thuat ngu luật

MARD ADB
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development Asian Development Bank
QUALITY AND SAFETY IMPROVEMENT IN

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS PROJECT
TA 4972-VIE
BACKGROUND PAPER
INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS AND CAPACITY

BUILDING
Prepared by
Francesco Goletti and Nguyen Thi Minh Hai
November 2008
In association
Agrifood
with Consulting
International
LIST OF ACRONYMS
ADB Asian Development Bank

ASEAN Association of Southeast Asia Nations
AusAID Australian Agency for International Development
CAC Codex Alimentarius Commission
CIDA Canadian International Development Agency

COC Code of Conduct
CPRGS Comprehensive Poverty Reduction and Growth Strategy
CSP Country Strategy and Program
DANIDA Danish International Development Agency
DARD Provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural Development
DCP Department of Crop Production
DMF Design and Monitoring Framework
DMTP Department of Multilateral Trade Policy
DPP Department of Plant Protection
DST Department of Science and Technology
EUREPGAP European Good Agricultural Practices
FAVRI Fruit and Vegetables Research Institute
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization
FAPQDCP Food Agricultural Products Quality Development Control Project
FFA Food and Foodstuff Association
GAP Good Agricultural Practices
GATT General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
GHP Good Handling Practices
GLOBALGAP Global Good Agricultural Practices (previously EUREPGAP)
GMP Good Manufacturing Practices
HACCP Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point
ICD International Cooperation Department
IEC Information, Education, and Communication
IFAD International Fund for Agriculture Development
IPM Integrated Pest Management
IPPC International Plant Protection Convention
ISO International Standards Organization
JAS-ANZ Joint Accreditation System – Australia and New Zealand
LIFSAP Livestock Foodstuffs Safety Project
MARD Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
MIO Ministerial Inspection Office
MOF Ministry of Finance
MOH Ministry of Health
MPI Ministry of Planning and Investment
MOIT Ministry of Industry and Trace
MOST Ministry of Science and Technology
NAFEC National Agricultural and Fisheries Extension Center
NAFIQAD National Agro-Forestry and Fisheries Quality Assurance Department
NGO Non Governmental Organization
NZ New Zealand
ODA Official Development Assistance
OIE World Organization for Animal Health (Office International de
PFZ Pest Free Zone
PM Prime Minister
PPRI Plant Protection Research Institute
QCDP Technical Regulation – Local
QCVN Technical Regulation - National
QUACERT Certification Body under MOST
SAZ Safe Agricultural Zone
SBV State Bank of Vietnam
SEDP Socio-Economic Development Plan
2
SME Small and Medium Enterprise
SOFRI Southern Fruit Research Institute
SPS Sanitary and Phytosanitary
STAMEQ Directorate for Standards and Quality
STDF Standards and Trade Development Facility
SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats
TA Technical Assistance
TBT Technical Barriers to Trade
TCCS Vietnam Local Standards
TCVN Vietnam National Standards
USAID United States Agency for International Development
VFA Viet Nam Food Administration
VIETGAP Viet Nam Good Agricultural Practices
VINAFRUIT Viet Nam Fruit Association
VITAS Viet Nam Tea Association
WB World Bank
WHO World Health Organization
WTO World Trade Organization
GLOSSARY OF VIETNAMESE REGULATIONS
Term English English Term Vietnamese Vietnamese

Abbreviation Abbreviation
National Assembly NA Quốc hội QH
Standing SC Ủy ban Thường Vụ Quốc UBTVQH
Committee, National hội
Assembly
Government Chính phủ CP
Prime Minister PM Thủ tướng Chính phủ PM
Ministry of MARD Bộ Nông nghiệp và Phát BNN
Agriculture & Rural triển Nông thôn
Development
Ministry of Health MOH Bộ Y tế BYT
Ministry of Fishery MOFI Bộ Thủy sản BTS
Ministry of Science MOST Bộ Khoa học & Công BKHCN
& Technology nghệ
Constitution Hiến pháp HP
Law Luật
Ordinance Pháp lệnh PL
Decree ND Nghị định NĐ
Directive Chỉ thị CT
Decision QD Quyết định QĐ
Circular Thông tư TT
Inter-ministerial Thông tư liên bộ TTLT
Circular
Resolution Nghị quyết NQ
For example, the regulation 02/2007/ND-CP refers to the Resolution (QD) No 2 issued by
the Government (CP) in 2007.
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Executive Summary ............................................................................................11

2 Introduction .........................................................................................................26
3 Approach and Methodology ................................................................................28
3.1 Definition of Food Safety and Quality.........................................................28
3.2 Institutional Dimensions of Food Quality and Safety ..................................28
4 The Institutions Involved in Food Quality and Safety..........................................31
4.1 Introduction.................................................................................................31
4.2 Ministries and Related Agencies ................................................................34
4.2.1 Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development ......................................34
4.2.2 Ministry of Science and Technology.......................................................36
4.2.3 Ministry of Health....................................................................................37
4.2.4 Ministry of Industry and Trade ................................................................37
4.3 International Organizations and Agencies..................................................37
4.4 Research Institutes and Universities ..........................................................39
4.5 Associations and Cooperatives ..................................................................39
4.6 Private Sector and NGOs ...........................................................................40
4.7 Markets and Supermarkets ........................................................................40
5 Key Legislation....................................................................................................42
5.1 Introduction.................................................................................................42
5.2 National Assembly Standing Committee Ordinance on the Plant Protection
and Quarantine No. 36/2001/PL-UBTVQH10 of 25 July 2001 ...............................44
5.3 Government Decree on the Regulation on Plant Protection, the Regulation
on Plant Quarantine and the Regulation on Plant Quarantine, and the Regulation
on Management of Plant Protection Drugs No. 58/2002/ND-CP dated 3 June 2002
44
5.4 Government Decree on Plant Quarantine No. 02/2007/ND-CP dated 5
January 2007..........................................................................................................46
5.5 National Assembly Standing Committee Ordinance on Food Hygiene and
Safety No.12/2003/PL-UBTVQH11 dated 26 July 2003.........................................46
5.6 Government Decree on the Implementation of Ordinance on Food Hygiene
and Safety No.163/2004/ND-CP dated 7 September 2004....................................46
5.7 Prime Minister Decision on the Approval of National Action Plan on the
Assurance of Food Safety to 2010 No 43/2006/QD-TTg dated 20 February 2006 47
5.8 Prime Minister Directive on the Implementation of Urgent Methods to
Assure Food Hygiene and Safety No 06/2007/CT-TTg dated 28 March 2007.......48
5.9 MARD Decision on Regulations on Safe Tea Production, Processing, and
Business Management No. 43/2007/QD-BNN dated 16 May 2007 .......................49
5.10 MARD Decision on Safe Vegetable Production and Trading Management
No 106/2007/QD-BNN dated 28 December 2007 ..................................................50
5.11 Ministry of Health Decision on Food Safety No. 57/QD-BYT dated 9
January 2008..........................................................................................................51
5.12 MARD Directive on Declaring 2008 to be the Year of Quality and Safety No
56/CT-BNN-KHCN dated 8 January 2008..............................................................52
5.13 MARD Decision on Good Practices for the Production of Fresh Fruit and
Vegetables No. 379/QĐ-BNN-KHCN dated 28 January 2008................................52
5.14 MARD Decision on Good Practices for the Production of Tea No. 1121/QĐ-
BNN-KHCN dated 14 April 2008 ............................................................................52
5.15 Ministry of Fisheries Decision on Establishing the National Agriforestry and
Fisheries Quality Assurance Department (NAFIQAD) No. 29/2008/QD-BTS dated
28 January 2008.....................................................................................................53
5.16 Government Decree on Labeling of Goods No. 89/2006/ND-CP dated 30
August 2006 ...........................................................................................................53
4
5.17 Law on Standards and Technical Specifications No. 68/2006/QH11 dated
29 June 2006..........................................................................................................53
5.18 Government Decree on Detailed Implementation of several Articles of Law
on Standards and Technical Specifications No. 127/2007/NĐ-CP dated 1 August
2007 54
5.19 Government Decree on administrative fine in plant protection and
quarantine No. 26/2003/NĐ-CP dated 19 March 2003...........................................54
5.20 Law on Inspection No. 22/2004/QH11 dated 15 June 2004.......................54
5.21 Government Decree on Organization and Operation of Inspection in
Agriculture and Rural Development No. 153/2005/NĐ-CP dated 15 December
2005 55
5.22 MARD Circular on guiding mandate duties, organization and personnel of
inspection in agricultural and rural development and inspection of agencies under
MARD No. 73/2006/TT-BNN dated 18 September 2006........................................55
5.23 Government Decree on administrative fine in plant protection and
quarantine No. 26/2003/NĐ-CP dated 19 March 2003...........................................55
5.24 Criminal Code.............................................................................................55
5.25 Government Decree No. 79/2008/NĐ-CP dated 18 July 2008 stipulating
systems of food safety management, inspection and testing .................................56
5.26 Prime Minister Decision No. 107/2008/QĐ-TTg dated 30 July 2008 on
several policies to support production, processing and consuming development of
safe vegetable, fruit and tea up to year of 2015 .....................................................56
5.27 MARD Decision No. 84/2008/QĐ-BNN, dated 28 July 2008, on issuing
regulations on VietGap certification for vegetable, fruit and tea .............................56
5.28 Summary ....................................................................................................57
6 Key Issues ..........................................................................................................58
6.1 Introduction.................................................................................................58
6.2 Standards ...................................................................................................58
6.2.1 Current Situation in Standards ...............................................................58
6.2.2 Issues in Standards ................................................................................59
6.3 Good Practices...........................................................................................60
6.3.1 Current Situation in Good Practices .......................................................60
6.3.2 Issues in Good Practices........................................................................61
6.4 Certification ................................................................................................62
6.4.1 Current Situation in Certification.............................................................62
6.4.2 Issues in Certification .............................................................................63
6.5 Planning for Safe Agricultural Zones..........................................................64
6.5.1 Current Situation in Planning for Safe Agricultural Zones ......................64
6.5.2 Issues on Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones.......................................65
6.6 Inspection ...................................................................................................67
6.6.1 Current Situation in Inspection ...............................................................67
6.6.2 Issues in Inspection ................................................................................68
6.7 Monitoring...................................................................................................69
6.7.1 Current Situation in Monitoring ...............................................................69
6.7.2 Issues in Monitoring................................................................................69
6.8 Laboratories ...............................................................................................70
6.8.1 Current situation in Laboratories ............................................................70
6.8.2 Issues in Laboratories ............................................................................71
6.9 Information .................................................................................................72
6.9.1 Current Situation on Information.............................................................72
6.9.2 Issues on Information .............................................................................72
6.10 Education ...................................................................................................72
6.10.1 Current Situation in Education............................................................72
6.10.2 Issues in Education ............................................................................73
6.11 Extension....................................................................................................74
5
6.11.1 Current Situation on Extension...........................................................74
6.11.2 Issues in Extension.............................................................................74
6.12 Communication ..........................................................................................75
6.12.1 Current situation on Communication ..................................................75
6.12.2 Issues on Communication ..................................................................76
6.13 Research ....................................................................................................76
6.13.1 Current Situation on Research ...........................................................76
6.13.2 Issues on Research............................................................................76
6.14 Regulations, Policies, and Strategies .........................................................77
6.14.1 Current Situation in Regulations, Policies, and Strategies .................77
6.14.2 Issues in Regulations, Policies, and Strategies..................................77
6.15 Capacity .....................................................................................................78
6.15.1 Current Situation in Capacity..............................................................78
6.15.2 Issues in Capacity ..............................................................................79
7 Relevant Experiences of Other Countries in Food Safety ..................................80
7.1 Malaysia .....................................................................................................80
7.2 Thailand......................................................................................................81
7.3 Other Countries ..........................................................................................83
8 Recommendations ..............................................................................................86
8.1 General Framework....................................................................................86
Policy and Institutional Development for Food Safety.....................................86
8.2...........................................................................................................................86
8.2.1 Lead Agency at MARD for food safety ...................................................86
8.2.1.1 Options for the leading agency .......................................................86
8.2.1.2 Recommendations regarding Lead Agency for Food Safety at
MARD 87
8.3 Establishment of a Food Safety Monitoring System at MARD ...................88
8.3.1.1 The Provincial Food Safety Index...................................................88
8.3.1.2 Recommendations regarding Establishing Food Monitoring System
at MARD 89
8.4 Establishment of Food Safety Information and Communication Systems at
MARD 89
8.4.1.1 Recommendations regarding Establishing Food Safety Information
and Communication Systems at MARD ..........................................................90
8.5 Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones ...........................................................90
8.5.1.1 Recommendations regarding Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones 90
8.6 Development and Harmonization of Standards..........................................90
8.6.1.1 Recommendations regarding Development and Harmonization of
Standards 91
8.7 Development of Good Practices.................................................................91
8.7.1.1 Recommendations regarding Development of Good Practices......91
8.8 Incentive Policy for Adoption of Good Practices ........................................91
8.8.1.1 Recommendations regarding Incentives Policies for Adoption of
Good Practices................................................................................................92
8.9 Institutional Capacity of Key Agencies at MARD, Labs, and Certification
Bodies 92
8.9.1.1 Recommendations regarding Institutional Capacity for Food Safety
93
8.10 PILOT CROP FOOD SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (CFSMS).........93
8.10.1 RATIONALE .......................................................................................93
8.10.1.1 Coordination ...............................................................................93
8.10.1.2 Monitoring ...................................................................................94
8.10.1.3 Management of Food Safety ......................................................94
8.10.2 PROPOSED SOLUTIONS .................................................................95
8.10.3 VISION ...............................................................................................95
6
8.10.4 COMPONENTS OF THE CFSMS ......................................................95
8.10.4.1 Elements.....................................................................................96
8.10.4.2 Legislation...................................................................................96
8.10.4.3 Management Structure ...............................................................96
8.10.5 MODEL OF MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE AT MARD......................97
8.10.5.1 Central Level - MARD.................................................................97
8.10.5.2 Province Level – DARD ..............................................................98
8.10.5.3 District and Commune Level.......................................................98
8.10.5.4 Sustainability of the System........................................................98
8.11 Policy and Institutional Development for Food Safety at the central level -
Outputs, Targets, Activities, Inputs, and Monitoring .............................................101
8.11.1 List of outputs ...................................................................................103
8.11.2 Output 1: Improved regulatory framework and coordination for state
management of safety and quality of fruit, vegetables, and tea........................103
8.11.2.1 Activities for Output 1................................................................103
8.11.2.2 Targets for Output 1..................................................................106
8.11.2.3 Inputs for Output 1 ....................................................................107
8.11.2.4 Costs for Output 1.....................................................................107
8.11.2.5 Data sources and reporting mechanisms for Output 1 .............107
8.11.3 Output 2: Strengthened capacity of state agencies, certification
bodies, and laboratories involved in the implementation of quality and safe food
production, processing, and trading of fruit, vegetables, and tea. ....................107
8.11.3.1 Activities for Output 2................................................................107
8.11.3.4 Costs for Output 2.....................................................................110
8.11.4 Output 3: Establishment of a pilot Crop Food Safety Management
System (CFSMS) from the central level of MARD to the commune level for fruit,
vegetables, and tea...........................................................................................110
8.11.4.3 Costs for Output 3.....................................................................111
8.12 Justification, Benefits, and Risks..............................................................111
8.12.1 Justification.......................................................................................111
8.12.2 Benefits.............................................................................................112
8.12.3 Assumptions and Risks ....................................................................112
8.12.3.1 Assumptions for Output 1 .........................................................112
8.12.3.2 Risks for Output 1 .....................................................................112
8.12.3.4 Risks for Output 2 .....................................................................112
8.12.3.6 Risks for Output 3 .....................................................................113
9 ANNEXES.........................................................................................................114
9.1 Codex Alimentarius Commission .............................................................115
9.1.1 Office of Vietnam food standardization commission (Abbreviated
Vietnam Codex Contact Point - VCAC) ............................................................115
9.1.1.1 Technical Committees of Vietnam Codex Alimentarius commission
116
9.1.1.2 Contact Address: ..........................................................................116
9.2 Introduction to SPS and TBT Agreements ...............................................117
9.3 The SPS Agreement ................................................................................118
9.3.1 What Is the WTO Sanitary and Phytosanitary (WTO-SPS) Agreement?
118
7
9.3.2 What Is the Economic Rationale for Governments to Become Involved?
118
9.3.3 Why Does the WTO-SPS Agreement Promote Free Trade? ...............119
9.3.4 What Is the Genesis of the WTO-SPS Agreement?.............................119
9.3.5 What Are the Main Provisions of the WTO-SPS Agreements? ............120
9.3.6 Final Comments ...................................................................................121
9.3.7 References ...........................................................................................121
9.4 The TBT Agreement.................................................................................122
9.4.1 The focus of GATT ...............................................................................122
9.4.2 The problem of de facto discrimination.................................................122
9.4.3 The concept of "technical barriers to trade"..........................................122
9.4.4 Discriminatory measures and technical barriers to trade .....................123
9.4.5 The structure of the TBT Agreement ....................................................123
9.4.6 The rules pertaining to technical regulations ........................................124
9.4.7 The rules pertaining to standards .........................................................124
9.4.8 Conformity Assessment Procedures ....................................................125
9.4.9 Other provisions ...................................................................................125
9.4.10 Dispute settlement............................................................................125
9.5 Risk Analysis ............................................................................................126
9.5.1 What Is Risk Analysis? .........................................................................126
9.5.2 What Is the Origin of Risk Analysis? ....................................................126
9.6 Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) ................................129
9.6.1 Principle of Equivalence .......................................................................129
9.6.2 The GMO Debate .................................................................................129
9.7 Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) .............................130
9.8 CODEX STANDARDS, CODE OF PRACTICE, MAX RESIDUE LIMITS,
GUIDELINES........................................................................................................131
9.9 Viet Nam National Standards (TCVN) for Food and Agriculture ..............143
9.10 Examples of some Vietnamese Standards related to VIETGAP ..............144
9.10.1 Permitted Residue Limit for some heavy metals in cropping soil .....144
9.10.2 Permitted Residue Limit for some chemicals in irrigation water .......144
9.10.3 Permitted Residue Limit for some harmful bioorganisms and toxic
chemicals in fresh vegetables...........................................................................144
9.11 Implications of Food Hygiene and Safety Regulations for Different Actors
along the Value Chain ..........................................................................................146
9.12 Preliminary Estimation of Costs for the Project Component: Policy and
Institutional Development for Food Safety at the central level .............................148
9.13 Design and Monitoring Framework for the Policy and Institutional
Component of the Project.....................................................................................160
9.14 Model of Food Safety in Thailand.............................................................162
9.14.1 National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food Standards
(ACFS) 162
9.14.2 Responsibilities of ACFC..................................................................162
9.14.3 Structure ...........................................................................................163
9.14.4 ACFS and Standards Establishment ................................................163
9.14.5 Standard elaboration steps...............................................................164
9.14.6 Utilization of Standardization ............................................................164
9.14.7 GAP Implementation ........................................................................166
9.14.8 GAP Certification Procedure ............................................................167
8
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Summary of Costs for Subcomponents of the Policy and Institutional

Development Component of the Project ....................................................................23
Table 2 Design and Monitoring Framework for the Policy and Institutional Component
of the QSIAP ..............................................................................................................24
Table 3 Institutional Issues and Ministries along the Value Chain of Food and
Agricultural products ..................................................................................................32
Table 4: Key Players in Food Quality and Safety Improvement.................................33
Table 5 Summary of relevant Legislation related to Food Safety and Quality ...........43
Table 6 SWOT Analysis of Standards........................................................................60
Table 7 SWOT Analysis of Practices .........................................................................62
Table 8 SWOT Analysis of Certification .....................................................................64
Table 9 SWOT Analysis of Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones................................66
Table 10 SWOT Analysis of Inspection......................................................................68
Table 11 SWOT Analysis of Monitoring .....................................................................70
Table 12 SWOT Analysis of Laboratories ..................................................................71
Table 13 SWOT Analysis of Information ....................................................................72
Table 14 SWOT Analysis of Education ......................................................................73
Table 15 SWOT Analysis of Extension ......................................................................75
Table 16 SWOT Analysis of Communication .............................................................76
Table 17 SWOT Analysis of Research.......................................................................77
Table 18 SWOT Analysis of Regulations, Policies, and Strategies ...........................78
Table 19 SWOT Analysis of Capacity ........................................................................79
Table 20 Analysis of Alternative Options for a Lead Agency at MARD on Food Safety
...................................................................................................................................87
Table 21 Elements for the design of a Provincial Food Safety Index.........................88
Table 22 Summary of Costs for Output 1.................................................................107
Table 25 Number of National Standards Related to Food and Agricultural Products
and Processes .........................................................................................................143
Table 26 Investment Costs for Output 1 of Policy and Institutional Component –
Improving Regulatory Framework and Coordination................................................148
Table 27 Recurrent Costs for Output 1 of Policy and Institutional Component –
Improving Regulatory Framework and Coordination................................................151
Table 28 Investment Costs for Output 2 of Policy and Institutional Component –
Strengthening Capacity............................................................................................152
Table 29 Investment Costs for Output 3 of Policy and Institutional Component – Crop
Food Safety Management System...........................................................................157
Table 30 Recurrent Costs for Output 3 of Policy and Institutional Component – Crop
Food Safety Management System...........................................................................158
Table 31 Summary of Costs for Outputs and Component on Policy and Institutional
Development ............................................................................................................159
Table 32 Design and Monitoring Framework for the Policy and Institutional
Component of the QSIAP.........................................................................................160
9
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Approach and Methodology of Report ........................................................30

Figure 2: Ministries Responsible Along the Food Chain ............................................31
Figure 3 The Crop Food Safety Management System.............................................100
Figure 4 The Division of Food Safety Monitoring, Information and Commnication at
NAFIQAD .................................................................................................................100
Figure 5 The Division of Food Safety at DCP ..........................................................101
Figure 6 Food Safety Facilitators at District and Commune Level ...........................101
Figure 7 Structure of National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food Standards
in Thailand................................................................................................................163
Figure 8 Roles of MOAC and MOPH in food safety management..........................166
Figure 9 GAP steps..................................................................................................167
10
1 Executive Summary
BACKGROUND
1. Since the early 2000s, there has been an intense regulatory activity related to
food safety and quality in Viet Nam. The defining moments were the issuing of the
National Assembly Standing Committee Ordinance of Food Hygiene and Safety in
2003, which was followed by several decrees and directives, and the approval of the
National Action Plan for Food Safety in 2006. Laws on Standards, Good Labels, and
Inspection were also issued during this period. The Law on Inspection will be
amended; the laws on Plant Protection, Animal Health, and Food Safety are currently
under preparation and expected to be drafted in 2008.
2. Regulations on good agricultural practices have been issued. VIETGAP for

fruits, vegetables and tea were issued during the first 4 months of 2008. The
VIETGAP regulations are based on ASEAN GAP and GLOBALGAP. The Ministry of
Agricultural and Rural Development (MARD) has issued Regulations No.
106/2007/QĐ-BNN and No.43/2007/QD-BNN on management of production and
business of the three commodity groups includes rules for accreditation and
certification processes.
3. There is still considerable work to be done on establishing a comprehensive

regulatory framework for food safety. Most of this work is planned to occur over the
5-year period 2008-2012 of the Action Plan for Food Safety.
INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES
Standards
4. The national organization for establishing standards is STAMEQ under

