrity. July 2020. Archived from the original on 17 October 2021. Retrieved 20 September 2021.
  31. ↑ "Who's Tipping the Scales?". ipes-food.org. IPES-Food. Archived from the original on 8 May 2023. Retrieved 17 May 2023.
  32. ↑ "Governance". mygfsi.com. GFSI. Archived from the original on 6 October 2021. Retrieved 14 October 2021.
  33. ↑ "Safe Working Environment". mondelezinternational.com. Mondelez. Archived from the original on 27 October 2021. Retrieved 14 October 2021.
  34. ↑ "Integrated Management of food safety, quality, environment, health and safety". cargill.com. Cargill. Archived from the original on 28 October 2021. Retrieved 14 October 2021.
  35. ↑ "Nestlé Quality Policy" (PDF). nestle.com. Nestlé. Archived (PDF) from the original on 29 October 2021. Retrieved 14 October 2021.
  36. ↑ "Quality & Food Safety Policy". coca-colacompany.com. Coca-Cola. Archived from the original on 28 October 2021. Retrieved 14 October 2021.
  37. ↑ "Offer superior experiences and innovate, always". danone.com. Danone. 21 April 2021. Archived from the original on 28 October 2021. Retrieved 14 October 2021.
  38. ↑ "Joint UNCTAD/WTO informal information session on private standards". wto.org. World Trade Organization (WTO). Archived from the original on 1 April 2023. Retrieved 18 June 2023.
  39. ↑ "Our services and quality systems, IFS". .schoutenadvies.nl. Schouten Advies. Archived from the original on 29 October 2021. Retrieved 14 October 2021.
  40. ↑ "One Standard for the Food Industry". mygfsi.com/. Global Food Safety Initiative. 13 August 2020. Archived from the original on 1 April 2023. Retrieved 18 June 2023.
  41. ↑ Soon, Jan Mei; Baines, Richard N. (2013). "Public and Private Food Safety Standards: Facilitating or Frustrating Fresh Produce Growers?". Laws. 2 (Global Food Safety Law and Policy): 1–19. doi: 10.3390/laws2010001 .
  42. ↑ "GFSI Conference". mygfsi.com. Consumer Goods Forum. Archived from the original on 13 July 2023. Retrieved 13 July 2023.
  43. ↑ "GFSI Conference Executive Summary – Seattle 2020" (PDF). mygfsi.com. Consumer Goods Forum. Archived (PDF) from the original on 14 June 2023. Retrieved 13 July 2023.
  44. ↑ "Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) 2024 Conference". mygfsi.com. Global Food Safety Initiative. 11 April 2024. Archived from the original on 16 April 2024. Retrieved 15 April 2024.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.