MOST. According to the Law on Standards and Technical Specifications No.
68/2006/QH11 all standards have to be issued as national standards (TCVN) or local
standards (TCCS). The process of revision of all previous sectoral standards issued
by ministries (TCN) will ensure that all future standards will be within one system
managed by STAMEQ. The new VIETGAP for fruits, vegetables, and tea already
make reference to the TCVN system.
5. While it is the intention of the Government to conform to international

standards in the longer term, the current state of hygiene in Vietnam prevents this
from being achieved in the short to medium term. About 48% of Vietnam’s food and
agricultural standards are harmonized with Codex. The objective is to harmonize
50% of all standards in Viet Nam by 2010. Currently, for the country as a whole, only
about 30% of standards are harmonized. Having harmonized 48% of its standards
already, agriculture fares a little better than the average of all sectors in Viet Nam.
6. The current process of development of standards led by STAMEQ is

consistent with the principles of the TBT Agreement. Any organization (public or
private) can submit a standard for approval, and a review committee including
different stakeholders ensures the relevance, technical accuracy, feasibility, and
transparency of the standard.
11
7. Considerable progress has already occurred in improving standards and
communicating them to the public. The Catalogue of Standards issued by STAMEQ
is a laudable effort in this direction. There remain however several standards to be
developed to improve quality and safety of specific food and agricultural products.
Product-specific standards for the numerous types of fruits and vegetables need to
be developed.
Good Practices
8. Viet Nam has developed its own good agricultural practices called VIETGAP
for fresh vegetables and fruit and tea during the first 4 months of 2008. VIETGAP is
closely inspired by ASEANGAP, EUREPGAP/GLOBALGAP, and FRESHCARE.
There are organizations already certified for EUREPGAP, for example the Ham Minh
Dragon Fruit Cooperatives located in Binh Thuan Province.
9. Given the novelty of VIETGAP it will take some time to ensure that a large
number of farmers and organization adopt these good practices or other practices
consistent with international standards. The adoption of VIETGAP will require testing,
establishing of demonstration sites, development of manuals, training, and
dissemination. Cost and benefit analysis of VIETGAP needs to be conducted through
research studies so as to evaluate VIETGAP promotion programs and facilitate the
work of extension workers in disseminating the new practices to farmers and
enterprises.
10. As of now, it is not clear whether most farmers and enterprises will benefit
from the adoption of VIETGAP. It is likely that farmers and enterprises engaged in
international trade will comply with VIETGAP and even more advanced practices
such as EUREPGAP/GLOBALGAP. However, adoption of VIETGAP for domestic
markets might be more problematic, particularly if the VIETGAP are perceived as
procedures increasing the cost of production without a corresponding increase in the
price paid by consumers. The growth of supermarkets in Viet Nam is an opportunity
for establishing safer production, handling, and distribution of food products and
supermarkets are already engaging in VIETGAP-like procedures. It is likely that
supermarkets and enterprises engaged in exporting food products will be the earliest
adopters of VIETGAP.
11. Incentives for the adoption of VIETGAP should be established. Constraints to

the adoption of VIETGAP by smallholder farmers and SME need to be assessed.
Certification
12. The VIETGAP certification is obtained from certification bodies which must be
accredited by DCP to operate over the national territory, and by DARDs to operate at
the province level.
13. As of May 2008, there are only 5 certified organizations in VIETGAP for safe
vegetables located in Hanoi, 2 organizations will be certified in HCMC and one will be
certified in Dalat. The certification follows procedures explained in the related
regulations and must be renewed after 3 years. Currently, accreditation is obtained
free of charge, whereas certification of safe vegetable, fruit, and tea is obtained by
paying the certification bodies.
14. Apart from the VIETGAP certification bodies, Vietnam has nineteen other
certification bodies, all of which are foreign with the exception of QUACERT, the
certification body under MOST. QUACERT is accredited by JAS-ANZ (Australia and
12
New Zealand Joint accreditation system) to provide certification for HACCP and ISO
9000 and 14000. In the ISO 9000 certification market, QUACERT has 34 percent
market share; QUACERT is planning to become a GAP Certifying Body.
15. Currently, some farmers in Viet Nam are EUREPGAP certified. The project
on Dragon Fruit in Binh Thuan and Tien Giang, funded by USAID and AUSAID and
implemented by Southern Fruit Research Institute (SOFRI) uses EUREPGAP
standards for monitoring production of dragon fruit.
16. Capacity of the accreditation organizations (DCP and DARDs) is still weak.
Most of the staff involved in accreditation do not have a sufficient background in food
safety and accreditation and certification. As the number of organizations requiring
certification increases, the demand for accreditation will grow. The current capacity
(both in terms of number and skills of staff) will have to increase over time.
17. Accreditation is currently obtained free of cost. This situation might also need
to change over time in order to ensure sustainability of the accreditation system.
18. For certification to be effective and ensure consumers that the promise of
“safe food” is maintained, reputation and trust have to be established. That requires
frequent monitoring (including un-announced visits) and auditing by the accreditation
and the certification agencies, the availability of a code of conduct that is respected
by the industry, and the availability of reliable diagnostics and testing centers.
19. Reputation and trust are probably the two most important elements of a good
certification system. Reputation and trust require a multi-dimensional process of
capacity strengthening, awareness, dissemination of information, and transparency.
These are elements that need to be promoted by both regulation and initiatives of the
government and the industry (workshops, public hearings, publications, websites,
field visits, etc).
Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones (SAZ)
20. In 1995 the GOV launched a safe vegetable program in response to public
concerns of vegetable safety. Programs for safe production of vegetables in Viet
Nam started in 1999. In spite of these and other initiatives, up to the present, safe
production zones occupy just a small proportion of total cultivated area. Pilots of safe
vegetable production have occurred in 54 provinces (out of 64) and 24 provinces
have developed their own procedures for safe vegetable production.
21. Infrastructure for safe production zones is often poor. Unsafe water for
irrigating vegetables is common and sources from river, lakes, and pools (60% of the
total), wells (29%), and waste water (11%) are not adequately controlled for safety.
Almost 100% of vegetable production is not tested and about 12% of vegetable
production occurs near industrial zones, main roads and hospitals.
22. As of April 2008, in the Red River Delta only 6,320 ha of safe production
areas have been declared safe by DARD(s). The planned safe vegetable production
areas are 13,216 ha which represents only 13% of the total vegetable cultivated area
in the region.
23. Planning of safe production zone is a complex task. Agricultural land has
been allocated to farmers who are mostly smallholders and usually have fragmented
landholdings. To establish contiguous land plots of land which could be declared part
13
of a safe production area requires coordination and the establishment of rules and
incentives.
24. Currently the DARDs are responsible for declaring a zone safe for agricultural
production. However, there are not yet regulations on how to plan and declare an
agricultural zone safe for agricultural production.
25. The regulation No. 02/2007/ND-CP envisages Pest Free Zones (PFZ).
However, up to now, there are no PFZ and the Inspectorate Division of the
Department of Plant Production is in the process of formulating the relevant
standards. The problems of declaring a pest free zone are similar to the ones
declaring a safe agricultural zone. Technical determinations could be made and clear
rules on monitoring established. However, ultimately, it depends on the adherence
and participation of local communities to engage in a certain type of practices and
Code of Conduct (COC) for the zone to remain safe or pest free. This suggests the
need of including a communication strategy that involves the local communities.
26. The declaration of a safe production zone could also be linked to

Geographical Indications so that products coming from a certain area are provided a
certificate of origin stating that the area is a SAZ or a PFZ.
Inspection
27. The inspection system for agricultural products consists of the Ministerial
Inspectorate Office (MIO) at MARD and inspectorate divisions at different
departments of MARD, such as the Inspectorate at the Department of Plant
Protection, the Inspectorate at the Department of Veterinary Services, and
Inspectorate at the Department of Crop Production. At the local level, there are
DARD(s) Inspectorates and Inspectorates at the Sub-Departments specialized in
plant protection and quarantine, and veterinary and animal health.
28. Each Inspectorate Division at MARD reports to the head of the respective
department and also to the MIO. The 2004 Law on Inspection did not provide clear
instruction about the roles and responsibilities of the Inspectorate Divisions. The
2005 Decree on Inspection No 153/2005/NĐ-CP did remedy to this deficient of the
2004 Law. The amendment to the Law on Inspection under preparation (expected to
be submitted to the National Assembly in 2008) is likely to confirm the roles and
responsibilities of the Inspectorate Divisions as clarified in the Decree of 2005.
29. There are relatively few inspectors both at the central and at the local level.
There are no inspectors at the commune level. Most of the inspectors are not full
time specialized inspectors, and perform various functions besides inspection.
30. Inspection takes place several times during the year and different types of
inspections are carried out. In the case of plant protection, inspections occur for
pesticide use, pesticide trading, testing in markets for different residues, quarantine
inspection, and inspection upon request, complaints and denunciations.
31. When a violation is discovered, inspectors have the right to issue

administrative fines and to recommend suspension of the violating organization.
Administrative and financial penalties are common; however they do not seem to be
too heavy. For example, traders who have been found trading in fake products are
often ready to pay the fines, provided they can continue their business. For serious
violations against food hygiene and safety the Criminal Code could be applied with
14
penalties including imprisonment; however, inspectors can only recommend
application of the Criminal Code. In practice imprisonment occurs rarely (if ever).
32. While coordination between inspectorates and MOI at MARD is relatively

frequent and smooth, there is less coordination between MARD and MOH in term of
inspection activities. The Inspectorate of the Department of Plant Protection, for
example, carries out monthly testing of chemical residues from samples collected at
major markets. This function would seem to be under the responsibility of MOH.
33. The power of inspectorates appears to be limited either in terms of applying

fines, confiscating products, or suspension of violators. At the same time, any
additional power given to the inspectors should be checked against increased
incentives for rent seeking behavior. Some kind of external monitoring of inspectors
will need to be introduced in the new Law to reduce rent seeking behavior and undue
outside interference with the work of inspectors.
Labs
34. Vietnam has 8 laboratories which have reached ISO 17025 standards for
laboratory analysis, including 1 laboratory at the Nutrition Institute of the Ministry of
Health, 1 laboratory at the Office of Animal Health Control in HCMC, and 6
laboratories at NAFIQAD with two laboratories capable to analyze pesticide residues,
hormones, additives, and heavy metals. In the plant protection area, there is no
laboratory which has reached up to international standard.
35. The level of soil and water contamination is serious. Survey’s findings show
high levels of chemical residue on tea and high use of chemicals. About 4.5% of
farmers still use pesticides which are not permitted for use in Vietnam. Almost 100%
of land for vegetable cultivation is not tested, 12% of vegetable cultivation area is
near industrial zones, big roads or hospitals. Fresh manure and urine are still
common in irrigation water used for vegetable production.
36. Even though there are qualified laboratory technicians and professionals,
their number is limited. Testing facilities in many laboratories are out of date and the
cost of testing is often not affordable to poor farmers. For example a complete set of
tests from samples collected at the market place costs between 1.8 and 2 million
VND, according to the Inspectorate of Plant Protection Department. Testing soil
requires sending samples to the central Soil and Fertilizer Institute. Water testing
facilities at the local level (province) have limited capacity in several provinces and
are not yet available in many provinces; the water testing facilities are located at
Centers for Quarantine of Agricultural Products and Supplies or at Centers for Clean
Water and Rural Environment which have been established in several provinces at
the end of 2007.
37. Rapid testing methods are not yet developed. For example the testing of food
samples collected at market takes about one week to be completed, which is too late
to take any measure to prevent the circulation of unsafe food in the distribution
system. According to the Department for Plant Protection, support to rapid testing
methods is useful and vital.
Monitoring
38. Almost all the regulations mention monitoring and reporting. Directive No.
06/2007/CT-TTg indicates that annual and bi-annual reports on food safety should be
submitted to the Prime Minister by the lead agency for food safety, namely the MOH.
15
VIETGAP regulations indicate that both regular and irregular monitoring of
certification bodies will be conducted by the accreditation agency.
39. In spite of all these references to monitoring in the regulations, there is not yet
a monitoring system for food safety that is consistent, reliable, publicly available, and
effective. The MOH publicizes cases of incidence of food borne diseases. The
published data are however considered to be an underestimation of the real situation.
In the case of MARD, there are occasional reports, but these tend to be occasional
rather than regular.
40. Without a monitoring system, it is rather difficult (or impossible) to assess the
current situation on food safety and, most importantly, progress made. There is no
lead agency within MARD responsible for monitoring of food safety issues.
Information, Education, Communication
41. In spite of an intense regulatory activity related to food safety, information

about food safety in Viet Nam is scattered among different agencies. There are no
well organized databases on food safety dimensions such as regulations, standards,
practices, laboratories, and inspection.
42. For an organized information system on food safety to arise at MARD, a clear
mandate needs to be provided to an agency, responsibilities and authorities have to
be defined, and adequate resources have to be ensured. The Information Center of
MARD could initially take up this role and using its website www.agroviet.gov.vn to
make this information available.
43. The education system is lagging behind in incorporating food hygiene and
safety issues in its programs. Food hygiene principles and practices needs to be
instilled since the primary education level. At the tertiary level, food hygiene and
safety courses and programs are not yet available. A master and PhD program in
food hygiene and safety needs to be developed.
44. In most recent years, there has been a considerable attention of the media on
food safety. The latest issue of Outlook Magazine (May 26, 2008) is entirely
dedicated to food safety. Television and radio programs often report about food
borne diseases and communicate to the general public activities and decisions of the
Government related to food safety. The VFA launches awareness campaign about
food hygiene and safety.
45. These efforts are laudable; however they seem still insufficient to inform the
general public and farmers in a professional and regular manner. Workshops and
conferences dedicated to food safety are increasing, but their number is still limited.
Programs to inform children at school could be strengthened. Mass organizations
(Women Union, Youth Union, and Farmer Union) have a critical role to play in
communication and have the organization to enable them to communicate effectively.
Publications and websites dedicated to food safety are still limited.
Extension
46. Food safety and quality is a new concept for most farmers and extension
workers in Viet Nam. The recently developed VIETGAP for fruit, vegetables, and tea
will require a considerable effort to ensure that good practices are disseminated and
adopted by farmers and enterprises.
16
47. There are leading farmers and organizations who have already adopted good
practices, including EUREPGAP and HACCP. Certified organizations for safe food
production and trading are increasing, partly motivated by the incentives of capturing
new export markets and higher value consumers in the domestic market.
48. VIETGAP (and other GAPs) require considerable behavioral changes by

farmers and enterprises. Unless there are adequate incentives for adoption, the food
safety practices will remain limited to few leading farmers.
49. Clear evidence that adoption of safe practices could benefit smallholding
farmers should be provided. Technical and socioeconomic research could support
the production of such evidence.
50. The development of an extension system capable and effective in ensuring

that safe practices are adopted by a larger number of farmers requires a concerted
effort that involves on-farm testing of GAP, development of manuals and guidelines,
training of trainers, establishment of models, and focused extension activities.
51. Close collaboration with research organizations and private sector (including
processors and supermarkets) might facilitate the work of extension workers and
provide additional incentives to farmers.
52. Well established methods of extension such as demonstrations and farmer

field schools should be combined with incentives such as prizes for best safe food
producers, participation in study tours (eg to certified farmers in dragon fruit),
facilitating access to markets (through contracts with enterprises and supermarkets)
and participation in producer marketing groups.
Strategies, Policies, and Regulations
53. Since the early 2000 there has been an intense regulatory activity on food
hygiene and safety. The Laws on Standards and Good Labels have already been
approved. Currently the amendment to the Law on Inspection and a new Law on
Food Safety are under preparation. An Action Plan for Food Safety has been
approved in 2006 and additional clarifications on the Action Plan 2008-2012 have
been issued in 2008.
54. There remains considerable work to be done to complete the regulatory

framework, formulate policies, and develop strategies. The priorities for action
include the establishment of a lead agency for food safety at MARD, the
establishment of monitoring, information, and communication systems, the
development of standards and good practices, the planning of safe agricultural
zones, and an incentive policy for adoption of good practices.
Capacity
55. There is a limited number of staff within MARD and related research
organizations who are specialists in food safety. In the DCP there are only 4 staff
involved in food safety, and only 2 are full time. At the DPP there are 37 inspectors,
of which only 7 are full time. At the province level, on average there are less than 7
staff who have responsibilities related to food safety and most of them are not
specialists. In the research organizations, the situation is similar, as food safety
research programs are just starting to be established. In the livestock production and
animal health department, and in the fishery department, the situation seems to be
better, with a larger number of specialists involved in food safety issues.
17
56. Farmers lack knowledge and capacity for safe food production and basic
postharvest operations such as grading, handling, packaging. Good sorting,
handling, packaging, washing, and labeling practices in the marketing chains from
farm to consumers are also largely lacking.
57. There are capacity needs at all levels of the food safety institutional
dimensions examined in this report, from standards, practices, to regulations,
policies, and strategies. The immediate gaps seem to be those related to improving
capacity for formulating regulations, policies, and strategies. As the regulatory
framework becomes better defined, the subsequent priorities for capacity
strengthening are in certification, extension, inspection, monitoring, and information.
RECOMMENDATIONS
58. Lead Agency for Food Safety at MARD. Establish a lead agency at MARD
devoted to food safety.
59. Establishment of a Food Safety Monitoring System at MARD. Issue a

regulation to establish a food safety monitoring system under the responsibility of a
unit at MARD. Develop a methodology and pilot the construction and monitoring of a
Provincial Food Safety Index.
60. Establishment of Food Safety Information and Communication Systems

at MARD. Issue a regulation to establish a food safety information and
communication system under the responsibility of the lead agency for food safety at
MARD and the technical support of the Information Center at MARD.
61. Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones. Issue a new regulation on planning of

Safe Agricultural Zones including the participation of communities in developing code
of conducts, the planning of infrastructure, and the establishment of a monitoring
system.
62. Development and Harmonization of Standards. Establish an action plan

for the development of standards to ensure food quality and safety and improve
capacity to carry out the action plan. Focus on the development of standards for the
specific products in fruit, vegetables, and tea that contribute to improve safety and
quality.
63. Development of Good Practices. Issue regulations to develop existing

VIETGAP and formalize a Standing Committee for the Development of VIETGAP.
Issue regulations for developing new VIETGAP. Establish a road map to ensure a
gradual convergence of national good practices with internationally recognized good
practices.
64. Incentive Policy for Adoption of Good Practices. Issue a policy on

incentives to adoption of good practices including direct incentives to operators
(farmers and enterprises) such as reduced costs of certification, matching grants for
investment in good practices, rewards to best performers, and access to credit; and
indirect incentives through improvement of infrastructure (eg for building safe
agricultural zones, safe stalls in fruits and vegetable markets), technical assistance,
and information.
65. Institutional Capacity of Key Agencies at MARD, Labs, and Certification

Bodies. Conduct an in-depth capacity needs assessment for food safety and quality
18
improvement of MARD agencies and DARDS. Assess scope and plans of ongoing
capacity building projects. Establish a coordination body for capacity building
activities. Formulate a 5-year plan for capacity building. Conduct capacity building
activities including training, study tours, certification programs, and degree programs.
PROPOSED CROP FOOD SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (CFSMS)
66. Rationale. A number of regulations indicate functions and responsibilities of

various departments of MARD related to policy formulation, management,
monitoring, inspection, communication, accreditation, and development of standards
related to food safety. The existing regulations however do not provide sufficient
clarity on three key institutional issues, namely (i) who will take the lead in
coordinating the efforts of various departments; (ii) who will take the lead in
monitoring; and (iii) how the food safety management system will be managed.
67. Coordination. The issue of coordination is both internal and external to

MARD. Internally at MARD, various departments are mandated with monitoring (for
example DCP and NAFIQAD) and all departments are mandated with communication
and policy formulation. It is not clear however who will take the lead in coordination
and how various efforts will be harmonized. Externally, MARD needs to coordinate its
activities on food safety with other key ministries, mostly notably the Ministry of
Health (MOH), the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST), the Ministry of
Industry and Trade (MOIT), the Ministry of Planning and Investment (MPI), and
various key organizations such as the Viet Nam Food Administration (VFA) and
STAMEQ. For example, the development of national food standards is managed by
STAMEQ, but requires considerable input from MARD. There is not yet a body within
MARD that is coordinating with external agencies.
68. Monitoring. Existing regulations indicate monitoring as a responsibility of all

departments at MARD, with NAFIQAD in charge of supervising specialized
monitoring activities by other departments. This indication of responsibility however
does not translate into an actual system of monitoring. Specific resources, budgets,
and tools to carry out a monitoring system for food safety are not in place. There is
not yet a system of monitoring able to produce regular reports on various aspects of
food safety that allow assessing progress towards achievement of policy objectives
on food safety.
69. Management. For an effective management of food safety system to emerge,

operational structures have to be established. Currently, no food safety units exist,
either at the central (MARD) or at the provincial level (DARD). Staff engaged in food
safety are usually involved in other activities and not fully specialized in food safety.
At MARD, for example, standards and practices for safe production of fruit,
vegetables, and tea have been established and a body of related regulations has
been developed. However, there only 3 part-time staff at DCP are involved in these
activities, while the Department itself is charged with numerous functions and
responsibilities including policy formulation, accreditation of certification bodies,
monitoring and inspection, communication, promotion of safe agricultural zones, and
training.
70. Proposed Solutions. The QSEAP will contribute to the establishment of an

effective food safety system at MARD by addressing the issues of coordination,
monitoring, and management. The project will pilot a crop food safety management
19
system (CFSMS) that that could eventually be institutionalized and extended to other
agri-products. The proposed solutions include:
1. Establishment of a Standing Committee on Food Safety headed by a Vice

Minister of MARD with Secretariat at NAFIQAD
2. Establishment of Food Safety Divisions in the Department of Crop Production
(DCP) at MARD and sub-divisions at DARD dealing with Crop Food Safety
3. Establishment of a Food Safety Monitoring Division at NAFIQAD for overall
crop food safety monitoring, communication and information
4. Creation of new staff positions for Food Safety Specialists (at DCP/MARD
and DARD) and Food Safety Facilitators at district and commune level
5. Capacity building program of staff involved in the crop food safety
6. Review and formulation of policy and regulations for food safety
71. The proposed solutions address the problem of coordination, monitoring, and
management by (i) establishing a standing committee on food safety to coordinate
the work of the departments; (ii) assigning leadership to NAFIQAD in establishing a
monitoring system for the Ministry; and (iii) using the comparative advantage and
experience of DCP by giving to DCP the leadership in several functions related to
crop food safety.
72. Vision. The vision for the crop food safety management system (CFSMS) is a
regulatory and management system that assures that safe agricultural products are
produced, processed, and distributed. The system benefits both consumers and
producers. Producers, processors, wholesalers, retailers, exporters, and importers
are able to provide buyers an independent verification that a recognized program of
safe agricultural products production, handling, processing, and distribution practices
has been followed. The CFSMS will meet food safety requirements of domestic
consumers and international trading partners, including WTO, through certification to
mutually agreed and recognized standards.
73. Elements. The proposed CFSMS is consistent with 7 essential elements of a

food safety system, namely:
1. Standards and Codes of Practices which prevent or minimize potential food
safety hazards, based on the hazard analysis critical control point (HACCP)
method.
2. Certification that entities have met the Standards or follow the Codes of
Practices.
3. Inspection and Auditing of entities to verify they continue to meet the
Standards.
4. Monitoring to ensure progress towards policy objectives on food safety.
5. Internal Control Systems to ensure that certified business units (including
farmer groups, cooperatives, and enterprises) comply with food safety
Standards.
6. Information, Education, and Communication to ensure that all the actors in
the food supply chain are aware and can access knowledge about food
safety.
7. Research to identify the most suitable technologies and socioeconomic
mechanisms to promote food safety.
74. Legislation. Policies and regulations are clearly defined to provide authority
to the management agencies and protect the rights and integrity of consumers and
commercial entities. Key to the development of legislation is a comprehensive Food
Safety Law that completes and harmonizes the existing large body of regulations.
The management structure is defined in the legislation. Within MARD different
20
departments have functions and responsibilities for various elements of the CFSMS;
coordination is provided by the proposed Standing Committee on Food Safety
(SCFS). The QSEAP will provide support to the review of existing regulations and the
formulation of new policies and regulations consistently with the new Food Safety
Law expected to be submitted to the National Assembly in 2009.
75. Management Structure - Overall. The CFSMS will be part of a national

management structure that defines the responsibilities for each of the elements of the
system and the agencies involved. The following is typical of many countries in the
world:
1. Food Administration Authority – VFA has overall responsibility for food safety
2. Standards Authority – STAMEQ has overall responsibility for issuing
standards The standards authority coordinates with sector agencies that are
responsible for the development of standards and codes of practices (eg DCP
responsible for VIETGAP)
3. Certification – It includes Accreditation Bodies (eg DCP for VIETAP) and
Certification Bodies
4. Inspection and Auditing – It includes laboratories certified ISO 17025 and
professionals or companies trained and competent to ISO 9000.
5. Monitoring Bodies to manage and coordinate monitoring conducted by
different units
6. Information, Education, and Communication Bodies – Public or private
organizations that disseminate information and provide access to knowledge
to improve food safety
7. ICS Service Providers – Public or private organizations that help farmers and
enterprises achieving Internal Control Systems (ICS) to assure compliance
with Standards and Codes of Practices
8. Research Organizations – Public or private organizations that provide
research on socioeconomic and technological aspects of food safety.
76. Management Structure - MARD. The proposed Crop Food Safety

Management System (CFSMS) includes a coordination body at MARD (the Standing
Committee on Food Safety), a department leading in monitoring, information, and
communication (NAFIQAD), a department leading in policy formulation, development
of standards, and accreditation of certification bodies (the Department of Crop
Production), and positions at the central, provincial, district, and commune level
responsible for the management of the food safety system and facilitation of safe
food production for fruit, vegetables, and tea.
77. Central Level – MARD. The CFSMS envisages the following:

1. Standing Committee on Food Safety (SCFS) coordinates policy formulation,
monitoring and inspection, development of standards, communication and
information among different departments of MARD and ensures coordination
with other agencies outside of MARD. The committee is headed by a Vice
Minister of MARD and NAFIQAD provides the Secretariat for the Standing
Committee; members include all departments involved in food safety.
2. NAFIQAD has lead responsibility in establishing and managing the monitoring
system for food safety and an information and communication system.
3. A Food Safety Monitoring, Information, and Communication Division is
established at NAFIQAD with staff responsible in the five areas of (i)
methodologies; (ii) statistics; (iii) evaluation and reporting; (iv) operations; and
(v) information and communication.
4. Monitoring of food crop safety is based on surveys, visits, and testing carried
out by national and regional laboratories under DCP, DPP, NAFIQAD, and
any other laboratory authorized by NAFIQAD. NAFIQAD has overall
21
responsibility for managing the monitoring system including the development
of a Provincial Food Safety Index that will include not only variables such as
test results (water and soil quality, MRL, heavy metals, and microbiological
contamination), but also infrastructure variables (eg number of water
treatment units, packhouses and cold storage), variable on certification
(number of certification bodies and certified organizations), inspection
(number and gravity of violations), food-borne diseases, and consumer
confidence variables.
5. DCP has lead responsibility for policy formulation related to crop food safety,
accreditation and monitoring of VIETGAP certification bodies, development of
standards and manuals for VIETGAP and other standards, training of other
departments and DARDs staff in VIETGAP and other standards.
6. A Food Safety Division is established at DCP with staff responsible in the five
areas of (i) policy, (ii) standards, (iii) monitoring and inspection, (iv)
accreditation, and (v) communication.
7. Other relevant departments such as Department of Plant Protection (DPP)
and Department of Science and Technology (DST) carry out activities in
policy formulation, standards development, monitoring, and communication;
NAFEC carries out extension programs for food safety. All these activities will
be coordinated through the SCFS.
8. QSIAP will undertake a comprehensive program of capacity building at MARD
and in the provinces covered by the project.
78. Province Level – DARD. The CFSMS envisages the following:

1. A sub-Division of Food Safety is established at DARD with overall
responsibility for managing implementation of regulations on crop food safety
in each project province, training, monitoring, accreditation of certification
bodies, promotion of safe agricultural zones (SAZ), and facilitation of the
establishment of internal control systems at business units (farmer groups
and cooperatives) engaged in safe food production.
2. Positions for Food Safety Specialists will be established. The QSIAP will
provide capacity building for the Food Safety Specialists at the province level.
Some of the staff will be trained and certified as VIETGAP inspectors.
79. District and Commune Level. The CFSMS envisages the following:
1. Positions for Food Safety Facilitators (FSF) will be created at the district and
at the commune level. The QSEAP will build capacity of FSF to provide
services to farmers groups and cooperatives engaged in safe food production
of fruit, vegetables, and tea.
2. Services by FSF will include training, liaising with certification bodies and
buyers, and facilitating the establishing Internal Control Systems for food
safety. This involve ensuring that individual farmers maintain records required
by the standards, maintaining a register of farmer records, including monthly
consolidated records of all farm inputs, outputs and certified sales for auditing
purposes; conducting regular monitoring and spot checks of member farmers,
and guiding them on any corrective actions; conducting an internal audit of
the certified entity, prior to each audit by the Certification Body, and at least
once per year; ensuring all Corrective Action Requests by the Certification
Body are complied in a timely fashion; and facilitating the production of all
certification compliance, quality assurance and traceability documents.
3. The FSF will pass an accredited VIETGAP inspector or manager course
(gaining a certificate) and attend annual or bi-annual refresher training
courses to maintain current accreditation status.
22
80. Sustainability of the System. The proposed system is a pilot that could be
institutionalized over time. The sustainability and replicability of the system beyond
the project life depend on the following:
1. As the demand for certification increases and knowledge about safe food
production becomes more widespread, several services of facilitators will be
provided by the private sector; alternatively the services could be provided by
the public sector based on a fee. The pilot will allow to understand what
services could be delivered for a fee and which services will still require public
funding.
2. The services provided by the food safety specialists (at MARD and DARD
level) are likely to remain essential (with the possible exception of
accreditation that could be outsourced outside of the public sector). There is a
strong rationale for them to continue to be publicly funded, as they provide
public goods. This is the practice in most countries. As Viet Nam moves
towards middle income country status and beyond, it will increase its
emphasis on food safety both to promote health of the population and to meet
the increasing domestic and international demand for safe agroproducts. The
need of policies and regulations, monitoring, certification, inspection,
information and communication about food safety will increase and will
require an adequately funded public sector.
PROJECT DESIGN OF THE POLICY AND INSTITUTIONAL COMPONENT
81. The design and monitoring framework for the Policy and Institutional
Component of the Project is summarized in Table 2. The costs of this component are
presented in the following table:
Table 1 Summary of Costs for Subcomponents of the Policy and Institutional

Development Component of the Project
Investment Cost Recurrent Cost Total Cost

Sub-component 1.1 $ 1,592,000 $ 1,076,000 $ 2,668,000
Sub-component 1.2 $ 1,140,000 $ - $ 1,140,000
Sub-component 1.3 $ 312,000 $ 360,000 $ 672,000
Total $ 3,044,000 $ 1,436,000 $ 4,480,000
23
Table 2 Design and Monitoring Framework for the Policy and Institutional Component of the
QSIAP
Output Targets Data Sources and Assumptions and

Monitorin Risks
g
Output 1 - 1. A review of existing 1. CPMU reports Assumptions
Improved regulations submitted to and document 1. Sustained
regulatory MARD decision makers records commitment of MARD to
framework and 2. Standing Committee on 2. Standing improving policy and
coordination Food Safety headed by Vice Committee on regulatory framework
for state Minister of MARD for food Food Safety 2. Cooperation among
management of quality and safety minutes and departments to transfer
safety and established with Secretariat list of meeting responsibilities and
quality of fruit, provided by NaFIQAD attendance assets as necessary
vegetables, and 3. A comprehensive and 3. MARD 3. Rationalization of
tea readily accessible set of decrees, laboratory system may
regulations for the decisions on involve making use of
implementation of food food safety analytical services of
safety and quality of fruit, and quality agencies outside of
vegetables, and tea including 4. STAMEQ- MARD
regulations on SAZ, approved 4. GAP and other
Incentive policy, and TCVN related standards reviewed
monitoring, communication, to fruit, annually and revised to
and information. vegetables, meet user concerns and
4. A consistent and readily and tea any changes in market
available set of good 5. Reports of the requirements
practices (VIETGAP) and monitoring unit 5. Phasing out of
standards in production and under MARD, subsidies to certified
postharvest operations including bodies over the course
(TCVN) related to fruit, Provincial of the Project
vegetables, and tea Food Safety
(standards for at least 10 Index Risks
different types of vegetables, 6. Reports of the 1. High global food
10 different types of fruit, and information prices might retard the
tea; including organic and emphasis on food safety
production) communication and quality
5. Food safety monitoring units at MARD 2. Rent seeking
system, information system, behavior might result
and communication system from an empowered
for fruit, vegetables, and tea inspection system
established 3. Resistance to
separate monitoring
agency from
implementation agency
Output 2 1. About 130 staff from 1. CPMU reports Assumptions

Strengthened MARD and 140 staff from and document
capacity of DARD trained in regulations records 1. Sustained
state agencies, and policy formulation, 2. Reports of the commitment of MARD to
certification certification, GAP, standards, monitoring unit capacity strengthening of
bodies, and monitoring, inspection, under MARD, state organizations,
laboratories information, communication, including laboratories, and
involved in the planning, and risk analysis Provincial Food certified bodies
implementation 2. Staff from 100 Safety Index 2. Coordination with
of quality and certified/certifying bodies 3. Number of other projects involved in
safe food trained certified bodies by capacity strengthening
production, 3. Staff from 20 DCP activities for food quality
processing, and laboratories trained 4. Area of SZA and safety
Monitorin Risks
g
trading of fruit, 4. Staff from 16 DARD established by 3. Food safety reflected
vegetables, and provinces trained in planning DARD in new degree programs
tea. SAZ 5. Quality of at education institutions
service surveys and research programs
conducted by at research
independent organizations
organization
Risks
1. Scheduling of
training activities might
conflict with other
activities
Output 3: 1. Standing Committee for 1. CPMU reports Assumptions

Establishment Food Safety established by and document 1. Sustained
of a pilot Crop first half of 2009 records commitment of MARD to
Food Safety 2. Pilot units for Food 2. Minutes of pilot the crop food safety
Management Safety Monitoring Standing management system.
System established by second half of Committee for
(CFSMS) from 2009 at NAFIQAD Food Safety and
the central level 3. Pilot units for Food attendance lists Risks
of MARD to the Safety established at DCP 3. Records of 1. The piloted system
commune level and DARDs in 16 provinces staff fully devoted does not lead to
for fruit, by second half of 2009 to food safety replicable outcome in
vegetables, and 4. Job descriptions, activities in the other provinces.
tea. reassignment of staff, and project
identification of staff for the 4. Quality of
positions of Food Safety service surveys
Specialists and Food Safety conducted by
Specialists (at district and independent
commune level) completed organization
by second half of 2009.
Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper
25
2 Introduction
82. This Working Paper1 is the joint output of the Institutional Consultants Francesco
Goletti and Nguyen Thi Minh Hai.
83. The scope of work includes an assessment of food safety regulations and
institutional capacity related to food safety for three commodity groups, namely vegetables,
fruit, and tea.
84. The objective of the Working Paper for the Institutional component of the QSIAP is to
review the current legislation related to food safety, provide an analysis of the key
institutional issues, assess capacity of institutions related to food safety, and make
recommendations for the design monitoring framework (DMF) of the project.
85. The Working Paper is organized as follows:
• Chapter 1 provides the Executive Summary
• Chapter 2 contains the Introduction
• Chapter 3 provides the conceptual framework used in the analysis of food

quality and safety issues
• Chapter 4 gives an overview of the key institutions involved in food quality and
safety
• Chapter 5 provides a review of the key legislation on food quality and safety
• Chapter 6 analyzes the current situation and issues related to food quality and
safety
• Chapter 7 presents experience of other countries
• Chapter 8 presents recommendations, including the outcomes, outputs,

activities, inputs, and costs necessary to achieve the outputs; the indicators of
outputs, the monitoring methods, the expected benefits, and the risks
• Chapter 9 contains various Annexes including:
1. Codex Alimentarius Commission

2. Introduction to SPS and TBT Agreements
3. The SPS Agreement
4. The TBT Agreement
5. Risk Analysis
6. Standards and Trade Development Facility
7. Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP)
1
To be cited as Goletti, Francesco, and Nguyen Thi Minh Hai, Institutional Analysis and Capacity
Building, Working Paper, Quality and Safety Improvement in Agricultural Products Project, ADB TA
4972-VIE, NIRAS in association with Agrifood Consulting International and VICA, Hanoi, Viet Nam,
September 2008.
26
8. Codex Standards, Code of Practice, Max Residue Limits, Guidelines
9. Viet Nam Standards (TCVN) for Food and Agriculture
10. Examples of some Vietnamese Standards related to VIETGAP
11. Implications of Food Safety Regulations for Different Actors along the
Value Chain
12. Preliminary Estimation of Costs for the Project Component: Policy and
Institutional Development for Food Safety at the central level
13. Design and Monitoring Framework
14. Thailand Food Safety System
27
3 Approach and Methodology
3.1 Definition of Food Safety and Quality
86. Quality: Compliance with predefined standards
87. Food Safety: Protection from chemical or biological substances that lead to illness or
death
88. Improving food quality and safety depends on actions taken all along the value
chain2, from supply of inputs to final consumption. At each stage of the value chain, there are
institutional issues that need to be addressed. While in the past, the emphasis of regulations
and institutions was on reactive measures to control food quality and safety, currently the
emphasis is on preventive measures.
3.2 Institutional Dimensions of Food Quality and Safety
89. The development of a food quality and safety system starts with the awareness of
food quality and safety as an issue that has critical relevance to society. The awareness of
food quality and safety in Viet Nam is rapidly increasing as the outcome of more information
available through the media, various regulations introduced by the Government, integration
with the world economy and the WTO Agreements on SPS and TBT, and increasing
concerns for health in a population that is moving rapidly towards mid-income status.
90. In order to establish a food quality and safety system able to assure quality and safety
of food, standards and practices have to be developed and adhered to ensure the
standards are achieved in production, processing, marketing, distribution, trade, and service
delivery. The development of food standards and practices has received a great boost over
the most recent years in Viet Nam as cases of food born diseases, and zoonotic diseases
have been reported in the media.
91. To ensure that good practices (at the production, processing, and distribution levels)
are followed, systems of certification have arisen. GAP, GMP, GHP, HACCP, and Risk
Analysis have become common words in the regulatory body that is rapidly development in
Viet Nam.
92. Certification usually refers to individual organizations. It could however also apply to
entire communities and areas (for example SAZ or safe agricultural zones, and PFZ or pest
free zones) or to market places. In the latter case, certification involves regional planning
93. Both certified organizations and non-certified ones need to be inspected or audited
in order to take action in the case of violations of the law and also to ensure that quality and
safety standards are followed.
94. Regular monitoring and reporting about food quality and safety provides the basis
to assess the current situation, identify problems, and take decisions to improve the system.
2
See Annex 9.11.
28
95. Inspection and monitoring are increasingly based on science. The role of
laboratories in providing analysis and diagnostics services is supporting inspection and
monitoring.
96. Monitoring and reporting provides a basis for information to be disseminated to the
larger public, farmers, enterprises, and consumers.
97. Education of producers, processors, traders, food service providers, and consumers
is another critical institutional dimension of a well functioning food quality and safety system.
In the specific case of producers, extension services are expected to improve capacity to
produce quality and safe food.
98. The improvement of the quality and safety system is increasing dependent on the
development and application of science-based methods. Scientific and socioeconomic
research can provide the basis to develop technologies, strategies, and policies to improve
the system.
99. An effective institutional framework for the development of food quality and safety will
require appropriate regulations, policies, and strategies.
100. Institutions are effective as long as the human resources engaged in those institutions
have adequate capacity.
101. While many institutional aspects of an effective food quality and safety system
depends on the development of the private sector and its corporate social responsibility
(CSR), the implications for public health are so far-reaching that the public sector has a
fundamental role to play in order to assure the safety of food consumed by the population
and the health of current and future generations.
102. The working paper will not analyze private institutions such as farmer organizations
(groups, cooperatives), trade and industry associations, mass organizations, and consumers
associations, but only provide a general overview of these institutions and their role in the
ensuring food safety and quality.
103. The analysis in the following chapters provides a review of the current situation for the
issues mentioned above and illustrated in Figure 1. It will focus the analysis on safety of
vegetables, fruits, and tea and on the public institutions involved, while at the same time
mentioning other commodities.
104. Based on the overview of the key institutions involved and the analysis of the
institutional dimensions, the consultants will provide a general set of recommendations. The
recommendations will be presented as part of the Design Monitoring Framework (DMF) of
the Project and outcomes, outputs, activities, and inputs will be indicated.
29
Overview of Review of Institutional Strategic Recommend
Institutions Regulations Issues Analysis ations
MARD Ordinances SWOT Framework

Standards
MOH Directives Problem Tree DMF
Practices
MOST Decrees Outcomes
Certification
Circulars Outputs
Inspection
Laws Activities
Labs
Inputs
Monitoring
Indicators
Information
Monitoring
Education
Risks
Extension
Communication
Regulation
Policies
Strategies
Research
Capacity
Figure 1: Approach and Methodology of Report
30
4 The Institutions Involved in Food Quality and Safety
4.1 Introduction
105. Several institutional players are involved in food quality and safety, including
ministries, government agencies at the central and local levels, research organizations,
international agencies, the private sector, associations, and mass organizations.
106. The objective of this chapter is to provide a brief overview of these institutional
players and indicate their roles along the food safety and quality chain.
107. The key ministries involved in the improvement of quality and safety of agricultural
products are illustrated in Figure 2. The key institutional issues and ministries involved along
the value chain are illustrated in Table 3. The key players are illustrated in Table 4.
Agro-input Producers Processors Traders Retailers Consumers

providers Municipal markets
MARD MARD MOH MOH MOH MOH

MOH MARD MOIT MOIT
MOIT MOIT MARD
MOST - standards
Figure 2: Ministries Responsible Along the Food Chain
31
Table 3 Institutional Issues and Ministries along the Value Chain of Food and
Agricultural products
Stage in the Value Main Institutional Main Ministries Cross Cutting
Chain Issues Issues
Pre-production Quarantine MARD
Inspection MOH
Storage, packaging, MOIT
labeling, handling MOST
Production Agricultural practices MARD

Extension
Farmer organization
Standards
Safe production zones
Information
Certification
Communication
Education
Processing Manufacturing practices MARD
Capacity
Certification MOIT
Coordination
MOH
MOST
Marketing and Trade Storage MARD
Packaging MOH
Storage, packaging, MOIT
labeling, handling
Service and Storage, handling, MOH

Consumption preparing
32
Table 4: Key Players in Food Quality and Safety Improvement
Level Government Agency Non-government Private Sector
Organization
International • World Trade Organization • Multinational
(WTO) Export and
• FAO/WHO: Codex Import
Alimentarius Commission Companies
for food
• FAO’s Secretariat of the
International Plant
Protection for Plant Health
• GlobalGAP (EurepGAP)
National • Ministry of Agriculture and Rural • JAS-ANZ • Exporters
Development (MARD) • Vietnam Tea Association • Processors
→ International Cooperation Department (VITAS) • Wholesale
(Enquiry Point and Notification • Vietnam Fruit Association Traders
Authority) (VINAFRUIT) • Importers of
→ Department of Crop Production • Food and Foodstuff Farm Inputs
(DCP) Association (FFA) • Service
→ Department of Plant Protection (DPP) • Consumers’ Assn. providers
→ National Agro-Forestry and Fisheries • Farmers’ Association
Quality Assurance Department
(NAFIQAD)
→ National Agriculture and Fisheries
Extension Center (NAFEC)
→ Fruits and Vegetables Research
Institute (FAVRI)
→ Plant Protection Research Institute
(PPRI)
• Ministry of Science and Technology
(MOST)
→ Directorate for Standard and Quality
(STAMEQ)
→ QUACERT
• Ministry of Health (MOH)
→ Vietnam Food Administration (VFA)
• Ministry of Industry and Trade (MOIT)
→ Department of Multilateral Trade
Policy (DMTP)
• Agriculture universities
Region • Northern Pesticide Control Center
(covering • Southern Pesticide Control Center
several • Northern Mountainous Agricultural
provinces) and Forestry Science Institute
• Southern Coastal Central Agricultural
Science Institute
• Southern Fruit Research Institute
(SOFRI)
Provincial, • Department of Agriculture and Rural • Agricultural Cooperatives • Agro-

District, Development (DARD) • Water Users’ Associations processing
Commune, and → Provincial Agriculture and Fisheries • IPM Groups companies
Village Levels Extension Center • Extension Clubs • Retailers
→ Plant Protection Sub-Department • Credit Clubs • Input
• Agricultural universities suppliers
• Consumers
33
4.2 Ministries and Related Agencies
4.2.1 Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
108. Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. MARD is the main government
ministry responsible for agriculture and rural development for the whole country, including
crops, livestock, forestry, fishery and salt production; irrigation development and services,
rural development, and management of state-owned enterprises in the agriculture sector. Its
tasks and authorities include the following:
• Submit to the Government and Prime Minister legal drafts, ordinances and other
legal documents within the Ministry’s mandate areas;
• Submit to the Government and Prime Minister development master plans and
annual strategies, five-year and long-term plants and key programs and projects
within the Ministry’s mandated areas;
• Issue decisions, directives, and circulars within the Ministry’s mandated areas.
• Guide, supervise and implement legal documents, strategies, master plans, plans,
and standards within the Ministry’s mandated areas;
• Design and implements projects in the areas of crop production, animal
production, salt production, fisheries production, water resources, forestry and
rural development;
• Coordinate policies and strategies for market development for agricultural
products in cooperation with the Ministry of Trade; and
• Carry out international cooperation in the domain of its mandated areas;
109. Within MARD, the agencies which are closely involved in the quality and safety
improvement of agricultural products include the following:
110. International Cooperation Department (ICD). ICD is responsible for coordination,

supervision and monitoring of all the projects and programs funded by bilateral and
multilateral funding agencies, international NGOs, and foreign direct investment in the
agriculture sector. With respect to quality and safety issue, ICD has been designated as
Enquiry Point and Notification Authority in which ICD takes the lead on SPS regulations
related to WTO agreements. Its main function is to receive and respond to requests for
information regarding domestic sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures, including new or
existing regulations and decisions based on risk assessment. Thus, ICD should notify
Vietnam’s SPS contents and regulations to WTO and its members, and to request WTO
members to provide information on measures, procedures for risk assessment, inspection,
and examination relevant to SPS matters.
111. Department of Crop Production (DCP). DCP is responsible for the submission of
proposed laws, ordinances, and legal documents in the crops sector; formulation and
implementation of strategies, schemes, plans, procedures, techniques, technologies for
crops and fertilizers; preparation of export and import lists of crops species, fertilizers, and
gene stock; and management and utilization of fertilizers. DCP is responsible for developing
policies, framework and management system for the production of safe crops by small
farmers, state-owned companies, and private companies.
112. National Agro-Forestry and Fisheries Quality Assurance Department

(NAFIQAD). NAFIQAD is a new department created by MARD in January 2008 to carry out
the state governing of quality and safety improvement of crops, forestry, fishery and salt
products in the whole country. The new agency is responsible for the preparation of laws,
ordinances, strategies, long-term master plans, five-year and annual plans, programs and
34
projects related to product quality and safety; issuance of specific documents and relevant
professional guidance; supervision of the implementation of approved legal documents,
strategy, master plans, programs and projects, standards, technical regulations and
procedures; synthesis and propagation of Vietnam and international regulations on quality,
safety and hygiene of agricultural products; and certification of quality, safe and hygienic
agricultural products. It appears that some of these responsibilities are currently being
carried out by the Department of Crop Production and Vietnam Food Administration. This
duplication of effort may have to be resolved before NAFIQAD has become well established.
113. Department of Plant Protection (DPP). DPP is responsible for the governance and
inspection of plant protection and quarantine activities and use of plant protection chemicals.
As such, its functions are to (i) investigate, detect, forecast and prevent harmful pests; (ii)
announce outbreaks of harmful pests; (iii) manage plant quarantine efforts related to import,
export, and port transit of plants and disinfection activities; (iv) manage registration, field
testing and utilization of plant protection chemicals, including insecticides, herbicides,
fungicides, rodenticides, and plant growth hormones; and (v) revoke licenses and
certification, conduct inspection and execute sanctions on infringement of regulations related
to plant protection chemicals. DPP’s organization structure comprises of national-level
department, two Regional Pesticide Control Centers in Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City, and
Plant Protection Sub-departments in 64 provinces, and a network of plant protection staff at
the district, commune and village levels.
114. National Agriculture and Fisheries Extension Center (NAFEC). NAFEC is the new
name for the National Agriculture Extension Center after the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural
Development was merged with the Ministry of Fisheries in January 2008. It is responsible for
formulation of policies and plans for agricultural extension, supervision and monitoring of
extension services nation wide. It supervises the extension service activities undertaken by
Provincial Agriculture and Fisheries Extension Center (PAFEC) under DARD in 64 provinces.
It has a network of extension staff extending from the provincial level to district, commune
and village levels.
115. Office of SPS. The establishment of Vietnam Sanitary and Phytosanitary Notification
Authority and Enquiry Point is a compulsory requirement of joining WTO. The Prime Minister
decided to establish the SPS Office and locate it at Ministry of Agriculture and Rural
Development according to Decision No. 99/2005/QĐ-TTg, dated 9 May 2005. The Office has
a Director, Deputy Directors and a General Secretariat constituted of enquiry points from
MARD (Departments for Veterinary, Plant Protection, NAFIQAD, Department for Fishery
Exploitation and Protection), Ministry of Health (Vietnam Food Administration), Ministry of
Science & Technology (Directorate for Standards and Quality –STAMEQ) and Ministry of
Industry and Commerce with responsibilities for information provision, explanation and
information on standards, food safety and animal-plant quarantine, and Inter-ministerial Task
Force (Ministry of Health, Ministry of Science & Technology, Ministry of Industry and
Commerce and MARD) consisting of one contact person from each ministry (department
level) and one staff (full time) appointed by Minister to be responsible for information and
answering or preparing documents assigned by Director of SPS Office in Vietnam.
116. The Regulations on Organization and Operation of SPS Office in Vietnam stipulates
responsibilities of ministries and duties of its Enquiry Points in preparing and providing
documents to inform and enquire about regulations on standards relate to epidemics
prevention and animal-plant quarantine according to time and formats stipulated by WTO.
Information on transparency of SPS measures can be searched from website of Vietnam
SPS Office. Managers and technical staff who work in SPS network, have been trained by
experience trainers to continue strengthening their capacity in state management of SPS.
35
117. Department of Legislation. Submits to the Minister plans for preparation of
normative legal documents for annual and long-term enforcement. Systemizes normal legal
documents and policies; disseminates and supports education on policies and laws; instructs
on and checks normative legal documents; supervises the enactment of policies and laws in
the entire sector.
118. Ministerial Inspection Office (MIO). The office is directly under the control of the
Ministry and assists the Minister in governing the inspection service. The office inspects,
verifies, concludes, and recommends solutions to complaints and denunciations. Steers and
guides the organization and professional processes of administrative and specialized
inspections conducted by inspectorates at the Department level. Imposes sanctions for
infringement of administrative regulations and publicizes the conclusions of inspection;
monitors and supervises the enactment of post-inspection decisions, makes decisions for
addressing complaints and denunciations issued by the Minister and authorized state
agencies.
2. ICARD. The Information Center for Agriculture and Rural Development maintains the
www.agroviet.gov.vn website both in Vietnamese and English and provides information
about news in agriculture and rural development, a market information and trade promotion,
news about 10 commodities (rice, coffee, rubber, tea, pepper, sugarcane, cashes, meat,
vegetables, and wood), and trade promotion.
119. Department of Agriculture and Rural Development. DARD is the implementing

arm of MARD at the provincial level. It is responsible for the implementation of laws,
regulations, directives, master plans, strategies, programs and projects approved by MARD.
It is headed by a Director who is assisted by 1 to 5 Vice Directors. Under Vice Directors,
there are sections, administrative units, sub-departments, and commercial and production
units which correspond to the major crops/livestock/fisheries grown in the provinces. Three
most important sub-departments relevant to the proposed Project are Crop Production
Subdepartment, Plant Protection Subdepartment, and Provincial Agriculture and Fisheries
Extension Center (PAFEC). Both Plant Protection and PAFEC have staff at provincial,
district, commune and village levels. In some provinces, the extension staff dual functions as
plant protection staff, while in other provinces the two sub-departments are completely
separated.
4.2.2 Ministry of Science and Technology
120. Directorate for Standards and Quality (STAMEQ). STAMEQ under the Ministry of
Science and Technology has the following functions: (i) to prepare legal documents, policies,
strategies and plans on standardization and quality management for submission to the
Government for approval; (ii) to guide and supervise the standardization, and quality carried
out by the ministries and their branches; (iii) to unify the state management on national
standards system; (iv) to establish, maintain and improve national measurement of
standards; (v) to guide in settling disputes regarding quality of products; and (vi) to carry out
scientific research, training, information, consultancy, and international cooperation in the
fields of standardization, metrology, quality management, and productivity. With regard to
safety and quality issue, the Directorate hosts the Codex Contact Point, and is responsible
for setting up food safety standards, and accreditation of laboratories in the country for ISO
170253.
3
ISO/IEC 17025:2005 specifies the general requirements for the competence to carry out tests and/or
calibrations, including sampling. It covers testing and calibration performed using standard methods,
non-standard methods, and laboratory-developed methods. It is applicable to all organizations
performing tests and/or calibrations. These include, for example, first-, second- and third-party
36
121. Quacert is the Certification Body of Vietnam established by the Ministry of Sciences
and Technology (Decision No.1003/QDD-BKHCN-MT) as a subsidiary of the Directorate for
Standards and Quality (STAMEQ). QUACERT services include:
• Product certification to Vietnamese standards (TCVN), foreign standards (JIS,
ASTM, GOST, GB), regional standards (EN, CEN) and international standards
(ISO, IEC,...);
• Management system certification to international standards:
• Quality Management System ISO 9001
• Environmental Management System ISO 14001
• Occupational & Health Safety Management System OHSAS 18001
• Hazards Analysis and Critical Control Point HACCP
• Good Manufacturing Practices GMP
• Quality Management System in specific industries such as ISO/TS 29001 for the
Petroleum, Petrochemical and Natural gas industries...
• Information Security Management System ISMS
• Training activities to assist customer achieve excellent business system through
process efficiency;
• Provision of business management solutions applying information technology (IT)
for enterprises.
4.2.3 Ministry of Health
122. Vietnam Food Administration (VFA). VFA under the Ministry of Health was
established in 1999 under the Ministry of Health. It is responsible for the preparation of a
food safety policy, the compilation of food safety legislation and related communications,
coordination of risk management concerning food contamination, carrying out food safety
inspection, and the organization of food safety research
4.2.4 Ministry of Industry and Trade
123. Department of Multilateral Trade Policy (DMTP). DMTP under the Ministry of
Industry and Trade is responsible for the formulation of international policy trade policy, and
certification of export and import companies and other companies involved in trade.
4.3 International Organizations and Agencies
124. World Trade Organization. WTO, established by the Uruguay Round negotiations in
1995, is the only global international organization dealing with the rules of trade between
laboratories, and laboratories where testing and/or calibration forms part of inspection and product
certification. ISO/IEC 17025:2005 is applicable to all laboratories regardless of the number of
personnel or the extent of the scope of testing and/or calibration activities. When a laboratory does not
undertake one or more of the activities covered by ISO/IEC 17025:2005, such as sampling and the
design/development of new methods, the requirements of those clauses do not apply. ISO/IEC
17025:2005 is for use by laboratories in developing their management system for quality,
administrative and technical operations. Laboratory customers, regulatory authorities and accreditation
bodies may also use it in confirming or recognizing the competence of laboratories. ISO/IEC
17025:2005 is not intended to be used as the basis for certification of laboratories. Compliance with
regulatory and safety requirements on the operation of laboratories is not covered by ISO/IEC
17025:2005.
37
nations. Its goal is to assist producers of goods and services, exporters, and importers to
conduct their business. Its functions are to: (i) administer WTO trade agreements which are
negotiated and signed by the bulk of the world’s trading nations and ratified by their
parliaments; (ii) provide forum for trade negotiations; (iii) handle trade disputes; (iv) monitor
national trade policies; and (v) provide technical assistance and training to developing
countries.
125. Article 20 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) allows governments
to act on trade in order to protect human, animal or plant life or health, provided they do not
discriminate or use this as a disguised protectionism. In addition, there are two specific WTO
agreements dealing with food safety and animal and plant health and safety and with product
standards in general. These are the Codex Amimentarius Commission (CAC) and the
International Plant Protection Commission (IPPC)
126. Food standards and guidelines developed by the Codex Alimentarius Commission
which was created in 1963 by FAO and WHO. The Commission developed food standards,
guidelines and related texts such as codes of practice under the Joint FAO/WHO Food
Standards Program. The main purposes of this Program are protecting health of the
consumers and ensuring fair trade practices in the food trade, and promoting coordination of
all food standards work undertaken by international governmental and non-governmental
organizations. For additional information see Annex 9.1.
127. The International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) is an international treaty

relating to international trade. The convention has been deposited with the Director General
of FAO at its Sixth Session in 1951. It has encouraged countries to ensure through
phytosanitary certification that their exports are not the means for introducing new pests to
their trading partners. Likewise, the importing countries strive to ensure that measures they
have in place for their plant and animal protection are technically justified.
128. A separate agreement on food safety and animal and plant health standards (the
Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Agreement or SPS) sets out the basic rules. It
allows countries to set their standards provided they are based on science. They should be
applied only to the extent necessary to protect human, animal or plant life or health. They
should not arbitrarily or unjustifiably discriminate between countries where identical or similar
conditions prevail. Member countries are encouraged to use international standards,
guidelines and recommendations where they exist. When they do, they are unlikely to be
challenged legally in a WTO dispute. Members can also set higher standards based on
appropriate assessment of risks so long as the approach is consistent, not arbitrary. The
agreement still allows countries to use different standards and different methods of
inspecting products. The agreement includes provisions on control, inspection and approval
procedures. Governments must provide advance notice of new or changed sanitary and
phytosanitary regulations, and establish a national enquiry point to provide information. In the
case of Viet Nam, the national enquiry point resides at the MARD’s Office of SPS. For
additional information on the Agreements SPS and TAB see Annexes 9.2, 9.3, 9.4, 9.6.
129. In addition to the international agreement with WTO, Vietnam also have bilateral trade
agreements with some countries, such as Republic of Korea, Republic of Chile, USA,
Mongolia, and Romania.
130. ISO. The International Organizations for Standards has more than 16 500
International Standards and other types of normative documents in its current portfolio. ISO's
work programme ranges from standards for traditional activities, such as agriculture and
construction, through mechanical engineering, manufacturing and distribution, to transport,
medical devices, information and communication technologies, and to standards for good
management practice and for services. ISO is made up of 157 members which are divided
38
into three categories: Member bodies, Correspondent members, Subscriber members. A
member body of ISO is the national body "most representative of standardization in its
country". Only one such body for each country is accepted for membership of ISO. Member
bodies are entitled to participate and exercise full voting rights on any technical committee
and policy committee of ISO. The Department of Standards and Quality of Viet nam is a
member body of ISO and participates in 71 technical committees. STAMEQ is responsible
for accreditation of ISO certifying bodies.
4.4 Research Institutes and Universities
131. Fruit and Vegetable Research Institute (FAVRI). FAVRI is responsible for the
development of improved varieties and technologies for fruit and vegetables, including
integrated pest management and proper use of bio-pesticides. The institute plays an
important role in providing improved varieties and technologies to extension staff and farmers
for improvement of quality and safety of vegetables and fruit production. In addition to
FAVRI, there are other research institutes involved in the development of improved varieties
and technologies for vegetables, fruits and tea. These include the Southern Fruit Research
Institute (SOFRI), Northern Mountainous Agricultural and Forestry Science Institute
(NOMAFSI), Southern Coastal Central Agricultural Science Institute (SOCASI), and Northern
Central Vietnam Agricultural Science Institute (NCVASI).
132. SOFRI. Long Dinh Fruit Research Center (LDFRC) was founded on 26 March 1994
by the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. Then LDFRC was reorganized and
upgraded to be the Southern Fruit Research Institute (SOFRI) under the decision No.
1056/1997/QD TTg on December 9 th 1997. It is located at Long Dinh commune. Chau
Thanh district in the province of Tien Giang. SOFRI has 67,5ha in Tien Giang province and
SOFRI’s affiliated establishment named South Eastern Fruit Research Center has its home
on 476 ha of land located in Baria-Vungtau province. The present staff of SOFRI numbers
130. Of the total, there are 59 researchers and 18 post graduates (3 PhD, 15 MSc).
133. Agricultural Universities. A number of agricultural universities, exist in Viet Nam

including the Ha Noi Agricultural University, Hue Agricultural University, and HCMC
Agriculture and Forestry Univerity. Other universities have Agriculture Faculty at Thai Nguyen
University in the Northern Mountains, Tay Nguyen University in the Central Highlands, and
Can Tho University in the Mekong River Delta. Collectively, these universities offer various
programs in fruit, vegetables, and tea.
4.5 Associations and Cooperatives
134. Vietnam Fruit Association (Vinafruit). Vinafruit has 71 members comprising state-
owned enterprises, private enterprises, research institutes, and cooperatives operating in all
stages of the fruit industry value chain, including production, material services, fruit
purchasing, preservation and processing. Vinafruit was established in 2001. Its roles are to
mobilize and enhance cooperation among members to develop the fruit industry in response
to increasing demand from international and domestic markets, and to disseminate
information about technologies, market trends, trade promotion, and capacity building.
135. Vietnam Tea Association (Vitas). Vitas has 102 members comprising growers and
processors located in 10 union branches and 21 tea-growing provinces. Its roles are to
promote food safety and industrial hygiene among its members, and disseminate results
from research centers on markets, processing technology and improved seeds.
39
136. Food and Foodstuff Association (FFA). FFA represents public and private
enterprises in food, foodstuff and beverages. Its roles are to disseminate information on
business and legal environments, markets, new technology, and management practices, to
relay members’ difficulties to relevant government offices, and to act as a forum through
which companies can discuss their problems and propose suggestions and
recommendations to concerned government agencies.
137. Agricultural cooperatives. There were a total of 8,090 cooperatives in 2004

comprising 7.694 agricultural cooperatives and 376 fisheries cooperatives4. They were small
(about 30 to 200 members) and some of them deliver services related to food safety and
agricultural health, and agricultural extension, while other cooperatives provide services in
input supply and marketing to their members.
4.6 Private Sector and NGOs
138. Private Sector Companies and Individuals. Private sector companies and
individuals involved in the quality and improvement of agricultural products include
multinational export and import companies, domestic exporters and importers, food
processing companies, input suppliers, service providers, wholesalers, retailers, and
consumers. They play an important role in the promotion of exports, provision of farm inputs
(fertilizers and pesticides) to farmers, and creating demand for vegetables, fruits and tea in
the domestic and international markets. Some examples of innovative companies are
presented in the following paragraphs.
139. Bac Giang Food Export Joint Stock company has been accredited with IS0 9001 and
HACCP and process 5,000 tins on their canning line and more than 2,500 tons of frozen
products. They currently export all their products to USA, Russia, Switzerland, Germany,
Japan and China and employ more than 200 staff. The company also owns a cold storage
facility which stores frozen fruit and vegetables at a temperature as low as -20C, and has
arranged 20 contracts with farmers and cooperatives within the region.
140. HADICO (Hanoi Agricultural Development And Investment Co) is one of the first
companies to be accredited with the food safe quality mark, currently exports to South Korea
and Taiwan, and produces more than 30 vegetable products. The company owns more than
500 hectares of land, and also has 8,000 square metres of excellent greenhouse facilities.
The company is currently trying to export produce to Japan, but needs to improve the quality
of produce to comply with Japan import requirements. The company has its own brand label
and currently employs more than 1,000 employees.
4.7 Markets and Supermarkets
141. Wholesale markets such as the major market of Long Bien in Ha Noi are a critical link
in the food safety chain. Unfortunately, the sanitary conditions of these markets leave much
to be desire. Vendors are selling from open air stalls, the back of motor scooters, baskets on
the ground and any other means available to display their produce. There is no running water
for maintaining personal hygiene or for washing the produce. Only rarely is any of the
product packaged. Motor scooters and pedestrians mix freely among the displays on muddy
paths and poorly maintained asphalt pathways.
4
Statistical Yearbook of Vietnam, 2004
40
142. The situation is aggravated by a marketing system in which about 70% of fresh fruit
and vegetables is distributed by street vendors. Supermarkets (such as Metro, Big C,
Carrefour, Fivimart) distribute about 5%, but their share is increasingly considerably
particularly in large urban areas.
41
5 Key Legislation
5.1 Introduction
143. Food safety regulations became the focus of intense regulatory activities starting in
2003 with the Food Hygiene and Safety Ordinance. The preparation of access of Viet Nam to
WTO was probably the main motivating factor behind the formulation of regulations. This is
also reflected in the SEDP (Socioeconomic Development Plan 2006-2010) which states as
one of its objective: To reduce the incidence of diseases, improve the health and life
expectancy of the population by providing high quality health care services (objective 2.2.1)
and indicates the associated input/activity as follows: ensuring chemical and disease-free
food to comply with WHO requirements.
144. Viet Nam does not yet have a unified Law on Food Hygiene and Safety. The Viet
Nam Food Administration (VFA) is currently drafting this law with one of its main objectives to
introduce consistency among numerous regulations issued by different agencies involved in
food quality and safety. In the absence of a Law on Food Hygiene and Safety, there is a
plethora of decrees, decisions, directives, and circulars which make difficult for the various
actors along the value chain (from input providers to consumers) to understand the
requirements of the law. The plethora of regulations makes it difficult also for regulatory
agencies to monitor, inspect, and implement the regulations. Overlapping of functions,
weakly defined responsibilities, and weak coordination in the absence of a clearly recognized
leading agency within MARD for implementing the law are common issues that aggravate the
complexities of improving food quality and safety.
145. In the past, the Government relied on regulations related to good quality in general to
deal with food quality and safety in particular (Ordinance on Good Quality No. 18/1999/PL-
UBTVQH10 issued by the Standing Committee of the National Assembly dated 24
September 1999). In the early 2003, a series of regulations started to be issued by various
agencies, as the result of more awareness on food safety, the increasing integration with
world markets, and the preparation for entry into WTO. In the following paragraphs, a
summary of the key regulations affecting food quality and safety is presented together with a
discussion of the key issues related to each regulation.
146. The Ministry of Health is in the process of preparing a Food Law which will introduce
consistency among previous food safety regulations. The Law is expected to be prepared in
2008 and approved in 2009. Other relevant laws under preparation include the Law on Plant
Quarantine, the Law on Animal Health, and the amendment of the Law on Inspection.
147. In the following sections a review of the main regulations about food safety and
quality are presented. The review is primarily based on the regulations issues after year
2000. It focuses on the regulations affecting agricultural products, and primarily the three
commodities of interest to this project, namely fruit, vegetables, and tea.
42
Table 5 Summary of relevant Legislation related to Food Safety and Quality
# Title Issuing Body No Date
1. Ordinance on the Plant Protection National Assembly 36/2001/PL- 25 July 2001

and Quarantine Standing Committee UBTVQH10
2. Decree on the Regulation on Plant Government 58/2002/ND- 3 June 2002
Protection, the Regulation on Plant CP
Quarantine and the Regulation on
Plant Quarantine, and the
Regulation on Management of
Plant Protection Drugs
3. Decree on Plant Quarantine Government 02/2007/ND- 5 January
CP 2007
4. Ordinance on Food Hygiene and Standing Committee 12/2003/PL- 26 July 2003
Safety of the National UBTVQH11
Assembly
5. Decree on the Implementation of Government 163/2004/ND- 7 September
Ordinance on Food Hygiene and CP 2004
Safety
6. Decision on the Approval of Prime Minister 43/2006/QD- 20 February
National Action Plan on the TTg 2006
Assurance of Food Safety to 2010
7. Directive on the Implementation of Prime Minister 06/2007/CT- 28 March
Urgent Methods to Assure Food TTg 2007
Hygiene and Safety
8. Decision on Regulations on Safe MARD 43/2007/QD- 16 May 2007
Tea Production, Processing, and BNN
Certification Management
9. Decision on Safe Vegetable MARD 106/2007/QD- 28 December
Production and Trading BNN 2007
Management
10. Decision on Food Safety Ministry of Health 57/QD-BYT 9 January
2008
11. Directive on Declaring 2008 to be MARD 56/CT-BNN- 8 January
the Year of Quality and Safety KHCN 2008
12. Decision on Good Practices for the MARD 379/QĐ-BNN- 28 January
Production of Fresh Fruit and KHCN 2008
Vegetables
13. Decision on Good Practices for the MARD 1121/QĐ-BNN- 14 April 2008
Production of Tea KHCN
14. Decision on Establishing the Ministry of Fisheries 29/2008/QD- 28 January
National Agriforestry and Fisheries BTS 2008
Quality Assurance Department
(NAFIQAD)
15. Decree on Labeling of Goods Government 89/2006/ND- 30 August
CP 2006
16. Law on Standards and Technical National Assembly 68/2006/QH11 29 June 2006
Specifications
17. Decree on Detailed Government 127/2007/NĐ- 1 August
Implementation of several Articles CP 2007
of Law on Standards and
Technical Specifications
18. Decree on administrative fine in Government 26/2003/NĐ- 19 March
plant protection and quarantine CP 2003
19. Law on Inspection National Assembly 22/2004/QH11 15 June 2004
20. Decree on Organization and Government 153/2005/NĐ- 15 December
Operation of Inspection in CP 2005
Agriculture and Rural
43
# Title Issuing Body No Date
Development
21. Circular on guiding mandate MARD 73/2006/TT- 18
duties, organization and personnel BNN September
of inspection in agricultural and 2006
rural development and inspection
of agencies under MARD
22. Decree on administrative fine in Government 26/2003/NĐ- 19 March
plant protection and quarantine CP 2003
23. Criminal Code National Assembly 21 December
1999
24. Decree on stipulating systems of Government 79/2008/NĐ- 18 July 2008
food safety management, CP
inspection and testing
25. Decision on several policies to Prime Minister 107/2008/QĐ- 30 July 2008
support production, processing TTg
and consuming development of
safe vegetable, fruit and tea up to
year of 2015
26. Decision on issuing regulations on MARD 84/2008/QĐ- 28 July 2008
VietGap certification for vegetable, BNN
fruit and tea
5.2 National Assembly Standing Committee Ordinance on the Plant

Protection and Quarantine No. 36/2001/PL-UBTVQH10 of 25 July
2001
148. The principles of plant protection and quarantine are based on prevention, a
combination of short and long-term benefits to the entire society, and application of scientific
and technological advantages. The state encourages the investment and research in the
production and trading of plant protection drugs of biological origin and less toxicity. The
ordinance indicates the responsibilities of individuals and organizations involved in the
prevention and elimination of organisms harmful to plant resources. It explains the various
processes involved in Plant Quarantine and the management of plant protection drugs.
Article 30 indicates that the production, processing, bottling, packing, storage, preservation,
transportation, trading, use and destruction of protection drugs must ensure safety for human
beings, plants, livestock, and the environment. Personnel involved in production, processing,
bottling, packing, and trading of plant protection drugs must have practicing certificates.
Article 32 mentions quality standards for plant protection drugs. Article 40 stipulates rewards
for protection of plant, prevention and elimination of damaged microorganism or discovery
and prevention of law violation and stipulates penalties for violation. Article 41 indicates that
production and use of fake licenses, certificates in plant protection and quarantine will be
punished according to the law. Article 42 stipulates administrative fines and penalties
according to Criminal Code for power abuse in issuing, withdrawing of certificates or licenses
in plant protection and quarantine, and in implementation of the related regulations. The
Ordinance gives responsibility to MARD to implement the Ordinance. The Plant Protection
and Quarantine Inspectorate is a specialized inspectorate whose organization and operation
shall be stipulated by the Government.
5.3 Government Decree on the Regulation on Plant Protection, the

Regulation on Plant Quarantine and the Regulation on Plant
44
Quarantine, and the Regulation on Management of Plant Protection
Drugs No. 58/2002/ND-CP dated 3 June 2002
149. The decree provides details about the implementation of plant quarantine
organization and procedures. The decree contains sections on plant quarantine of imported
plants, exported plants, transit plants, and domestic plant, and treatment.
150. The Regulation stipulates prevention, elimination of harmful microorganism to plant

resources. The prevention and elimination of harmful microorganism should be implemented
on a regular, synchronous, timely manner, in researches, experiments, exploitation, process,
storage, business, use, import-export and other activities related to plant resources.
Responsibilities of state competent agencies on plant protection and quarantine, owner of
plant resources are specified.
151. Information flow and reporting requirement within state competent agencies
responsible for plant protection and quarantine, rights to declare and abrogate epidemics is
stipulated.
152. The state encourages organizations, individuals to provide services in plant protection
and quarantine. Criteria for the service providers, their rights and obligation in providing
services in plant protection and quarantine are clearly provided.
153. The Regulation stipulates plant quarantine in import, export, transit, domestic and
settlement of those objects which are under control of plant quarantine through fumigation for
decontamination.
154. Mandate and duties of agencies for plant quarantine and owners of objects which are
under control of plant quarantine; criteria for organizations, individuals responsible for
fumigation for decontamination, procedures for plant quarantine, coordination in plant
quarantine among responsible agencies are clearly stipulated.
155. Criteria for objects imported to, exported from Vietnam, transit, domestic, settlement
of objects through fumigation for decontamination, its procedures and criteria for
organizations and individuals when performing their duties, responsibilities of plant
quarantine agencies and object owners during transportation, storage, use of objects are
specified.
Criteria for organizations, individuals who work in fumigation for decontamination area are
clearly defined.
156. The Regulation stipulates production, outwork, bottling, packaging, import, export,
storage, preservation, transportation, business, use, registration, quarantine, experiment and
destruction of plant protection drugs in Vietnam
157. Domestic and foreign organizations, individuals who participate in production, export,
storage, preservation, transportation, business and use of plant protection drugs in Vietnam
must obey legal regulations on management of plant protection drugs in Vietnam and related
International Conventions5 of which Vietnam is a member.
5
The International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) is an international treaty organization that
works to prevent the international spread of pests and plant diseases. Among its functions are the
maintenance of lists of plant pests, tracking of pest outbreaks, and coordination of technical assistance
between member nations. The IPPC was created in 1952 by the Food and Agriculture Organization of
the United Nations. As of 2007, 163 governments, among which Viet Nam, have adopted the IPPC.
45
5.4 Government Decree on Plant Quarantine No. 02/2007/ND-CP
dated 5 January 2007
158. The decree replaces the previous regulation No. 58/2002/ND-CP, yet it covers the
same topics. The main innovation consists in explicitly mentioning (Article 5) harmonization
of phytosanitary measures with IPPC (International Plant Protection Convention), providing
sufficient information on plant protection and quarantine to importing countries in accordance
with the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS
Agreement) and coordinating with the quarantine authorities of the exporting countries. The
decree also mentions the establishment and maintaining of pest free areas according to the
related National Standard. The decree stipulates development and harmonization of
standards on Pest Free Zones and stipulates development and harmonization of standards
on Pest Free Zones.
5.5 National Assembly Standing Committee Ordinance on Food

Hygiene and Safety No.12/2003/PL-UBTVQH11 dated 26 July 2003
159. The Ordinance stipulates general conditions for establishing food safety in production,
processing, marketing, transportation, storage, import and exports. The Ordinance includes
provisions for inspection, standards, information, and communication. Incentives and
penalties for violation, preventive measures to overcome food-born diseases are also
specified. The MOH is assigned responsibility for coordination of food hygiene and safety.
160. The Ordinance does not clarify implementation arrangements. Some of these
arrangements are included in the subsequent implementation Decree. The specific
responsibilities of each ministry or agency are not clarified. No agency seems to be assigned
responsibility for regular monitoring of food hygiene and safety. Incentives for engaging in
practices for food quality and safety are given only a cursory reference in terms of
commendations.
161. Overall, the Ordinance makes an important step forward in addressing the issues of
food hygiene and safety and initiating a body of regulation. The Ordinance is short of
specifying implementation details and procedures, and addressing issues of incentives,
monitoring, and clear definition of responsibilities of state agencies.
5.6 Government Decree on the Implementation of Ordinance on

Food Hygiene and Safety No.163/2004/ND-CP dated 7 September
2004
162. The Decree clarifies more specific conditions to establish food hygiene and
standards, and the responsibilities of the key state agencies in the management of food
safety. It indicates consumers’ rights and responsibilities, the procedures to check hygiene
and safety of imported and exported products, and the procedures to establish basic
conditions for assuring safety in production and marketing of foods with high risk of
46
contamination6 (10 groups are identified). Requirements for registration, labeling, and
documentation for food products are also indicated. Specific responsibilities are assigned to
different agencies including the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural
Development, the Fisheries Ministry (currently under MARD), the Ministry of Industry, the
Ministry of Trade, the Ministry of Science and Technology, the Ministry of Culture and
Information, the Ministry of Finance, the People’s Committees at all level (central, provincial,
district, commune). In addition to indicating the responsibilities in the prevention and
overcoming of food-born diseases, the decree clarifies the monitoring and inspection
functions. With regard to monitoring, the Decree (Articles 37-40) mentions both regular and
irregular examinations to monitor observance of the law provisions on food hygiene and
safety. The Decree does not clarify the actions and penalties for violation of the law.
163. The Decree clarifies some of the articles of the Ordinance of Food Hygiene and
Safety. It does not however prescribe clear implementation rules and procedures for the
implementation of the law. For example, it does not clarify the content, frequency, and format
of monitoring. The penalties for violations of the law and the incentives for compliance and
promotion of the food hygiene and safety issues mentioned in the law left undefined.
164. It is not surprising that in spite of increasing concerns for food-borne diseases, the
recorded violations are relatively few, penalties are lenient or inexistent, and the certified
organization are still an insignificant number. Similar to the Ordinance on Food Hygiene and
Safety, the Decree on Implementation of the Ordinance on Food Hygiene and Safety is a
stepping stone in the right direction, but still far from providing a comprehensive, clear, and
feasible regulatory framework for food hygiene and safety.
5.7 Prime Minister Decision on the Approval of National Action

Plan on the Assurance of Food Safety to 2010 No 43/2006/QD-TTg
dated 20 February 2006
165. The action plan establishes targets for awareness and capacity related to food
hygiene and health, the establishment of a management system based on HACCP, the
establishment of the programme of risk analysis and food contamination management, and
unified food contamination control system. Some of the targets seem ambitious, for example
the 100% target of food premises in high risk foods (presumably the foods in the 10 groups
specified in Decree 163/2004/ND-CP). The Action Plan indicates that by 2007 the national
analysis division and the regional divisions on food safety meet the requirement for Good
Laboratory Practices (GLP), ISO/IEC 17025. The responsibility for implementation of the
action plan is assigned to key ministries, provincial and municipal peoples’ committee. In
addition to the list of ministries indicated in the Decree 163/2004/ND-CP there is the addition
of Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment with the responsibility to coordinate waste
control causing environment pollution and food safety contamination.
6
These foods include 10 groups: (i) meat and meat products, (ii) milk and milk products, (iii) eggs and
products processed from egg, (iv) fresh and raw and processed aquatic products; (v) ice creams and
icy water of all kinds, and mineral water; (vi) functional food; food complemented with micronutrients,
supplementary food, food additives; (vii) processed food and drinks for instant consumption; (viii)
frozen food; (ix) soya milk and products processed with soya; and (x) assorted fresh and raw
vegetables, tubers and fruits for instant consumption.
47
5.8 Prime Minister Directive on the Implementation of Urgent
Methods to Assure Food Hygiene and Safety No 06/2007/CT-TTg
dated 28 March 2007
166. This directive is a crucial turning point in the development of food safety
regulations. The Directive recognizes that food safety is an urgent matter. It clearly mentions
several problems that are occurring in Viet Nam which are not adequately addressed by the
current regulations or implementation system. These issues include:
• Toxic chemicals contamination of vegetables and fruits
• Meat and fishery products containing antibiotic and hormone residues
• Non-compliant use of chemicals and additives in food processing and storage
• Un-controlled food and food service in markets, trading, schools, restaurants,
tourist areas
• Food poisoning in canteens and industrial zones
• Fake, sub-standard, and illegal imported foods
• Violations not being timely and strictly addressed
167. The indicated reasons for the current situation are low awareness; sub-standard
production practices; incomplete organization and management system; limited capacity; and
inadequate attention to food safety issues paid by authorities at all levels. To remedy these
weaknesses, the Prime Ministry directs ministries and all agencies to intensify information,
education and communication (IEC); to strengthen capacity in food hygiene and safety
management, inspection and testing; to implement regulations strictly; to tighten the
inspection and supervision of breaches making a provision of dismissing leaders in worst
cases of food safety violations occurring under their jurisdiction; and to increase investment
budgets, human resources, and equipment.
168. The Directive indicates several areas for intervention including:

• Establishing safe areas for agroprocessing
• Establishing annual action plans
• Strengthening and enhancing intersectional steering committees for food hygiene
and safety from provinces and hamlet levels.
169. A large number of Ministries are mentioned and responsibilities for each agency are
indicated. The overall coordination is still assigned to the Ministry of Health, but other
ministries are also indicated: MARD, MOI, MOT, MOST, Ministry of Defence and Ministry of
Police, Ministry of Culture-Information, Ministry of Interior, MOF, MPI, MET.
170. Some important new aspects mentioned in this Directive are:
• Implement Risk Analysis7

• Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP), Good Hygiene Practices (GHP), and Hazard
Analysis Critical Control Point8 (HACCP)
• Organization and strengthening capacity of laboratories
• Establish a comprehensive system of Viet Nam Standards (TCVN)
• Develop a project on management, inspections, testing system of food hygiene and
safety (under the Ministry of Interior)
• Establish infrastructure and technical system for food hygiene and safety assurance
(under the MPI)
7
For more information on Risk Analysis see Annex 9.5.
8
For more information on HACCP see Annex 9.7
48
• Periodic reports (annually and every 6 months) on the effective implementation of this
directive (the MOH to report to the PM)
5.9 MARD Decision on Regulations on Safe Tea Production,

Processing, and Business Management No. 43/2007/QD-BNN dated
16 May 2007
171. This is the first comprehensive and detailed regulation related to one commodity (tea)
for safe production, processing, and business. It provides clear instructions related to the
conditions for production and processing of safe tea, covering human resources, soil,
fertilizer, irrigation water, cultivation techniques, pest control, processing and storage,
certification, packaging and labeling, and types of production and processing units.
172. Certification of conditions for production and processing of safe tea are issued for a
period of three years after an application is submitted and approved by DARD. Accreditation
of certifying bodies is carried out by the Department of Crop Production and the certifying
body is supervised twice per year on the basis of unannounced visits by the DCP. Tea
batches are certified as safe tea by Certifying Bodies. After submitting an application for safe
tea, the Certifying Body makes the necessary testing and issue safe tea certificates if the
requirements are satisfied. The certificate of safe tea is valid only for the tested batch.
173. Different departments and centers are assigned responsibilities. The top agency in
charge of state management of safe tea is the Department of Crop Production. Some of the
specific responsibilities include accreditation of Safe Tea Certifying Bodies, inspection of
production of safe tea, conduct training workshops on safe tea production and certification
nationwide. Other agencies involved include:
• National Fisheries and Forestry Quality Administration Director (NAFIQAD)
• Plant Protection Department (PPD)
• Science and Technology Department
• Planning Department
• National Extension Center (NAFEC)
• International Cooperation Department
174. The Decision includes Vietnamese Standards for permitted residue limit for some
heavy metals in soil (TCVN 7209:2000), permitted residue limit for pesticides in soil (TCVN
5941:1995), permitted residue limit for some chemicals in irrigation water (TCVN 6773:2000),
permitted heavy metal content in tea (according to decision No. 867/1998/QD-BYT dated 4
April 1998).
175. It also contains application forms for a certificate of conditions for production of safe
tea, for conditions for processing safe tea, and for being accredited as a certifying body.
176. The Decision is a good example of the way to implement the establishment of a
system for safe food in Viet Nam. It is based on a clear understanding of various steps
involved in the safety assurance system and envisages a management system that could
help farmers, processors, and traders to improve the safety of tea produced, processed, and
distributed in Viet Nam and exported.
177. Some aspects of the Decision could be improved such as the requirement of safe tea
certification based on a period of 20 days per batch. It is not clear why a certified body
should also certify each individual batch that it produces. It seems that a certified body
should be already be able to produce certified tea.
49
178. Also, there are perhaps too many agencies involved: for example several of the
functions currently under NAFIQAD, PPD, and NAFEC could be streamlined and put under
one agency only. The presence of too many institutions implies difficulties in coordination
and sometimes not clear boundaries of responsibilities.
179. The inspection and monitoring system for safe tea are not clearly detailed. More
importantly, it is not clear what are the incentives and penalties for farmers, processors, and
traders to adhere to safe tea requirements. Given that food safety is a relatively new issue in
Viet Nam, it might be useful to give more thought to the system of incentives. As it is now,
the Decision seems to put a heavy emphasis on standards and requirements (as it should),
but little on incentives.
180. Finally, there is no mention about the capacity of the agencies involved in
accreditation (namely the DCP), extension (NAFEQ), and quality assurance (NAFIQAD).
Planning for continuous capacity strengthening of these agencies is needed if the overall
management system aims to improve its performance.
5.10 MARD Decision on Safe Vegetable Production and Trading

Management No 106/2007/QD-BNN dated 28 December 2007
181. This regulation on the production and trading of safe vegetables is similar to the
Decision No. 43/2007/QD-BNN on safe tea. The regulation covers all vegetables including
leafy vegetables, stem, root, flower, fruit and seed types, seedlings, and food fungus. “Safe”
means vegetables which are produced, harvested, and processed according to Good
Agricultural Practices (GAP). GAP are developed and approved by MARD and competent
authorities at the provincial and centrally-controlled cities.
182. Condition for safe vegetable production and handling (Article 3) clarifies the human
resources, the soils, irrigation water, and GAP promulgated by MARD. Permitted limit for
heavy metal in soils are specified in Appendix 1 of the regulation and soil sampling should
follow the Standard No 10TCN 367:1999; irrigation water is regulated by permitted limits for
toxic chemicals (specified in Appendix 2) of the regulation and water sampling standard
TCVN 6000:1995 and well and underground water should follow the Standard No TCVN
5996:1995. Handling should be conducted in safe facilities, equipment, and tools specified by
GAP. Workers should not have contagious diseases (but it is not specified how this could be
monitored).
183. The process of certification including the conditions for applying and approval are
specified in Article 4 and related appendices. The Department of Crop Production at MARD
is the accreditation body (Article 5). An accreditation decision remains valid for a period of 3
years. Certificate of GAP safe vegetables production remain valid for one year. Monitoring of
certified organization will occur based on regular and announced visits during the period in
which the certificate of safe production is given. Regulations about trading of safe vegetables
specify the safety of packaging, labeling, and transportation means (Article 10).
184. Supervising and handling of violations are discussed in Article 11. Organizations
found non-compliant are given the opportunities to improve their processes; after three
consecutive violations their certificates can be suspended. Administrative fines are also
envisaged, but the regulation remains a little vague as to how this will be operationalized.
50
185. The key agencies within MARD responsible to ensure safe vegetables production
include the DCP, the DPP, DST, the National Extension Center; the DARD at the provincial
and city level are responsible for mapping safe production areas and investment projects to
develop safe vegetable production and trading.
186. Some of the comments made on Decision No. 43/2007/QD-BNN on safe tea could be
repeated here, such as the need of improving the monitoring and inspection functions, the
need for introducing incentives, and the need of capacity building of the state agencies
involved in safe vegetable production and trading.
187. Additional improvements of the regulation could be:

• Incorporation of regulations related to processing of vegetables
• Inclusion of various products such as essential oils and spices
5.11 Ministry of Health Decision on Food Safety9 No. 57/QD-BYT

dated 9 January 2008
188. The Decision of the Ministry of Health has been issued at the request of the Director
General of Viet Nam Food Administration and makes reference to the Resolution of
Government No. 16/2007/NQ-CP dated 27 February 2007 on the Action Plan for Food
Safety, and the resolution of the 4th Conference of the 10th Session of the Executive Central
Party Committee on WTO. The objective of the Decision is to implement the commitments
with WTO related to food safety and also to complete the development of the legal
framework for food safety, including the formulation of a Food Safety Law.
189. Some of the key features of the Decision include:
• The Food Safety Law should be prepared in 2008 and approved in 2009.
• Food hygiene and safety standards, and technical regulations meeting

international regulations, implementation of TBT agreement and SPS
agreement should be completed by 2012.
• Training and capacity building of all relevant government staff involved in food
safety.
• Preparation of a website at the Viet Nam Food Administration both in

Vietnamese and English to promote transparency in the legislative documents
on food hygiene and safety.
• Developing management system on food hygiene and safety from the central
to the local levels.
9
The full title is: Decision on the issuance of Ministry of Health’s Action Plan on food safety and
hygiene to implement the Resolution of Government No. 167/2007/NQ-CP dated 27 February 2008 on
the issuance of Government Action Plan in the implementation of the Resolution of the 4th Conference
of the 10th session Executive Central Party Committee in some important guidelines and policies to
make a rapidly developed and stable economy when Viet Nam is a member of the World Trade
Organization (WTO).
51
190. The Decision provides clarity about the specific tasks to implement the Action
Programme of the Ministry of Health on Food Safety for the period 2008-2012.
191. Less clear in the decision is how coordination with other relevant ministries, for
example MARD will actually occur.
5.12 MARD Directive on Declaring 2008 to be the Year of Quality and

Safety10 No 56/CT-BNN-KHCN dated 8 January 2008
192. The Directive of MARD declares 2008 the Year of Quality and Safety for agricultural
products and gives instructions to various agencies within MARD to promote awareness and
actions in order to implement the regulations of the Government pertaining to food safety.
5.13 MARD Decision on Good Practices for the Production of Fresh

Fruit and Vegetables No. 379/QĐ-BNN-KHCN dated 28 January 2008
193. The attachment to this decision is the first VIETGAP document produced by MARD
and it provides procedures for the production of safe vegetables and fruit. The VIETGAP
procedures are based on ASEAN GAP, EUREPGAP/GLOBALCAP, and FRESHCARE.
Application of these procedures help preventing and reducing risks that have a negative
impact on the quality and safety of fresh vegetables and fruit, the environment, and human
health. The Department of Crop Production is the lead body in drafting the procedures.
VIETGAP can be used by domestic and foreign organizations and individuals who wish to
participate in production, business, testing, and certification for safe vegetables and fruit
products in Viet Nam. VIETGAP for other products is not yet available.
5.14 MARD Decision on Good Practices for the Production of Tea

No. 1121/QĐ-BNN-KHCN dated 14 April 200811
194. The scope of the decision is to encourage Vietnamese Good Agricultural Practices in
fresh tender tea leaves in order to prevent and minimize the risks of hazards which occur
during the production, harvesting and post harvest handling. The hazards covered in
VietGAP include food safety, produce quality, environmental impacts and health, safety and
welfare of workers. As in the case of fruit and vegetables, VIETGAP is based on ASEAN
GAP, EUREPGAP/GLOBALCAP, and FRESHCARE. The decision provides clear guidelines
and rules about site selection for production tea, use of planting material, soils, chemicals,
fertilizers, water, harvesting, preservation, and storage, waste management and treatment,
workers’ welfare, records keeping allowing traceability, auditing and complaints, Forms for
checklist and record keepings are provided in the regulation.
10
The full title is Directive on Declaring 2008 to be the Year of Quality and Safety of agricultural,
forestry products, agricultural production materials and foodstuffs for the sake of production,
consumption, and export promotion.
11
This section will be completed after the translation of the regulation into English.
52
5.15 Ministry of Fisheries Decision on Establishing the National
Agriforestry and Fisheries Quality Assurance Department
(NAFIQAD) No. 29/2008/QD-BTS dated 28 January 2008
195. This regulation seems to give to NAFIQAD the leading role in formulating policies,
strategies and actions plans for food and agricultural products quality and safety within
MARD; supervise implementation plans; summarize monitoring reports; disseminate
standards; certification of food quality and safety for agricultural products, fishery products,
and animal products; examination and testing; and building the network of laboratories.
196. The idea of having one Department taking the lead on food quality and safety is a
most welcome one. However, the responsibilities of NAFIQAD seem to overlap to a large
extent with similar responsibilities of other departments of MARD. The Decision does not
seem to clarify the relation between NAFIQAD and other MARD departments and the issue
of overlapping responsibilities.
5.16 Government Decree on Labeling of Goods No. 89/2006/ND-CP

dated 30 August 2006
197. The decree provides detailed regulation on labeling of goods. It indicates the good
that require labels and those that do not require labels. Among the latter are raw and fresh
foodstuffs, unpacked processed foodstuffs for sale directly to consumers. This implies that
most fruit, vegetables, and tea sold in Viet Nam do not require labeling. Labels on foodstuffs,
food additives requires information written in Vienamese on quantity, date of manufacture,
expiry date, ingredients quantities, hygiene and safety information, warnings, instruction on
use and preservation. The responsibility for good labels is the Ministry of Science and
Technology and STAMEQ provides technical support to MOST. Penalties for violations are
also stipulated.
5.17 Law on Standards and Technical Specifications No.

68/2006/QH11 dated 29 June 2006
198. This law stipulates development, declaration and application of standards and
technical specification; assess the compliance of standards and technical specifications. The
law applies to Vietnamese and foreign organizations, individuals and oversea Vietnamese
who are involved in standards and technical specifications operations in Vietnam.
199. The system of standards and technical specifications in Vietnam consists of: National
standards (TCVN) and local standards (TCCS). National standards developed by ministries,
agencies in the government system and approved and declared by Ministry of Science &
Technology. Local standards are developed and declared by heads of organizations and
applied for operation of their organizations. Local standards are in conformity with related
technical specifications and legal regulations.
200. The system of technical specifications in Vietnam consists of national specifications

(QCVN) and local specifications (QCĐP). Technical specifications are developed and issued
by ministries and ministerial agencies. Ministry of Science & Technology verifies the
technical specifications submitted by ministries and ministerial agencies. QCĐP are
developed and issued by Provincial People’s Committees. QCĐP are applied to products,
goods and services in a province area.
53
201. Assessment of compliance with standards and technical specifications, certification of
compliance with standards and technical specifications, criteria for certifying bodies, rights
and obligations of certification bodies, and of those certified are also stipulated.
Responsibilities of organizations, individuals, operating in the area as well as inspection and
penalty for violation are indicated.
5.18 Government Decree on Detailed Implementation of several

Articles of Law on Standards and Technical Specifications No.
127/2007/NĐ-CP dated 1 August 2007
202. The decree stipulates the change of Vietnamese and sectorial standards into national
standards as well as Vietnamese and sectoral standards into national technical specification
which are compulsory for implementation. The decree assigns responsibility to various
ministries to identify a list of those standards and specifications which require adjustment and
those that do not require adjustment, and indicates the needed amendments when change
into national standards and national technical specifications or canceling occurs.
203. Responsibility of various ministries in development and issuance of technical

specifications is included in the decree. MARD is responsible for development and issuance
of technical specifications in production, processing, harvesting, storage, transportation of
agro-forest products, animal slaughtering, variety selection, agricultural materials, animal
health, plant quarantine, and provision of services in agricultural products.
5.19 Government Decree on administrative fine in plant protection

and quarantine No. 26/2003/NĐ-CP dated 19 March 2003
204. The Decree stipulates administrative fines for organizations, individuals who
purposefully or carelessly violate regulations on plant protection and quarantine, aggravating
and extenuating circumstances of violation, types and levels of fines in plant protection and
quarantine and plant protection medicine management. Jurisdiction of specialized inspectors
and chief inspectors in department and sub-department for plant protection as well as roles
of presidents of People’s Committees of all level in administrative fines are specified (Article
19)
205. However, the ensuing 2004 Law on Inspection (see next section) does not stipulate
title and responsibilities of Chief Inspectors at department and sub-department levels. As a
result the implementation of the Article 19 was suspended and has generated a higher
number of violation cases in this area. In the Letter No. 2970/TTr-BNN-BVTV to Prime
Minister on settlement of difficulties faced by inspection in plant protection and quarantine,
dated 26/10/2007, MARD has requested Office of the Government to allow it to continue
implementing Article 19 of Decree No. 26/2003/NĐ-CP on jurisdiction of chief inspectors at
department and sub-department levels in plant protection and quarantine to provide
administrative fines (Article 19).
5.20 Law on Inspection No. 22/2004/QH11 dated 15 June 2004
206. The Law stipulates structure of inspection which is organized according to

administrative level (Government Inspectorate, Province Inspectorate and District
54
Inspectorate) and by sectors (Agriculture, Industry, Health, etc). The law does not contain
any provision for the establishment of inspections at department and sub-department levels.
5.21 Government Decree on Organization and Operation of

Inspection in Agriculture and Rural Development No. 153/2005/NĐ-
CP dated 15 December 2005
207. The decree stipulates the establishment of inspection at department and sub-
department levels under management of ministerial inspectorate (Article 4). This seems to be
inconsistent with the Law on Inspection of 2004. However, it has satisfied a need of setting
up a specialized inspection system to cover technical issues. The decree appears to be a
move in empowering the role of specialized inspection. Technical departments and sub-
departments at central and provincial levels such as the department for plant protection (and
sub-departments for plant protection), department for animal health (and sub-departments for
animal health) have their own inspection. At the same time, the shortage of specialized
inspectors and quality of inspection has been reduced.
5.22 MARD Circular on guiding mandate duties, organization and

personnel of inspection in agricultural and rural development and
inspection of agencies under MARD No. 73/2006/TT-BNN dated 18
September 2006
208. The Circular stipulates organization and operation of inspection in plant protection
and quarantine at sub-department level (province level). The Circular empowers roles and
mandate of inspection system in animal health and plant protection at local level, as a whole
and roles and jurisdiction of Chief Inspectors in animal health and plant protection at local
level, in particular.
5.23 Government Decree on administrative fine in plant protection

and quarantine No. 26/2003/NĐ-CP dated 19 March 2003
209. The decree stipulates the right of Chief Inspectors of Department and Sub-
Department levels to give administrative fines. The power of giving fines is however limited.
For example, administrative fines over 200,000 VND (about USD 32) need to be sent to
Chief Inspector of province level or Chief Inspector (ministerial level) for decision on the
amount of the fine. This is time consuming and more important during this period the
products that are involved in the fine may be lost and cannot be confiscated.
5.24 Criminal Code
210. Articles 157 and 244 of the Criminal Code stipulate crimes for false products such as
food, foodstuff, medicines and crimes against violations against hygiene and food safety
regulations. The punishment is strong including imprisonment. Production and trading of fake
foods, foodstuffs, treatment and prevention medicines are considered as crimes and can
lead to prison terms from 2 to 7 years. Prison punishment of up 20 years for more serious
crimes is also indicated by the law. Violations of food safety regulations can be punished with
imprisonnement of between 1 and 10 years depending on the gravity of the consequence for
55
consumers. Violation of the law is also punished with fines ranging from 5 to 50 million VND
(this is not particularly high fine), and include a suspension of operations from 1 to 5 years.
5.25 Government Decree No. 79/2008/NĐ-CP dated 18 July 2008

stipulating systems of food safety management, inspection and
testing
211. The objective of the decree is to describe the system for management, inspection and
testing for food safety from central to local level. It clarifies the functions and responsibilities
related to food safety of various ministries, departments, and government bodies including
the Provincial, District, and Commune People Committee. NAFIQAD is clearly indicated as
the key department of MARD to assit the Minister of Agriculture in state management, law
management, law implementation, and inspection within the cope of state management for
MARD.
5.26 Prime Minister Decision No. 107/2008/QĐ-TTg dated 30 July

2008 on several policies to support production, processing and
consuming development of safe vegetable, fruit and tea up to year
of 2015
212. The decision states that by 2010, at least 20% of the area of vegetable production,
20% of the area for fruit production, 25% of the area for tea production should meet safe
production requirements according to VIETGAP. By the same year, at least 30% of total
vegetables and fruit products and 40% of total tea products which are consumed
domestically or used as inputs for processing and export should be products which are
certified and declared as produced and processed based on VIETGAP and HACCP
principles and procedures. By 2015, these objectives should be fully achieved (100%).
213. According to the decision, state and local budgets should be invested to facilitate the
achievement of these plans. The targets appear quite ambitious and it is not clear what the
budget implications of these plans are.
5.27 MARD Decision No. 84/2008/QĐ-BNN, dated 28 July 2008, on

issuing regulations on VietGap certification for vegetable, fruit and
tea
214. The decision indicates clearly that the VietGap certification fee should be agreed
between requesters and certifying bodies. The decision stipulates checks and monitoring of
producers and certifying bodies and indicates penalties for violation. Duties and
responsibilities of producers and certifying bodies are described, however, the penalty
framework requires further clarification.
215. The Department for Crop Production (DCP) is re-confirmed as VietGap Accreditation
Body to assess, monitor, check, train and settle related disputes. DCP has the right to issue,
maintain, warn or withdraw accreditation decision to certifying bodies; however, further
clarifications on penalty violation need to be implemented.
56
216. NAFIQAD cooperates with DCP in accreditation, monitoring operation, checking and
certifying VietGap which are implemented by certifyed bodies. NAFIQAD participates in
training provision on VietGap check, certification to Certifying Bodies and Producers.
5.28 Summary
217. Since the early 2000s, there has been an intense regulatory activity related to food
safety and quality in Viet Nam. The defining moment was the issue of the National Assembly
Standing Committee Ordinance of Food Hygiene and Safety in 2003 (see section 5.5), which
was followed by several decrees and directives, and the approval of the National Action Plan
for Food Safety in 2006. Laws on Standards, Good Labels, and Inspection were produced.
Revision and amendment on Law on Inspection, and new Laws on Plant Protection, and on
Food Safety are currently under preparation.
218. At the same time, regulations on good agricultural practices were issued. VIETGAP
for fruits, vegetables and tea were issued during the first 4 months of 2008. The VIETGAP
regulations are based on ASEAN GAP and GLOBALGAP; they provide indications of good
practices at the production and postproduction level for three commodity groups and
establish regulations for the accreditation and certification processes.
219. There is still considerable work to be done on establishing a comprehensive

regulatory framework for food safety. This additional work is planned to occur over the 5-year
period 2008-2012 of the Action Plan.
220. In terms of the current Project, the most important tasks to establish a comprehensive
regulatory framework for food quality and safety are the following:
1. Complete preparation of Food Safety Law, Plant Protection Law, Animal Health Law
and amendment to Inspection Law
2. Issue regulations about Monitoring System at MARD and other agencies
3. Issue regulations about Information and Communication Systems at MARD and other
agencies
4. Clarify the leading agency at MARD responsible for coordination of food safety and
quality
5. Issue standards for specific products within the commodity groups vegetables, fruit,
and tea
6. Establish an action plan for capacity strengthening of MARD and DARD agencies at
central and local level involved in food safety and quality
7. Develop standards consistent with the National Standards (TCVN) and within the
framework of the Agreements of TBT and SPS
8. Issue regulations related to planning and certification of Safe Agricultural Zones
9. Clarify roles and responsibilities for food safety monitoring and inspection of the farm
to market segments of the value chain (grading, packaging, handling, transporting,
marketing, storing)
10. Issue policies on incentives for adoption of good practices
57
6 Key Issues
6.1 Introduction
221. Consistently with the approach and methodology described in Chapter 3 and with
reference to the review of regulations in Chapter 5, this chapter analyzes the key issues
related to improving food safety and quality in Viet Nam. Various sections describe the
current situation and the key issues for the following dimensions of the food quality and
safety system:
1. Standards
2. Practices
3. Certification
4. Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones
5. Labs
6. Inspection
7. Monitoring
8. Information
9. Education
10. Extension
11. Communication
12. Strategies, Policies, and Regulations
13. Capacity
6.2 Standards
6.2.1 Current Situation in Standards
222. The national organization for establishing standards is STAMEQ under MOST. The
law regulating standards is the Law on Standards and Technical Specifications No.
68/2006/QH11. Currently there are almost 700 standards (according to the Catalog of
Standards 2008 published by STAMEQ) directly related to food and agricultural products and
about 260 standards related to soils, quality, and industrial waste water quality, among which
94 standards for fruit and vegetables and 28 for tea (see Annex 9.8). The standards related
to safe production of vegetables and tea have been developed by MARD (standards on
chemical maximum level permitted, soils, water are specified in Annex 9.10).
223. Standards for production, processing, and trading of food and agricultural products
are now established as National Standards (TCVN). Previous sectoral standards (TCN) will
be faded over the period 2008-2010 or become part of the TCVN standards system.
According to the law, in addition to national standards, there are also local standard (TCCS)
which are developed and declared by heads of organizations and applied for operation of
their organizations.
224. In addition to standards there are technical regulations at the national level (QCVN)
developed by ministries and ministerial agencies. Ministry of Science & Technology verifies
the technical regulations submitted by ministries, ministerial agencies. The local technical
58
regulations (QCDP) are developed and issued by Provincial People’s Committees and are
applied for products, goods and services in a province area.
225. While it is the intention of the Government to conform to international standards in the
longer term, the current state of hygiene in Vietnam prevents this from being achieved. The
adoption of international standards might be achievable in the future but of greater immediate
importance is the enforcement or compliance with the existing standards - even the current
levels.
226. It is estimated that about 48% of Vietnam’s food and agricultural standards is
harmonized with Codex standards (as of May 2008, source STAMEQ). Updating and
harmonization of legislation is still ongoing. STAMEQ is currently undertaking an inventory of
all Vietnamese food standards and their comparison with Codex standards (see list of
CODEX standards in Annex 9.8).
227. The objective is to harmonize 50% of all standards in Viet Nam with international
ones by 2010. Currently, for the country as a whole, only about 30% of standards are
harmonized. Agriculture fares a little better than the average of all sectors in the process of
harmonization (having already harmonized 48% of the standards).
6.2.2 Issues in Standards
1. Viet Nam has already a large body of standards and technical specifications
established in the past by various organizations. These standards and technical
specifications need however to be reviewed and made available under one
organization (STAMEQ) both in Vietnamese and English language. Information about
the progress of consolidation and development of standards and technical
specifications should be available and easily accessible to the public. The published
Catalogue of Standards is a great help to Viet Nam. A similar publication and website
both in Vietnamese and English would help to make the standards available to an
international audience.
2. Several standards need to be developed. All the 10 critical foods (specified in Decree
No.163/2004/ND-CP, see footnote 6) should have standards in place. Additional
standards for other foods of large consumption such as peanuts and cashews,
essential oils, medicinal plants, herbs need to be developed as TCVN. Standards for
organic food need to be developed.
3. The gap between Vietnamese standards and international standards need to be

assessed systematically and a recommended set of actions to bridge the gap, when
this is considered necessary. If conformity is not possible or if Vietnamese standards
are established which are new or different from international standards, a clear
documentation should be produced.
4. Standards and technical specifications need to be communicated to all relevant

organizations and made available over Internet for easy access. Currently, the
website of STAMEQ is not updated. MARD does not have an Internet site which
contains all the standards and technical regulations issued in the past.
5. The establishment of a standard should also be accompanied by an evaluation of the

process to adopt the standards, the constraints in adoption, the rationale of the
standard, the inspection procedures, and the monitoring of compliance with the
standard. To establish a standard that most people cannot reasonably meet is a
59
recipe for making the standard irrelevant. The process of establishing standards is
well documented by STAMEQ and follows the principles of the Agreement on TBT.
Table 6 SWOT Analysis of Standards

Weaknesses Strengths
• Consolidation of all the standards and • Clear regulations about the action plan and
technical specifications into national responsibility for establishing a well
standards (TCVN) and national technical functioning standards and technical
specifications (QCVN) is not yet completed. specifications system
• Limited access to available standards and • Adherence of Viet Nam to the principles of
technical requirements TBT
• Harmonization of national standards with • Availability of technical expertise in Viet Nam
international standards not yet complete
• Standards are usually not available in English
thus limiting the access of foreign investors
• Limited research on standards
Opportunities Threats
• Assistance from WTO and FAO for • Establishing a comprehensive system of

harmonization of standards consistent with standards without accompanying measures
Codex, SPS and TBT agreements such as practices, certification, inspection,
• Training and information available with CAC monitoring, and regulations will not result in
on all international standards related to food an effective system.
and agriculture, with easy access over the
Internet
6.3 Good Practices
6.3.1 Current Situation in Good Practices
228. Viet Nam has developed good agricultural practices called VIETGAP for fresh
vegetables and fruit (see Decision No. 379/QĐ-BNN-KHCN) and tea. The relevant decisions
have been reviewed in sections 5.9, 5.10, and 5.13, 5.14. VIETGAP regulations for additional
commodities have not been issued yet. Based on conversation with DCP, the development
of additional VIETGAP will be halted for some time. Priority is being currently given to
VIETGAP for fruits, vegetables and tea partly because these are items of large consumption
with food safety issues, and partly because the implementation of the existing VIETGAP will
require some adjustment period.
229. The present VIETGAP is closely inspired by similar procedures for ASEANGAP,
EUREPGAP/GLOBALGAP, and FRESHCARE. There are organizations who are already
certified for EUREPGAP, such as Ham Minh Dragon Fruit Cooperatives located in Binh
Thuan Province.
230. Given the novelty of VIETGAP (just recently produced) it will take some time to
ensure that a large number of farmers and organization comply with these good practices or
other practices consistent with international standards.
60
6.3.2 Issues in Good Practices
1. The adoption of VIETGAP will require several activities including testing of VIETGAP,
setting up of demonstration sites, development of manuals, training course
development, and dissemination.
2. The dissemination of VIETGAP will require considerable effort to enable a larger

number of farmers to adopt them. Perhaps different levels of compliance with
VIETGAP requirements need to be developed; the levels could be Basic,
Intermediate, and Advanced.
3. Cost and benefit analysis of VIETGAP needs to be conducted through research

studies so as to evaluate VIETGAP promotion programs and facilitate the work of
extension workers in disseminating the new practices to farmers and enterprises.
4. New VIETGAPs have to be developed, giving priority to the 10 critical food items
mentioned in the Decree No. 163/2004/ND-CP (see section 5.6)
5. Models and demonstrations of VIETGAP involving farmer organizations (groups,

cooperatives) and enterprises need to be piloted.
6. Alternative dissemination mechanisms should be considered in addition to the usual

extension mechanisms (training, demonstrations, farmer field schools, etc) and
include formation of producer marketing groups, television and radio programs,
leaflets, workshops, and field visits to pilot projects. A web site with a blog on
VIETGAP and interaction with users of VIETGAP could be established and managed
by DCP, ICARD, or other relevant organization.
7. Research on VIETGAP and monitoring of VIETGAP should be planned.
8. Incentives for the adoption of VIETGAP should be established. As of now, it is not

clear which farmers and enterprises will benefit from the adoption of VIETGAP. It is
likely that farmers and enterprises engaged in international trade will comply with
VIETGAP and even more advanced procedures (eg some Dragon Fruit producers in
the South are already EUREPGAP certified). However, adoption of VIETGAP for
domestic markets might be more problematic, particularly if the VIETGAP are
perceived as procedures increasing the cost of production without a corresponding
increase in the price paid by consumers.
9. The growth of supermarkets in Viet Nam is an opportunity for establishing safer

production, handling, and distribution of food products and supermarkets are already
engaging in VIETGAP-like procedures. It is likely that supermarkets and enterprises
engaged in exporting food products will be the earliest adopters of VIETGAP.
10. Constraints to the adoption of VIETGAP by smallholder farmers and SME need to be
assessed. Some of the constraints go beyond the control of the individual farmers
and might have to do with zone planning (see section 6.5).
11. In addition to GAP, there are additional good practices in manufacturing (GMP),
handling and hygiene (GHP). Some companies are already adopting these practices,
but their number is still limited. It is not clear if VIETGMP or VIETGHP will be
developed and by whom.
61
Table 7 SWOT Analysis of Practices
• Most farmers are not aware of any type of • The adoption of GAP allows to strengthen the
GAP food safety system, by controlling hazards at
• Adoption of GAP could be perceived as not the production and postproduction level.
cost effective by smallholders and
unorganized farmers • Some organizations are already using
• Few GAPs produced so far VIETGAP and EUREPGAP
• Early period of establishment of VIETGAP;
considerable work remains to be done in • Most farmers in Viet Nam have a basic
testing, disseminating, demonstrating, education to learn about good practices and
monitoring, and research. are ready to make innovations if the expected
• Weak linkages between farmer organizations, benefits justify the effort
enterprises, and markets make more difficult
the adoption of GAP
• Poor infrastructure (water, storage, cold
chain, grading facilities) make more difficult
the adoption of good practices
• Strong commitment of GOV to an improved • High food prices might put more focus on
food safety system volumes and yields than on quality and safety
• Improved health through lower number of • Certification, inspection, and monitoring of
foodborne diseases good practices is not effective thus lowering
• Greater access to international markets the incentives of consumers to pay a higher
• Growth of supermarkets will facilitate prices for safe food.
adoption of good practices.
6.4 Certification
6.4.1 Current Situation in Certification
231. A certification system consists of both standardization of specifications and conformity

assessment by a certification body. Certification bodies are accredited by agencies which are
authorized by the Government or recognized for their expertise by the industry.
232. In the case of fruits and vegetables, there are already standardized practices
(VIETGAP for fruits, vegetables, and tea) developed by the Government through Decisions
No 379/2008/QD-BNN-KHCN No. 1121/2008/QD-BNN-KHCN.
233. Safe vegetables or safe tea is interpreted as produced, harvested, and appropriately
processed according to VIETGAP. The VIETGAP certification of an organization is obtained
from a certification body which must be accredited by DCP (the only accreditation agency for
VIETGAP) to operate over the national territory; it could be also be certified at the provincial
level by a certification body accredited by the local DARD.
62
234. As of May 2008, there are only 5 certified organizations in VIETGAP for safe
vegetables located in Hanoi, 2 organizations will be certified in HCMC and one will be
certified in Dalat (accredited by DARD). The certification follows procedures explained in the
related regulations; certification must be renewed after a period of 3 years. Currently,
accreditation is obtained free of charge, whereas certification of “safe” vegetable, fruit, and
tea must pay the certification bodies.
235. Apart from the VIETGAP certification bodies, Vietnam has nineteen other certification
bodies, all of which are foreign with the exception of QUACERT. QUACERT is accredited by
JAS-ANZ (Australia and New Zealand Joint accreditation system) to provide certification for
HACCP and ISO 9000 and 14000. In the ISO 9000 certification market, Quacert has 34
percent market share, Bureau Veritas Quality International (BVQI, UK) has 31 percent, Det
Norske Veritas (DNV, Norway) has 14 percent, SGS has 7 percent and QMS Certification
Services (Australia) and AFAQ (France) each have 4 percent. QUACERT is planning to
become a GAP Certifying Body.
236. Currently, some farmers in Viet Nam are EUREPGAP certified. The project on
Dragon Fruit in Binh Thuan and Tien Giang, funded by USAID and AUSAID and
implemented by Southern Fruit Research Institute (SOFRI) uses EUREPGAP standards for
monitoring production of dragon fruit. Currently USAID in the process of introducing
EUREPGAP for durian.
6.4.2 Issues in Certification
1. Capacity of the accreditation organizations (DCP and DARDs) is still weak. Most of
the officials involved in accreditation do not have a sufficient background in food
safety and accreditation and certification procedures. This is even more the case at
the provincial level.
2. As the number of organization requiring certification increases, the demand for

accreditation will grow. The current capacity (both in terms of number and skills of
staff) will have to increase over time.
3. Accreditation is currently obtained free of cost. This situation might also need to
change over time in order to ensure sustainability of the accreditation system.
4. For certification to be effective and ensure consumers that the promise of “safe food”
or “good practices” is maintained, reputation and trust have to be kept. That requires
frequent monitoring (including un-announced visits) by the accreditation and the
certification agencies, the availability of a code of conduct that is respected by the
industry, and the availability of reliable diagnostics and testing centers. However, the
monitoring system for food safety and certification bodies has not been yet
established.
5. Reputation and trust are probably the two most important elements of a good
certification system. Reputation and trust could not be established overnight and by
decree only. It requires a multi-dimensional process of capacity strengthening,
awareness, dissemination of information, and transparency. These are elements that
need to be promoted by both regulation measures and initiatives of the industry
(workshops, public hearings, publications, websites, field visits, etc).
63
6. Certification is generally expensive. For example, BIOVEGI a company growing
various kind of sprouts for main hotels and restaurants in Hanoi, pays12 a flat
certification of 60 million VND per year (about $2,500). Certification in Australia with
FRESHCARE costs about $1,000 per year.
Table 8 SWOT Analysis of Certification

• Weak capacity of accreditation agencies and • Increasing number of certification bodies

limited number of staff • QUACERT reputed for a number of
• High costs of certification for the majority of certification activities and accredited
smallholder farmers internationally
• Lack of a monitoring system
• Weak inspection system
• Increased access to high-value exports •

• Improved system of traceability with positive
effects on trust of consumers
6.5 Planning for Safe Agricultural Zones
6.5.1 Current Situation in Planning for Safe Agricultural Zones
237. In 1995 the GOV launched a safe vegetable program in response to public concerns
of vegetable safety. Major components of the program included: vegetables distributed
through specific “safe vegetables shops” and control mechanism on pesticide residues
established (see www.agronet.vn). Programs for safe production of vegetables in Viet Nam
started in 1999. In spite of these and other initiatives, up to the present, safe production
zones have occupied just a small proportion of total cultivated area. Pilots of safe vegetable
production have occurred in 54 provinces (out of 64) and 24 provinces have developed their
own procedures for safe vegetable production.
238. Infrastructure for safe production zones is often poor. Unsafe water for irrigating
vegetables is common and sources from river, lakes, and pools (60% of the total), wells
(29%), and waste water (11%) are not adequately controlled for safety. Almost 100% of
vegetable production is not tested and about 12% of vegetable production occurs near
industrial zones, main roads and hospitals.
239. In Hanoi’s Dong Anh District where there are a number of large farms that provides
vegetables for the city everyday, it is reported that local farmers producing vegetables, are
regularly washing a pile of green vegetable products in ponds filled with dirty contaminated
water and then the products are sold at the local market. The threat of Cholera and Diarrhea
outbreak from this type of activity is alarming. Statistics by the Vietnam Food Administration
(VFA) show that 70% of all cholera cases have been caused by careless-washed salad.
240. As of April 2008, in the Red River Delta only 6,320 ha of safe production area have
been declared safe by DARD(s). The planned safe vegetable production areas are 13,216 ha
12
See working paper by Food Safety Specialist.
64
which represents only 13% of the total vegetable cultivated area in the region (almost
100,000 ha).
241. In the absence of certified practices and certified agricultural zones, consumers have
difficulty in trusting the claim of traders selling “safe” vegetables”.
242. Planning of safe production zone is a complex task. Agricultural land has been
allocated to farmers who are mostly smallholders and usually have fragmented landholdings.
To establish contiguous land plots of land which could be declared safe production area
requires coordination and the establishment of specific rules. For example, if excessive
pesticide or chemical application is carried out in one plot, another contiguous plot is affected
even though the contiguous plot might follow good practices.
243. Currently the DARDs are responsible for declaring a zone safe for agricultural
production. There are not yet regulations on how to plan and declare an agricultural zone
safe for agricultural production. Using criteria for safe production of tea (Decision No
1121/2008/QD-BNN-KHCN) and vegetables (Decision No 106/2007/QD-BNN-KHCN) one
could envisage the following requirements:
1. Physical and chemical features suitable for the growing and development of
tea and vegetables
2. Not directly affected by industrial waste, utility waste from residential areas,
hospitals, slaughter houses, cemeteries and heavy traffic roads.
3. The heavy metal content in the soil and substrates does not exceed the
permitted limits.
4. Irrigation water:
a. Industrial effluents; raw sewage water from hospitals,
residential areas, breeding farms, slaughter houses; fresh
night-soil water, urine and water from stagnant ponds is not
used to water vegetables directly.
b. Irrigation water for vegetables is not contaminated with harmful
organisms or toxic chemicals; the content of some toxic
chemicals does not exceed the permitted limit
5. Soils and water are regularly tested
244. The regulation No. 02/2007/ND-CP (see section 5.4) envisages Pest Free Zones
(PFZ). However, up to now, there are no PFZ and the Inspectorate Division of the
Department Plant Production is in the process of formulating the relevant standards. The
problems of declaring a pest free zone are similar to the ones declaring a safe agricultural
zone. Technical determinations could be made and clear rules on monitoring established.
However, ultimately, it depends on the adherence and participation of local communities to
engage in a certain type of practices and Code of Conduct (COC) for the zone to remain safe
or pest free. This suggests the need of including a communication strategy that involves the
local communities.
6.5.2 Issues on Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones
1. There are no clear regulations on safe agricultural zones or pest free zones. Both
types of zones are mentioned in the regulations, but there is no specific regulation on
how a SAZ or a PFZ should be planned and implemented. The development of the
regulation could be linked to the regulations on VIETGAP and the definition of
standards and technical specifications that still need to be developed.
65
2. Perhaps different levels of safety could be considered. Water and soil quality,
chemical residues, and location (away from major roads, hospitals, industrial zones,
garbage dump sites, etc) are among the most important criteria for the identification of
a safe production zone. At the minimum level samples of water and soils collected
and analyzed periodically should show that certain criteria (permitted limits) are
satisfied.
3. The declaration of a safe production zone or a pest free zone requires a public
commitment by the local farming communities and business communities that they
will not engage in unsafe practices. Some code of conduct needs to be developed
and adhered to by the communities.
4. At a more advanced level, local communities and enterprises wishing to establish a

certified safe agricultural zone should obtain a certification for VIETGAP or other GAP
that are internationally accepted.
5. The declaration of a safe production zone could also be linked to Geographical

Indications13 so that products coming from a certain area are provided a certificate of
origin stating that the area is a SAZ or a PFZ.
6. Effective planning for a SAZ and PFZ will require the participation of local
communities, the People’s Committee at all local level (provincial, district, and
commune) and the involvement of farmers organizations and trade associations.
Capacity for this type of participatory planning still needs to be developed.
Table 9 SWOT Analysis of Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones

• No specific regulations on SAZ and PFZ • Intention of the Government to establish

• Standards yet to be developed these areas
• Weak participatory planning capacity
• Limited infrastructure for clean water, grading
and packing facilities, controlled atmosphere
storage facilities, and cold chains
• Introduction of VIETGAP and increasing • Pests, diseases, epidemics, run-offs, and

number of certification agencies facilitate the water infiltration from neighboring zones
establishment of SAZ and PFZ could affecting the safety or integrity of a SAZ
• Development of Geographical Indications or PFZ.
13
Geographical Indications of Goods are defined as that aspect of industrial property which refer to
the geographical indication referring to a country or to a place situated therein as being the country or
place of origin of that product. Typically, such a name conveys an assurance of quality and
distinctiveness which is essentially attributable to the fact of its origin in that defined geographical
locality, region or country. Under Articles 1 (2) and 10 of the Paris Convention for the Protection of
Industrial Property, geographical indications are covered as an element of IPRs. They are also
covered under Articles 22 to 24 of the Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights
(TRIPS) Agreement, which was part of the Agreements concluding the Uruguay Round of GATT
negotiations.
66
6.6 Inspection
6.6.1 Current Situation in Inspection
245. The inspection system for agricultural products consists of the Ministerial Inspectorate
Office (MIO) at MARD and inspectorate divisions at different departments of MARD, such as
the Inspectorate at the Department of Plant Protection, the Inspectorate at the Department of
Veterinary Services, and Inspectorate at the Department of Crop Production. At the local
level, there are DARD(s) Inspectorates and Inspectorates at the Sub-Departments
specialized in plant protection and quarantine, and veterinary and animal health.
Each Inspectorate Division at MARD reports to the head of the respective department and
also to the MIO. The 2004 Law on Inspection did not provide clear instruction about the roles
and responsibilities of the Inspectorate Divisions (see section 5.20). The Decree on
Inspection No 153/2005/NĐ-CP (see section 5.21) did remedy to this deficient of the 2004
Law. The new Law on Inspection under preparation (expected to be submitted to the
National Assembly in 2008) is likely to confirm the roles and responsibilities of the
Inspectorate Divisions as clarified in the Decree of 2005.
246. There are relatively few inspectors both at the central and at the local level. In the
case of the Inspectorate Division of the Department of Plant Protection, there are about 37
inspectors at the central level (of which only 7 are full time) and about 7 inspectors in each
province (or which on average only 2 are full time). There are no inspectors at the commune
level. This situation does not seem to be perceived by the Inspectorate Division as a major
constraint to the development of a good inspection system. More important seem to be the
issues of regulations and capacity of inspectors.
247. As the previous paragraph shows, most of the inspectors are not full time specialized
inspectors, but they perform various functions besides the inspection function.
248. The appointment of inspectors is based on programs and plans approved by the
Minister of MARD of the Director of DARD. Little flexibility exists to appoint external
inspectors and there is no system of certifying inspectors.
249. Inspection takes place several times during the year (usually quarterly) and different
types of inspections are carried out. In the case of plant protection, inspections occur for
pesticide use, pesticide trading, testing in markets for different residues, quarantine
inspection, and inspection upon request of complaints and denunciations.
250. When a violation is discovered, inspectors have the right of penalize administratively
and to suspend the violating organization. Administrative and financial penalties are
common; however they do not seem to be too heavy. For example, traders who have been
found trading in fake or faulty products are easily ready to pay the fines, provided they can
continue their business. For serious violations against food hygiene and safety the Criminal
Code could be applied with penalties including imprisonment; however, inspectors can
recommend application of the Criminal Code. In practice imprisonment occurs rarely (if ever).
251. While coordination between inspectorates and MOI at MARD is relatively frequent
and smooth, there is less coordination between MARD and MOH in term of inspection
activities. The Inspectorate of the Department of Plant Protection, for example, carries out
67
monthly testing of chemical residues from sample collected at major markets. This function
would seem to be under the responsibility of MOH.
252. Inspectorate Divisions seem to be well equipped with testing laboratories (see section
6.8)
6.6.2 Issues in Inspection
1. Professionalism of inspectors needs to be increased through training and

specialization of functions.
2. There is no certification for becoming an inspector. All inspectors must be

government staff which might constrain future capacity of doing comprehensive and
regular inspection all over the country.
3. Roles and responsibilities of Inspectorate Divisions should be clearly defined. As of

now there are inconsistency between the 2004 Law on Inspection and subsequent
decrees. The new Law on Inspection currently under preparation provides an
opportunity to remedy to this regulatory weakness.
4. Coordination of inspectorates at MARD and MOH needs to be improved. In the

specific case of inspection of markets, there seems to be overlapping of functions.
5. Power of inspectorates appears to be limited either in terms of applying fines,

confiscating products, or suspension of violators. At the same time, any additional
power given to the inspectors should be checked against increased incentives for rent
seeking behavior. Some kind of external monitoring of inspectors will need to be
introduced in the new Law to reduce rent seeking behavior and undue outside
interference with the work of inspectors.
Table 10 SWOT Analysis of Inspection

• The current regulations (law and decree) • A competent technical staff at the central
seem inconsistent about roles and level
responsibilities of the Inspectorate Divisions • Good laboratories for testing and analysis
• Capacity of inspectors needs to be improved
and benefit from exposure to different types
of inspection systems in other countries
• Coordination between MARD and MOH in the
inspection of markets is limited.
• Power of inspectors is limited
• A new Law on Inspection is under preparation • Rent seeking behavior

• Increasing number of certified organizations • External interference in carrying out
requiring the services of inspection inspection
68
6.7 Monitoring
6.7.1 Current Situation in Monitoring
253. Almost all the regulations mention monitoring and reporting. Directive No.
06/2007/CT-TTg (see section 5.7) indicates that annual and bi-annual reports on food safety
should be submitted to the Prime Minister by the lead agency for food safety, namely the
MOH. VIETGAP regulations indicate that both regular and irregular monitoring of certification
bodies will be conducted by the accreditation agency. MARD inspectorates produce quarterly
reports on various issues affecting food safety.
254. In spite of all these references to monitoring, there is not yet a monitoring system for
food safety that is consistent, reliable, publicly available, and effective. The MOH publicizes
cases of incidence of food borne diseases. The published data are however likely to be an
underestimation of the real situation. Although reporting on food poisoning for 2007 listed
only 37 outbreaks, 555 hospitalizations and 7 deaths14, these statistics are grossly
understated. Estimates in Vietnam of 1.5 cases per year per person of food poisoning seem
more reasonable15. That estimate brings the total number of food poisonings per year to the
120-150 million per year with comparable increases in the number of deaths.
255. In the case of MARD, there are occasional reports (for example the report of DCP at
the safe vegetable production workshop), but these tend to be occasional rather than regular.
Quarterly reports by the Inspectorates Division are not easily available.
256. Without a monitoring system, it is rather difficult (or impossible) to assess the current
situation on food safety and, most importantly, progress made.
257. There is no lead agency within MARD responsible for monitoring of food safety
issues.
6.7.2 Issues in Monitoring
1. The establishment of a monitoring system for food safety in agriculture is a complex

and expensive task. Perhaps, the task could be broken down into simplified steps,
which are improvements relatively to the current situation, are feasible, and could be
constructed as a progressive process of improvement. For example, at the initial step,
only pesticide residues for vegetables in major provincial markets and certified
producer organizations could be monitored. As a second step, heavy metals and toxic
chemicals could be monitored, and so on. The idea is to introduce a gradual process
of improvement.
2. To be reliable the organization responsible for monitoring should be independent of

the organization responsible for implementation. Usually the same organization
conducts monitoring and implementation. Third party monitoring is not yet part of the
regulations.
3. Monitoring is the basis of learning and improving decisions. Monitoring however is

often perceived as a way of negative evaluation rather than constructive learning.
Effective monitoring could lead to the modification of programs, and even closure of
14
Report of MOH in the “Second Meeting of the Food Safety Assurance Program” on April 8, 2008
15
See report of Food Safety Specialist.
69
activities and initiatives. Participatory monitoring activities could reduce some of the
negative perception of monitoring.
Table 11 SWOT Analysis of Monitoring

• Absence of a monitoring system • Monitoring mentioned in all the regulations

• Irregular and limited reporting
• Development of new Food Law could provide • Lack of separation between monitoring
the basis for the establishment of a food agency and implementation agency
safety monitoring system
• Results Framework approach adopted by the
GOV in monitoring the SEDP provides a
basis for establishment of a monitoring
system for food safety
6.8 Laboratories
6.8.1 Current situation in Laboratories
258. Vietnam has 8 laboratories which have reached ISO 17025 standards for laboratory
analysis, including 1 laboratory at the Nutrition Institute of the Ministry of Health, 1 laboratory
at the Office of Animal Health Control in HCMC, and 6 laboratories at NAFIQAD with two
laboratories capable to analyze pesticide residues, hormones, additives, and heavy metals.
In the plant protection area, there is no laboratory which has reached up to international
standards.
259. The level of soil and water contamination is very serious. Survey’s findings16 show
high levels of chemical residue on tea and high use of chemicals. About 4.5% of farmers still
use pesticides which are not permitted for use in Vietnam17. Almost 100% of land for
vegetable cultivation is not tested, 12% of vegetable cultivation area is near industrial zones,
big roads or hospitals. Fresh manure and urine are still common in irrigation water used for
vegetable production. Water irrigated on vegetable is not safe (60% is from river, lakes,
pools; 29% is from wells and 11% is from waste water).
260. Even though there are qualified technicians and professional laboratory human
resources, the number of staff is limited. Testing facilities in many laboratories are out of date
and cost for sample testing and not affordable to poor farmers. For example a complete set
of tests from samples collected at the market place costs between 1.8 and 2 million VND,
according to the Inspectorate of Plant Protection Department. Testing soil requires sending
samples to the central Soil and Fertilizer Institute. Water testing facilities at the local level
(province) have limited capacity in several provinces and are not yet available in many
provinces; the water testing facilities are located at Centers for Quarantine of Agricultural
16
Project: Improvement inspection of quality & safety of agricultural products (FAPQDCP), CIDA,
point:1.2.5
17
Project: Improvement inspection of quality & safety of agricultural products (FAPQDCP), CIDA,
point:1.2.7.2
70
products and Supplies or at Centers for Clean Water and Rural Environment which have set
up in several provinces by end of 2007.
261. Rapid testing methods are not yet developed. For example the testing of food
samples collected at market takes about one week to be completed, which is too late to take
any measure to prevent the circulation of unsafe food in the distribution system.
6.8.2 Issues in Laboratories
1. Ensuring water testing facilities with qualified staff be available in all provinces seems
to be of highest priority
2. Ensuring cost of testing is affordable to a larger number of users. Ultimately, a

considerable number of tests could be performed upon demand by the private sector
in order to certify their practices and products. Incentives for the emergence of private
laboratories will arise and might provide a healthy competition with public laboratories
both in terms of quality of services (timely results and communication, reliable
analysis) and costs.
3. Prioritize soil testing and increase facilities and capacity of conducting rapid soil
testing for diagnostics of heavy metals, and chemicals in the permitted lists issued by
the government
4. Increasing the number of qualified staff at existing laboratories and improve capacity
of existing staff would seem to be consistent with the commitment to food safety and
its ensuing increasing demand for testing, inspection, and monitoring.
5. Increasing the number of certified laboratories according to international standards

would provide more trust in the accuracy of sampling both to consumers in Viet Nam
and to importers of Viet Nam products.
6. Upgrading of equipment and facilities
Table 12 SWOT Analysis of Laboratories

• Water and soil testing are limited in coverage • Existing laboratories with ISO 17015 standard
• High cost of food sample testing • Competent human resources
• Limited use of effective rapid testing methods • An already existing network of laboratories
• CIDA project on improvement of food safety • Operations and maintenance investments are
• Greater emphasis on HACCP and Risk not commensurate to capital investments (eg
Analysis facilities and equipment) and human resource
• Planning of SAZ and PFZ development
• Implementation of VIETGAP
• Development of private laboratories
71
6.9 Information
6.9.1 Current Situation on Information
262. In spite of an intense regulatory activity related to food safety, information about food
safety in Viet Nam is scattered among different agencies. A large body of literature on food
safety is available in English, but a only a very limited part of this literature is available in
Vietnamese. There are no well organized databases on food safety dimensions such as
regulations, standards, practices, laboratories, and inspection.
6.9.2 Issues on Information
1. For an organized information system on food safety to arise, a clear mandate needs
to be provided to an agency, responsibilities and authorities have to be defined, and
adequate resources have to be ensured.
2. Within Viet Nam, VFA seems to be in the position of being the lead agency for
providing information about food safety. Within MARD, however, there is no such
agency.
3. The Information Center of MARD could initially take up this role and using its website
www.agroviet.gov.vn to make this information available.
Table 13 SWOT Analysis of Information

• No organized information system on food • VFA is the lead agency on food safety and is
safety at MARD in the process of establishment an organized
• No lead agency at MARD for establishing and food safety information system
maintaining an information system on food
safety
• Use of Information Center at MARD to • Poor coordination with VFA might imply
establish and maintain an information system duplications of efforts
on food safety with inputs from all the relevant
agencies at MARD
6.10 Education18
6.10.1 Current Situation in Education
263. The education system provides principles of food hygiene. There is however no food
safety curriculum at the primary and secondary level. At the tertiary level, there are courses
and programs at different institutions. The most important ones include:
18
This section will be completed in the Final Report of the Institutional Specialists.
72
• Courses in Nutrition and Food Safety, Food processing, Food Chemistry and Food
Toxicity, Food technology and Biological Food, Storage and Processing are taught in
different universities including Public Health University (Ministry of Health), Hanoi
University of Technology, Hanoi Agricultural University, Universities of Medicine in Hanoi
and Thai Binh province.
• Post graduate programs on these subjects are available. A research thesis on marketing
of safe vegetable is currently carried out by a PhD candidate in Trade University.
• Institute of Food Technology and Food, Hanoi University of Technology offers education
programs from college to PhD levels.
• Food Technology and Food Safety and post graduate program is also taught by a
private university in HCMC, namely Sai Gon Technology University.
• The same subject and program is carried out by Forestry and Agriculture University in
HCMC
• There is Food Technology faculty in HCMC University of Technology where the subject
has been taught since 1976 and there is a postgraduate program.
• Food Storage and Processing are taught in universities in other cities and provinces such
as Hai Phong and An Giang.
6.10.2 Issues in Education
1. Curriculum of primary and secondary schools should include food hygiene and safety
principles and practices
2. Vocational schools do not seem to offer specialized courses in food hygiene and
safety
3. Educational programs at all levels (primary, secondary, vocational, and tertiary) does
not benefit from linkages with research, and the opportunities of involving the private
sector and associations. Private sector and associations have an interest in ensuring
that their products are recognized as safe by the consumers and increasingly are
ready to engage in supporting awareness and educational programs.
Table 14 SWOT Analysis of Education

• Food hygiene and safety does not receive its • A dense network of schools and universities
due importance in curriculum development of that reaches all the nation
primary and secondary education and
vocational schools
• Programs and postgraduate degrees in food
safety are part of food technology or public
health programs rather than programs self-
standing
• Establish programs on food hygiene and •

safety at the primary, secondary, and
vocation schools
• Establish degrees on food hygiene and safety
at the college and postgraduate level
• Link education programs to research activities
• Involve private sector and association in
sponsoring educational activities
73
6.11 Extension
6.11.1 Current Situation on Extension
264. Food safety issues are new to most farmers and extension workers in Viet Nam. The
recently developed VIETGAP for fruit, vegetables, and tea will require a considerable effort to
ensure that good practices are disseminated and adopted by farmers and enterprises.
265. There are however leading farmers and organizations who have already adopted
good practices, including EUREPGAP and HACCP. Certified organizations for safe food
production and trading are increasing, partly motivated by the incentives of capturing new
export markets and higher value consumers in the domestic market.
266. VIETGAP (and other GAPs) require considerable changes by farmers and
enterprises. Unless the incentives for adoption are understood and worthwhile to undertake,
the food safety practices will remain limited to very few farmers.
267. Clear evidence that adoption of safe practices will benefit farmers should be provided.
Technical and socioeconomic research should support the production of such evidence.
268. The development of an extension system capable and effective in ensuring that safe
practices are adopted by a larger number of farmers requires a concerted effort that involves
on-farm testing of GAP, development of manuals and guidelines, training of trainers,
establishment of models, and planning of focused extension activities.
269. Close collaboration with research organizations and private sector (including
processors and supermarkets) might facilitate the work of extension workers and provide
additional incentives to farmers.
270. Well established methods of extension such as demonstrations and farmer field
schools should be combined with incentives such as prizes for best safe food producers,
participation in study tours (eg to certified farmers in dragon fruit), and facilitating access to
markets (through contracts with enterprises and supermarkets).
6.11.2 Issues in Extension
1. Capacity for extension of safe production practices (VIETGAP) is not yet established.
This will require training of trainers, elaboration of training manuals and dissemination
material
2. Demonstrations, farmer field schools, and study tour activities need to be developed
3. Dissemination of cost/benefit analysis of practices. Unless there are demonstrable

benefits of adopting safe practices, there are no much incentives for adoption and
adoption will not take place.
74
4. One of the main challenges will be to reach upland farmers involved in tea production.
Several of these farmers are often from ethnic communities (problem of language),
poorly educated (problem of adoption), and isolated (problem of infrastructure).
5. Need of close collaboration with research and private sector organizations should be
facilitated
6. Establish reward systems for adoption of safe vegetables (eg best farmers given
monetary price of 30 million VND)
7. Promote and support formation of producer marketing groups
Table 15 SWOT Analysis of Extension

• Food safety is a new concept for most • The extension system reaches the commune
farmers and extension worker level
• Considerable effort will be required to ensure •
large number of farmers adopt the
innovations of VIETGAPs and other GAPs
• Upland isolated, ethnic communities involved
in tea production present special challenge
• Extension system does not reach the village
level
• Few producer marketing groups
• Collaboration with research organizations and •

private sector, particularly processors and
supermarkets
• Increased access to export markets
6.12 Communication
6.12.1 Current situation on Communication
271. In the most recent years, there has been a considerable attention of the media on
food safety. The latest issue of Outlook Magazine (26 May 2008) is entirely dedicated to food
safety. Television and radio programs often report about food borne diseases and
communicate to the general public activities and decisions of the Government related to food
safety. The VFA launches awareness campaign about food hygiene and safety.
272. These efforts are laudable; however they seem still insufficient to inform the public in
a professional and regular manner. Workshops and conferences dedicated to food safety are
increasing, but their number is still limited. Programs to inform children at school could be
strengthened. Mass organizations (Women Union, Youth Union, and Farmer Union) have a
critical role to play in communication and have the organization that could enable them to
communicate effectively. Publications and websites dedicated to food safety are still limited.
75
6.12.2 Issues on Communication
1. In spite of an increasing attention of the media to food safety, there is no organized

effort at communicating professional to the larger public about food safety issues.
2. Awareness campaigns, promotion activities, workshops and conferences, school

programs, mass organizations programs on food safety could be effectively
strengthened.
3. The Information Center at MARD could use its website www.agroviet.gov.vn platform
with a special section on food safety to inform the public.
4. Extension activities to farmers and communication activities to the larger public need
to be coordinated.
Table 16 SWOT Analysis of Communication

• Limited efforts at communicating • A network of Mass Organizations that could

professionally to a large public reach the commune level
• Little involvement of mass organizations and • Increasing interest of the media
departments of MARD in communication
activities
• Use of Mass Organization in food safety • Misinformation and irresponsible

awareness programs communication could lead to scares in the
• Promotion of school programs, workshops market
and conferences, media programs, and
publications devoted to food safety issues
• Role of Information Center at MARD could be
expanded to include communication activities
6.13 Research
6.13.1 Current Situation on Research
273. Subjects related to food safety are mostly taught rather than researched. There does
not appear to be research programs on food safety. For example, the adoption of Risk
Analysis in the Food Safety Action Plan would seem to indicate a considerable scope for
expanding food safety research. However, research programs on risk analysis are limited.
Similarly, Some research on standards is done mostly at STAMEQ, but not much in the
research community at large. Socioeconomic research related to good practices, rapid
testing methods are still at an infancy level.
6.13.2 Issues on Research
1. Underfunding of research on food safety

2. Limited linkages of research with food enterprises interested in improving food safety
76
Table 17 SWOT Analysis of Research
• Limited research on food safety • A number of courses on food safety are

• Marginal public funding of research on food already taught at various universities and
safety institutes
• Limited linkages of research with food
enterprises
• Establishment of a program on food safety

well funded and linking to food industry
6.14 Regulations, Policies, and Strategies
6.14.1 Current Situation in Regulations, Policies, and Strategies
274. Since the early 2000 there has been an intense regulatory activity on food hygiene
and safety (see Chapter 5). The Laws on Standards and Good Labels have already been
approved. Currently the new Law on Inspection and a new Law on Food Safety are under
preparation. An Action Plan for Food Safety has been approved in 2006 and additional
clarifications on the Action Plan 2008-2012 have been issued in 2008 (see section 5.7 and
section 5.11).
6.14.2 Issues in Regulations, Policies, and Strategies
275. For ensuring the existing and under preparation of regulations, policies, and
strategies are effective, there is a need of issuing clear policies related to the following
dimensions:
1. Establishment of an effective and regular information and monitoring system
2. Providing incentives to the adoption of good practices
3. Clear definition of a lead agency within MARD for food safety to facilitate coordination
within MARD and between MARD and other agencies
4. Clear definition of responsibilities for agencies involved in the postharvest chain, to

monitor and inspect grading, sorting, storage, washing, packaging facilities, and
markets and retail outlets. While production seems to be under the responsibility of
MARD and retail outlets seem to be under the responsibility of MOH. However, it is
not clear under whose responsibility is the monitoring and inspection of the marketing
chains from the farm to the market.
5. Planning and budgeting of capacity strengthening activities and extension
6. Planning and budgeting for safe agricultural zones and pest free zones
77
Table 18 SWOT Analysis of Regulations, Policies, and Strategies
• Incomplete regulatory framework • An existing Food Safety Action Plan

• Missing policies on information and • Laws on Inspection and on Food Safety
monitoring, incentives, lead agency within under preparation
MARD, capacity strengthening, and safe • Food safety mentioned in the SEDP
agricultural zones
• Weak coordination within MARD and between
MARD and other agencies, in the absence of
a leading MARD agency responsible for food
safety
• Unclear definition of responsibility for the
inspection and monitoring of the marketing
chain from farm to market
• Inadequate budgetary support to extension,
monitoring, inspection, and capacity
strengthening
• Food safety increasingly important as Viet • More stringent regulations might provide
Nam moves to mid-income status more scope for rent seeking behavior and
• Growing role of the private sector and corruption in the absence of a transparent
supermarkets monitoring and inspection system
6.15 Capacity
6.15.1 Current Situation in Capacity
276. There appears to be a limited number of staff within MARD and related research
organizations who are specialists in food safety issues. In the DCP there are only 4 staff
involved in food safety, with only 2 full time. At the DPP there are 37 inspectors, of which
only 7 are full time. At the province level, on average there are less than 7 staff who have
responsibilities related to food safety and most of them are not specialists. In the research
organizations, the situation is similar, as food safety research programs are just starting to be
established19. In the livestock production and animal health department, and in the fishery
department, the situation seems to be better, with a larger number of specialists involved in
food safety issues.
277. Farmers lack knowledge and capacity for safe food production and basic postharvest
operations such as grading, handling, packaging. Good sorting, handling, packaging,
washing, and labeling practices in the marketing chains from farm to consumers are also
largely lacking.
278. There are capacity needs at all levels of the food safety institutional dimensions
examined in this chapter, from standards, practices, to regulations, policies, and strategies.
19
This information needs to be checked.
78
279. The immediate gaps seem to be those related to improving capacity for formulating
regulations, policies, and strategies. As the regulatory framework becomes better defined,
the subsequent priorities for capacity strengthening are in certification, extension, inspection,
monitoring, and information.
6.15.2 Issues in Capacity
1. Carry out an inventory of staff and staff capacity involved in food safety issues at
MARD, DARD, and related agencies
2. Identify capacity needs and prioritize gaps
3. Design capacity strengthening programs and plan for implementation
4. Monitor capacity development
Table 19 SWOT Analysis of Capacity

• Relative few food safety specialists • Competent professional and technical staff at
• Lack of capacity needs assessments and MARD and DARD level
prioritization of gaps
• Priority gap in the immediate term: capacity
for formulation of regulations, policies, and
strategies
• Priority gaps in the short term: certification,
extension, inspection, information, monitoring,
communication
• Priority gaps in the medium term: research,
education
• Formulation of new laws on Inspection and • Lack of planning and budgeting for adequate
Food Safety capacity strengthening activities
• Ongoing projects on Science and Technology
(ADB funded), Food Quality and Safety
(CIDA), support to SPS and TBT agreements,
ASEAN programme on food safety
79
7 Relevant Experiences of Other Countries in Food Safety
7.1 Malaysia20
280. In 2002, Malaysia developed the SALM (Farm Accreditation Scheme of Malaysia) for
quality assurance of fruit and vegetables. The scheme is implemented by the Department of
Agriculture.
281. Apart from SALM, Malaysia has developed the MS-GAP, the Malaysia Standard for
Crop Commodity Good Agricultural Practices. This is a generic standard applicable to all
crops, food and non-food. Based on the framework of the generic standard, technical sub-
committees have been drafting specific GAP standards on behalf of the Department of
Standards Malaysia (DSM) for seven major crops: oil palm, rubber, cocoa, pepper, herbs,
fruit and vegetables, and flowers and ornamentals. The standard for fruit and vegetables
contains several references to the EurepGAP.
282. SALM was revised in 2005, the year that MS-GAP was issued. The revised SALM
takes into account of SALM. In the initial stage, both SALM and MS-GAP coexist, in order to
allow the MS-GAP certification and auditing procedures to be put in place.
283. SALM certification is provided by auditors trained by the Department of Agriculture,

based on farm visits to evaluate compliance with certain criteria grouped into “major must”,
“minor must”, and “encouraged” categories”. The revised SALM has 29 “major must”, 76
“minor must”, and 57 “encouraged criteria”. Farms conforming with 100% of “major must” and
95% of “minor must” receive a certificate of official recognition.
284. The MS-GAP is administered and managed by SIRIM-QAS, the National Certification
body, which is accredited by the Department of Standards Malaysia.
285. SALM-registered farms tend to be given preference as suppliers in local market but
price premium are usually not obtained. SALM-certified farms are also eligible for the
Malaysia Best Logo, administered by FAMA, the Federal Agricultural Marketing Authority.
286. The Department of Agriculture provides free service to farmers for the implementation
of the programme, including costs of sampling and testing of the soil, water and produce for
pesticide residue and heavy metals. The farmers are assisted with specific pre-formatted
checklists to manage record keeping on the farm. The Department of Agriculture has
extension officers in every state to assist farmers in the implementation of the programme.
287. In order to gain market acceptance and recognition, SALM will need to be upgraded;
eventually it may adopt MS-GAP to supplement SALM. Both SALM and MS-GAP make
reference to EurepGAP and could be benchmarked against EurepGAP.
288. The Department of Agriculture is pursuing an agreement with SIRIM-QAS to

outsource third-party auditing and certification, though it will continue to conduct internal
20 Drawn from UNCTAD 2007, Challenges and Opportunities Arising from Private Standards on Food Safety and
Environment for Exporters of Fresh Fruit and Vegetables in Asia: Experiences of Malaysia, Thailand and Viet
Nam
80
auditing. This will reduce the burden on the Department and will also increase the credibility
of SALM.
289. Lessons for Vietnam
1. Viet Nam might need to develop National Standards for good agricultural practices.
As of now, VIETGAP is the equivalent of SALM, but is not a national standard (TCVN)
approved by the National Standards Authority.
2. The experience of Malaysia suggests that certification by auditors of Department of
Agriculture is not sustainable. Third party auditors will enhance the credibility and also
effectiveness of the system.
3. Benchmarking of national standards to EurepGAP is a useful practice to upgrade
standards to international standards
4. However, it should not be forgotten that the majority of farmers are small, not well
educated, not too aware of food safety, and not convinced that GAP pays off, at least
they do not see price premium on being certified with SALM. So, a gradual approach
of introducing awareness about basic requirements for food safety and traceability
before going into the full EurepGAP procedures should be applied to smallhoder
farmers. For exports and commercial farmers, the more demanding requirements
make more sense.
5. The Best Malaysia logo provides a market entry preference within Malaysia, but not a
price premium. The logo is not recognized outside of Malaysia.
6. Malaysia is paying all the costs of testing for farms wishing to be certified. Even
though this provides incentives to farmers, the system is not sustainable and not
applicable to a country like Viet Nam with a much larger population of smallholders.
Different types of incentives (training, infrastructure, partial cost subsidization of
testing) and gradual reduction of subsidies might be more appropriate.
7.2 Thailand21
290. Thailand is the largest ASEAN FFV exporters and its exports face increasingly
stringent food safety requirements in external markets. Thailand has responded proactively
to such challenges through the development of GAP programme (the Q-GAP), which pays
special attention to food safety.
291. In addition to the national GAP scheme, which is driven by the Ministry of Agriculture
and Cooperatives (MOAC), a regional GAP programme in the western part of Thailand
(known as the “Western GAP cluster”) exists, which was developed using a bottom-up
approach. Farmers who fulfill the national GAP programme can label their products using the
GAP logo: the “Q” quality mark.
292. Currently, the entire Q-GAP certification process is carried out by the Government,
from setting the standards and serving as the national regulatory body, to providing advisory
services, carrying out farm inspection, and, finally, issuing the certification. Such an approach
creates doubts as to the independence and credibility of the system and the certification.
Ambitious objectives to certify a large number of producers may also have overburdened the
Department of Agriculture’s capacities and compromised the quality of certification. The
private sector and other stakeholders have played only a limited role in the development of
Q-GAP (but a larger role in the “Western GAP cluster”). Exporters, particularly those
21
Drawn from UNCTAD 2007, Challenges and Opportunities Arising from Private Standards on Food Safety and
Environment for Exporters of Fresh Fruit and Vegetables in Asia: Experiences of Malaysia, Thailand and Viet
Nam
81
exporting to the EU, are more interested in certification against the EurepGAP standard or
other schemes with broad buyer recognition. The modern retail sector may increasingly start
to demand higher level third-party certification for the domestic market. The recently
launched project of the Thai Fruit and Vegetables Producers’ Association and Kasetsart
University to set up a ThaiGAP with the aim of having it benchmarked to EurepGAP is an
attempt to counter a multitude of retailer GAPs, and thus avoid multiple certification
requirements.
293. The Ministry of Agriculture and Co-operatives has authorized the National Bureau of
Agricultural Commodity and Food Standards (NBACFS),58 the national regulatory body for
food safety established in 2002, to act as an accreditation body to assess the competence of
public and private organizations responsible for inspection and certification of agricultural
commodity and food production that comply with national GAP standards. The GAP scheme
originally covered 29 crops, of which 12 are main export crops.
294. GAP certification indicates, among other things, that agrochemicals are properly
recorded and used. The GAP standard requires that instructions on labels and/or
instructions/recommendations of the Department of Agriculture must be followed. Banned
chemicals must not be used, and for export-oriented production, only chemicals allowed by
trading partners may be used. The records of GAP certification makes it easier for
growers/exporters to meet the Department of Agriculture’s requirements for FFV exports. In
some cases, the Department of Agriculture requires that additional chemical and pest control
regulations be met. Farmers who fulfill the GAP requirements can label their products with
the GAP logo. Thailand has only one GAP logo, the Q quality mark, which is a third-party
certification system owned by the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives. It indicates that a
product is of high quality and safe for consumers, and that its production process and post-
harvest activities (e.g. packhouses), the latter based on the Q Good Manufacturing Practice
programme, are in accordance with the requirements of national or equivalent GAP
protocols.
295. “Q” GAP (for farms) is part of a supply chain scheme and is supported by other “Q”
certifications including “Q” Shop (for shops selling quality agricultural inputs such as
pesticides), “Q” GMP (for packhouses), “Q” HACCP (for processing establishments), “Q”
Fumigation (for sulphur dioxide), “Q” supermarkets and ‘Q” Food safety (which can be
granted to a packhouse or processing establishment with their own relevant Q certification
and using inputs from contract growers with Q GAP certification, provided that their products
are found to have conformed with food safety requirements for three months).
296. Q-GAP still falls short of the requirements of EurepGAP. The EurepGAP certification
process is based on a larger number of control points and compliance criteria and is more
complex than the national GAP scheme.
297. Currently, the entire certification process is carried out by the Government, which
involves setting the standards and serving as a national regulatory body (National Bureau of
Agricultural Commodity and Food Standards), providing advisory services and farm
inspection, and, finally, issuing the certification (Department of Agriculture). As a result, it
takes a long time to get the certification. Moreover, such an approach causes doubts as to
the independence and credibility of the system and the certification. Further, at present, the
private sector and stakeholders are playing only a limited role and have not been much
involved in the development of the national GAP scheme.
298. GAP training and advisory services for individual growers and grower groups are
supposed to be provided by the Department of Agricultural Extension (under a memorandum
of understanding with the Department of Agriculture signed in 2007). However, since the staff
82
of the Department of Agricultural Extension is insufficiently trained on GAP, this responsibility
is often transferred to the Department of Agriculture.
299. The Department of Agriculture needs to provide internal training to its staff to prepare
them to work as GAP advisers and inspectors. They should understand the concepts of a
quality management system, as well as quality and GAP issues specific to each crop, while
inspectors need to be trained in risk assessment. To this end basic curricula should be
developed for them as well as for independent advisers and inspectors. Appropriate
regulations and procedures should complement GAP training. In particular there is a need to:
• Outsource advisory and inspection services to independent government agencies
or nongovernmental entities, including those in the private sector;
• Establish standards for advisers and inspectors;
• Set up a monitoring system for private/independent advisers and inspectors;
• Establish common inspection checklists;
• Prepare and implement annual work plans for inspection; and
• Coordinate food inspection activities across ministries.
300. Lessons for Viet Nam
1. The National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food Standards (ACFS) is the
primary agency to regulate and certify standards of agriculture commodities and
foods for domestic consumers and buyers abroad. The Bureau is within the Ministry
of Agriculture and is separate from other technical departments. This allows a more
specialized role for food safety and a better coordination function.
2. Make VIETGAP part of a supply chain certification system, including not only farmers,
but processors, packhouses, exporters, and retailers.
3. Need of training the trainers, both in the Department of Crop Production and in the
Agricultural Extension Center, to improve awareness of VIETGAP and other
standards. Recently Thailand has started a training programme in EurepGAP for staff
from the Ministry of Agriculture.
4. Outsource advisory and inspection services to independent government and non-
government entities, including those in the private sector.
5. Establish standards for advisers and inspectors, establish common inspection
checklists
6. Establish regional GAP using a bottom-up approach with the participation of private
sector and universities, as the experience of the “Western GAP region” in Thailand
has shown.
7.3 Other Countries
301. Most industrialized countries have a unified Food Law and developing countries can
learn from their experiences. A progressive food safety regulatory system includes22:
• Consolidated authority with ability to address the food system from farm to table and
to move resources towards the most important sources of risk.
• Use of comparative risk assessment as one criterion for prioritizing public action.
• Cooperation with industry and consumers to provide information and education.
• Use of HACCP (Hazard Analysis of Critical Control Points) principles to promote
prevention and industry responsibility in place of prescription and inspection.
• An open decision making process that allows stakeholder participation.
22
Laurian Unnevehr and Nancy Hirschhorn, Designing Effective Food Safety Interventions in
Developing Countries.
83
• Evaluation of public health outcomes from regulation.
302. China has recently drafted a national Food Law which is expected to harmonize a
plethora of previous regulations, a situation similar to the one in Viet Nam. Shaghai however
as a unified Food Law which is regarded as very effective. Even though China is making
progress, there are still considerable problems regarding food safety (see the recent crisis
related to the chemical melamine in milk), aggravated by the complexities of inter-provincial
trade. As such the China experience, even though in some respect similar to Viet Nam, is of
less guidance to Viet Nam.
http://www.doae.go.th/English/index.htm
84
85
8 Recommendations
8.1 General Framework
8.2 Policy and Institutional Development for Food Safety
303. The design of this component of the Project is based on the review of regulations
pertaining to food safety and quality (see Chapter 5) and the analysis of institutional issues
(see Chapter 6). The main conclusions of the review and analysis could be summarized as
follows:
304. Considerable regulatory activity pertained to food safety and quality has occurred
since the early 2000s. Important legislation has been introduced related to standards, good
practices, inspection, and certification. Laws on Food Safety, Inspection, and Plant
Protection are under preparation. A National Action Plan for Food Safety has been approved
by the Prime Minister in 2006. The year 2008 has been declared the Year of Food Safety by
the Minister of Agriculture.
305. In spite of all these positive developments, there are still several issues that need to
be addressed both in terms of regulations and institutional capacity. The area that need to be
addressed are:
1. Lead Agency at MARD for food safety

2. Establishment of a Food Safety Monitoring System at MARD
3. Establishment of a Food Safety Information and Communication System at MARD
4. Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones
5. Development and Harmonization of Standards
6. Development of Good Practices
7. Incentive Policy for Adoption of Good Practices
8. Institutional Capacity of Key Agencies at MARD and Certification Bodies
306. The following sections analyze and make recommendations in each of these 8 areas.
8.2.1 Lead Agency at MARD for food safety
307. There is a need for clarification of which agency at MARD will be the leading agency
for coordinating; issuing regulations, policies, and action plans; monitoring; supervising
implementation plans; disseminating standards; communicating and informing about food
safety issues. Currently, several departments are playing a role on different aspects of food
safety and contribute with their specific technical expertise. There is however no entry or
enquiry point which is responsible for coordinating the efforts of different agencies at MARD
involved in food safety. As a result, information is scattered, policy and regulations are
formulated in relative isolation, monitoring does not happen systematically, and little efforts at
informing and communicating about food safety occurs.
8.2.1.1 Options for the leading agency
86
308. Such a leading role could be either taken up by an existing organization within MARD
or by a new organization. The recently approved Decision No 29/2008/QD-BTS) establishing
the National Agroforestry and Fishery Quality Assurance Department (NAFIQAD) would
suggest that NAFIQAD is a natural candidate for taking the coordinating and lead agency
role within MARD for issues related to food safety and quality. Moreover, the department is
already the lead implementation agency for the CIDA-funded projects on food agricultural
products quality development control (FAPQDCP).
309. However, the leading role of NAFIQAD in food safety still needs to be better defined,
so that roles and responsibilities of other departments already involved in various dimensions
of food safety will be clearly indicated. For example, in the case of crops, the Department of
Crop Production (DCP) had played a key role on policy formulation (eg VIETGAP), is the
accreditation agency for certification bodies in VIETGAP, and has technical expertise from
the central to the provincial level.
310. An alternative option would be to create a new department within MARD fully
responsible for food safety and quality assurance, similarly to what is the experience of
countries like Thailand and Malysia.
311. A third option would be to have a coordination body (for example a Food Safety
Standing Committee headed by a Vice Minister of MARD) to ensure coordination of policies,
planning, and programs related to food safety and implemented by various departments.
312. Each option has advantages and disadvantages which are indicated in the following
table:
Table 20 Analysis of Alternative Options for a Lead Agency at MARD on Food Safety
Option 1: One of the Option 2: New Department Option 3: Standing

Existing Departments of Food Safety Committee for Food
Safety
Pros • Have already mandate • Fully specialized on food • Coordinates different
on food safety safety departments
• Have technical • Takes leading role in • Easier to establish
expertise (eg DCP on policy, standards and
VIETGAP and practices, accreditation,
NAFIQAD on quality monitoring and inspection,
assurance for fishery information,
exports) communication,
implementation, and
coordination
Cons • Limited capacity on • Creation of new • Does not have
food safety institutional structure in an resources for
• No department has full already large ministry will implementation.
mandate on food safety. take time and additional
For example DCP not resources
involved in quality
assurance of exports,
NAFIQAD not involved
in production.
• Difficult to coordinate
8.2.1.2 Recommendations regarding Lead Agency for Food Safety at MARD
87
313. The recommendation of the consultant is to establish the Food Safety Standing
Committee headed by a Vice Minister of MARD. Members of the Standing Committee will be
NAFIQAD, DCP, and other departments and agencies within MARD who are involved in food
safety. Over time, either NAFIQAD or other new department will be fully involved in food
safety..
8.3 Establishment of a Food Safety Monitoring System at MARD
314. As mentioned in section 6.7.2, practically all the regulations reviewed indicate
monitoring as a key role and responsibility of agencies involved in food safety. However, the
fact is that no system of monitoring for food safety exists at MARD. While at the national
level, the VFA under the Ministry of Health is responsible for monitoring food borne diseases
and outbreaks, and a monitoring system (however still limited in scope) exists, this is not the
case at MARD. Occasional reports are produced, but regular monitoring activities are seldom
occurring. When they do occur, they are not widely publicized, so that the lessons that could
be learnt and the needed actions that could be undertaken are very limited. There is also the
additional issue of conflict of interest: in order to be effective monitoring would be better if
conducted by an organization that is independent of the implementation agency.
315. Regulations concerning the establishment of a food safety monitoring system need to
be issued and lead to the establishment of a monitoring system that provides regular,
reliable, and publicly available monitoring reports. The reports need also to be interpreted
and constitute the basis for an evaluation of current programs and policy implementation.
316. In order for a monitoring system to be effective, it needs to be supported by a system

of certified laboratories that could undertake key tests for water content, metal content, soil
analysis, chemical residues, and microbiological testing in a reliable, accurate, and timely
manner.
317. The regulations related to the establishment of a monitoring system will need a
parallel investment plan to improve the capacity of existing laboratories and the
establishment of new laboratories at the regional and provincial level.
8.3.1.1 The Provincial Food Safety Index
318. The development of the monitoring system could be accompanied by a specific

method of presenting information that is easily interpretable. The objective of establishing an
index of food safety at the provincial level is to monitor progress in improving food safety for
fruit, vegetables, and tea at the provincial level. The index could be built using several
indicators of food safety including the area of SAZ, the number of certified bodies operating
in the province, water quality, soil quality, percentage of samples exceeding MRL in samples
collected from market places, percentage of cases of food-born diseases in total province
population, number of violations of food regulations and gravity of the violations. The
methodology of building and measuring the index should be developed with the participation
of the provinces and stakeholders including farmers, enterprises, regulatory agencies, and
consumer groups. The monitoring of the PFSI should be conducted by a research
organization independent of implementation organizations. The index could be piloted for
fruit, vegetables, and tea and later expanded to other commodities.
Table 21 Elements for the design of a Provincial Food Safety Index

Component Sub-component Weight
88
Infrastructure Number of packhouses
Water treatment units
Cold storage capacity
Certification Number of certified bodies in good practices
Number of farmers following good practices
Number of enterprises following good practices
Testing Water quality
Soil quality
MRL
Heavy metals
Microbiological contamination
Violations Number of violation of food safety regulations
Gravity of violation of food safety regulations
Food-borne diseases Reported cases of food-borne diseases
Outbreaks of food-borne diseases
Number of enterprises following GAP
Consumer confidence Perception of consumers about food safety improvement
Price premium on certified safe food
8.3.1.2 Recommendations regarding Establishing Food Monitoring System at MARD
319. Issue a regulation to establish a food safety monitoring system under the
responsibility of a unit at MARD. The unit could be the food safety agency recommended in
section 8.2.1.2. Develop a methodology and pilot the construction and monitoring of a
Provincial Food Safety Index.
8.4 Establishment of Food Safety Information and Communication

Systems at MARD
320. The issues related to information and communication were reviewed in sections 6.9
and 6.12. Similarly to the case of a monitoring system, there are not yet at MARD systems
for informing and communicating about food safety. Every department has roles and
responsibilities to provide information and communication; however, these efforts remain
fragmented and isolated. For example, there is not a unique repository for the regulations
related to food safety; the standards, the practices, the monitoring reports, the projects, and
the activities ongoing, the publications, and the news related to food safety. This information
system could be undertaken by ICARD using the www.agroviet.gov.vn platform; however, so
far this has not happen.
321. For communication, the situation is similar. A unit at MARD should be solely
responsible for communications pertaining to food safety. In case a leading agency for food
safety is established at MARD (see section 8.2.1), the agency could be responsible for a
communication system.
322. Regulations establishing an information and communication system at MARD need to

be issues. The ensuing budget allocations for the maintenance of these systems need to be
planned and allocated.
89
8.4.1.1 Recommendations regarding Establishing Food Safety Information and
Communication Systems at MARD
323. Issue a regulation to establish a food safety information and communication system
under the responsibility of the lead agency for food safety at MARD and the technical support
of the Information Center at MARD.
8.5 Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones
324. There has been considerable activity related to the planning of safe agricultural
zones. According to data from DCP (see section 6.5), there are 1718 ha of declared SAZ in
the Red River Delat out of 13216 ha. However, there is not a clear definition of a safe
agricultural zone. Criteria for the establishment of SAZ and guidelines to the DARD for
establishing these zones have not yet been developed. The involvement of communities in
establishing a SAZ should be part of the planning practices, that the communities are
ultimately responsible for keeping a zone safe.
325. Regulations on planning of SAZ need to be issued. In order to be effective, the

regulations will have to be accompanied by a parallel investment in SAZ through the
provision of appropriate infrastructure and monitoring systems.
8.5.1.1 Recommendations regarding Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones
326. Issue a new regulation on planning of Safe Agricultural Zones including the
participation of communities in developing code of conducts, the planning of infrastructure,
and the establishment of a monitoring system.
8.6 Development and Harmonization of Standards
327. The Law on Standards approved in 2206 (see section 5.17) provides clear guidelines
about the process of developing standards (both national standards TCVN and local
standards or TCCS), their approval, and issuance. Similar clear guidelines are for Technical
Regulations (QCVN and QCDP). There are already about 700 national standards related to
food and agriculture and the process of review and modification into national standards is
occurring and should be completed by 2010.
328. The process of harmonization with international standards as part of the TBT
Agreement is also ongoing. About 30% of total standards have been harmonized and in the
case of agriculture 47% have been harmonized. The target is to harmonize 50% of the
standards in all the Viet Nam sectors by 2010.
329. There are however, several new standards that need to be issued, either for specific
products (for example each of the specific vegetables, fruit, and tea), processes
(postharvest, processing, organic, etc). The process of development of new standards is
constrained by a weak capacity.
330. The planning of establishment of new standards is assisted by STAMEQ. Any

organization in Viet Nam can propose new standards and the process of review (through
standing committee including different stakeholders) and approval is regulated by law.
90
8.6.1.1 Recommendations regarding Development and Harmonization of Standards
331. Establish an action plan for the development of standards to ensure food quality and
safety and improve capacity to carry out the action plan. Focus on the development of
standards for the specific products in fruit, vegetables, and tea that contribute to improve
safety and quality.
8.7 Development of Good Practices
332. The development of good practices in the Vietnamese legislation has started with the
approval of the two VIETGAP decisions on fruit and vegetables (see section 5.13) and tea
(see 5.14). In the future, new VIETGAP will need to be developed for additional commodities
group and specific products.
333. The legislation about good practices needs to be accompanied by implementation

arrangements to ensure that the good practices are disseminated and adopted. These
implementation arrangements include development of manuals and guidelines, testing of
practices, training of trainers, training of farmers, dissemination activities, demonstrations,
etc. A Standing Committee on Good Practices should be established to review existing
VIETGAP and recommend changes.
334. Critical to the development of good practice is a well functioning system of

accreditation and certification. The DCP is the only accreditation agency for VIETGAP. There
are other accreditation systems and certification bodies for good practices under
EUREPGAP, GLOBAL GAP, FRESHCARE, etc. The national accreditation agency and
certification bodies need support to improve their capacity, particularly in training and
auditing skills.
8.7.1.1 Recommendations regarding Development of Good Practices
335. Issue regulations to develop existing VIETGAP and formalize a Standing Committee
for the Development of VIETGAP. Issue regulations for developing new VIETGAP. Establish
a road map to ensure a gradual convergence of national good practices with internationally
recognized good practices.
8.8 Incentive Policy for Adoption of Good Practices
336. Food safety and quality assurance methods are still relatively new concepts for the
majority of farmers and enterprises in Viet Nam. Yet, the costs to society in terms of food-
born diseases, long-term health problems, and foregone income from access to export
markets and a growing segment of the population more aware about food safety and quality
and disposing of higher incomes are considerable. In terms of food-born diseases only, it is
estimated that 120-150 million cases per year of food borne diseases (see Food Safety
Consultant report). Long-term health problems deriving from consuming food with high level
of chemicals (above MRL) and heavy metals are not yet estimated, but are likely to be high
as well. Foregone income opportunities to access high-value markets in Europe, North
America, and East Asia are quite high. MARD plans to expand fruits and vegetable exports
from the current $415 million to more then $ 1 billion by 2010 (see Action Plan for Food
safety). For these plans to be realized, food safety and quality improvements will be crucial.
Comparable estimates for domestic market opportunities still need to be estimated.
91
337. A rough estimate by the MOH indicates that 70% of total food-born diseases are
attributable to microbiological factors and 30% to chemical factors.
338. Good practice in agricultural production and postharvest operations will contribute to
reduce the health costs of unsafe foods and increase the opportunities for higher income
from exports and domestic markets.
339. Given the novelty of the concepts and several constraints to the adoption of good
practices such as the high costs of investment, the lack of knowledge, an inadequate
infrastructure, and a relatively low awareness of the concepts of food safety and quality,
some incentives could be provided to accelerate the adoption of good practices.
340. These incentives can be grouped into two sets: direct incentives to operators (farmers
and enterprises) and indirect incentives. Direct incentives include reduced costs of
certification, matching grants, access to credit, tax holidays, etc. Indirect incentives include
improved infrastructure, technical assistance, and information.
8.8.1.1 Recommendations regarding Incentives Policies for Adoption of Good

Practices
341. Issue a policy on incentives to adoption of good practices including direct incentives
to operators (farmers and enterprises) such as reduced costs of certification, matching grants
for investment in good practices, rewards to best performers, and access to credit; and
indirect incentives through improvement of infrastructure (eg for building safe agricultural
zones, safe stalls in fruits and vegetable markets), technical assistance, and information.
8.9 Institutional Capacity of Key Agencies at MARD, Labs, and

Certification Bodies
342. Traditionally, MARD and DARDs have focused their activities on food security, yield
improvement, and agricultural diversification. The new concepts of food safety and quality
are gradually becoming part of the institutional vocabulary of the ministry. Capacity of staff
and institutional capacity of agencies to formulate strategies, policies, and regulations, and
the related capacity in planning, monitoring, and implementation are still limited.
343. Currently, capacity building and strengthening activities are proceeding in an

uncoordinated manner and without a clear plan of action.
344. A thorough capacity needs assessment has yet to be conducted. It is however

possible already to indicate the general areas that needs improvement. These areas include:
1. Capacity of formulating strategies, policies, and regulations

2. Capacity of accreditation agency (DCP) to certify, provide training, and audit certified
bodies
3. Capacity of certification bodies (both public and private) to train and audit
4. Capacity of developing standards and harmonizing those with international standards
(within the framework of Agreement of TBT)
5. Capacity of planning for Safe Agricultural Zones
6. Capacity of developing, testing, demonstrating, and disseminating good practices
(GAPs, GHP, GMP)
7. Capacity of monitoring and inspecting food safety from pre-production to post-
production levels
92
8. Capacity of informing and communicating effectively about food safety issues
9. Capacity in Risk Analysis
345. Different projects already exist that contribute to improving capacity in food safety and
quality. Most notable among this projects is the CIDA-funded Food and Agricultural Products
Quality Development Control Project (FAPQDCP) implemented by the Université de
Montréal. Other projects, much smaller in terms of scope and funding include the capacity
building program on phytosanitary factors (ASEAN/AUSAID), zoonotic diseases (SDC), SPS
(EU), FAO (regional program), JICA, etc .
8.9.1.1 Recommendations regarding Institutional Capacity for Food Safety
346. Conduct an in-depth capacity needs assessment for food safety and quality
improvement of MARD agencies and DARDS. Assess scope and plans of ongoing capacity
building projects. Establish a coordination body for capacity building activities. Formulate a 5-
year plan for capacity building. Conduct capacity building activities including training, study
tours, certification programs, and degree programs.
8.10 PILOT CROP FOOD SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (CFSMS)
8.10.1 RATIONALE
347. A number of regulations23 indicate functions and responsibilities of various

departments of MARD related to policy formulation, management, monitoring, inspection,
communication, accreditation, and development of standards and practices related to food
safety. The existing regulations however do not provide sufficient clarity on three key
institutional issues, namely (i) who will take the lead in coordinating the efforts of various
departments; (ii) who will take the lead in monitoring; and (iii) how the food safety
management system will be managed.
8.10.1.1 Coordination
348. The issue of coordination is both internal and external to MARD. Internally at MARD,
various departments are mandated with monitoring (for example DCP and NAFIQAD) and all
departments are mandated with communication and policy formulation. It is not clear
however who will take the lead in coordination and how various efforts will be harmonized.
Moreover, the coordination between center and local level (eg MARD and DARD) as
pertaining to food safety begs the question of who at MARD will be responsible for specific
activities to be conducted at the province level.
349. Externally, MARD needs to coordinate its activities on food safety with other key
ministries, mostly notably the Ministry of Health (MOH), the Ministry of Science and
Technology (MOST), the Ministry of Industry and Trade (MOIT), the Ministry of Planning and
Investment (MPI), and with various key organizations such as the Viet Nam Food
Administration (VFA) and STAMEQ. For example, the development of national food
standards is managed by STAMEQ, but requires considerable input from MARD. Another
example is the communication campaigns of VFA and MOH on food safety and hygiene;
23
See chapter 5.
93
unless these campaigns reach the farmers and are translated into good practices to assure a
safe food supply, the effectiveness of these efforts will remain limited.
350. In the absence of a body responsible for coordination at MARD, both internal and
external coordination will be limited. For example, division of responsibility related to
monitoring is unclearly defined between DCP, DPP, and NAFIQAD; similarly, monitoring and
inspections of markets is unclearly defined, particularly at the provincial level, between
DARD and Department of Health.
8.10.1.2 Monitoring
351. Existing regulations indicate monitoring as a responsibility of all departments at

MARD, with NAFIQAD in charge of supervising specialized monitoring activities by other
departments. This indication of responsibility however does not translate into an actual
system of monitoring. Specific resources, budgets, and tools to carry out a monitoring system
for food safety are not in place. There is not yet a system of monitoring able to produce
regular reports on food safety that allow assessing progress towards achievement of policy
objectives on food safety.
352. Often monitoring is confounded with inspection. However, the objectives of monitoring
and inspection are different. On one hand, monitoring should be undertaken to assess
progress towards policy objectives. As such it does not have a policing function, but provides
an information basis for introducing adjustments in current programs, policies, and
regulations. On the other hand, inspection is undertaken to assess compliance with existing
regulations and enforcing those regulations through administrative and legal measures
against violations; as such inspection has a policing function.
353. Inspection reports provide an input into the monitoring system; however, the
monitoring system should include assessment of other variables other than those related to
violations of norms. One example of indicators relevant to a monitoring system is illustrated
in Table 21.
354. Monitoring is usually conducted as internal monitoring (each department monitoring

itself). While internal monitoring is essential, there is the need of having external monitoring,
where for example one external unit independent of implementation is responsible for
monitoring.
8.10.1.3 Management of Food Safety
355. For an effective management of food safety system to emerge, operational structures
have to be established. Currently, no food safety units exist, either at the central (MARD) or
at the provincial level (DARD). Staff engaged in food safety are usually involved in other
activities and not fully specialized in food safety. At MARD, for example, standards and
practices for safe production of fruit, vegetables, and tea have been established and a body
of related regulations has been developed. However, there are only 3 staff at DCP involved
in these activities, while the Department itself is charged with numerous functions and
responsibilities including policy formulation, accreditation of certification bodies, monitoring
and inspection, communication, promotion of safe agricultural zones, and training. The
situation at NAFIQAD is no better. Even though the department has qualified staff for quality
control, particularly in the fishery sector, there is still a dearth of staff with expertise in
VIETGAP and crop food safety.
94
8.10.2 PROPOSED SOLUTIONS
356. The QSEAP offers the opportunity to contribute to the establishment of an effective
food safety system at MARD by addressing the issues of coordination, monitoring, and
operationalization of food safety management. The proposed solutions is specific for the crop
food safety management system, not for the complexity of overall food safety issues, which
eventually might lead to a specialized department at MARD or the strengthening of functions
and responsibilities of NAFIQAD. The project investments will allow piloting a system that
could eventually be institutionalized within MARD and DARDs. The proposed solutions
include:
7. Establishment of a Standing Committee on Food Safety headed by a Vice Minister of

MARD with Secretariat at NAFIQAD
8. Establishment of Food Safety Divisions in the Department of Crop Production (DCP)
at MARD and sub-divisions at DARD dealing with Crop Food Safety
9. Establishment of a Food Safety Monitoring Division at NAFIQAD for overall crop food
safety monitoring
10. Creation of new staff positions for Food Safety Specialists (at DCP/MARD and
DARD) and Food Safety Facilitators at district and commune level
11. Capacity building of staff involved in the crop food safety management system
12. Review and formulation of policy and regulations for food safety
357. Given the scope of the QSEAP (focused on fruit, vegetables, and tea) the piloted
system for food safety discussed here is only related to crops, and the food safety divisions
and sub-divisions mentioned above refer to units within DCP and DARD, respectively. The
food safety monitoring division for crops will be based at NAFIQAD.
358. The proposed solutions address the problem of coordination, monitoring, and
management by (i) establishing a standing committee on food safety to coordinate the work
of the departments; (ii) assigning leadership to NAFIQAD in establishing a monitoring system
for the Ministry; and (iii) using the comparative advantage and experience of DCP by giving
to DCP the leadership in several functions related to crop food safety.
8.10.3 VISION
359. The vision for the crop food safety management system (CFSMS) is a regulatory and
management system that assures that safe agricultural products are produced, processed,
and distributed. The system benefits both consumers and producers. Producers, processors,
wholesalers, retailers, exporters, and importers are able to provide buyers an independent
verification that a recognized program of safe agricultural products production, handling,
processing, and distribution practices has been followed.
8.10.4 COMPONENTS OF THE CFSMS
360. The CFSMS provides assurance of the safety of agro-products. The system will meet
food safety requirements of domestic consumers and international trading partners, including
WTO, through certification to mutually agreed and recognized standards. The system
involves (i) a set of essential elements which are common to all internationally compatible
food safety systems; (ii) legislation to give authority and enforceability of the system; and (ii)
a management structure of agencies with clearly defined responsibilities.
95
8.10.4.1 Elements
361. There are 7 essential elements in a food safety system:

8. Standards and Codes of Practices which prevent or minimize potential food safety
hazards, based on the food safety hazard analysis critical control point (HACCP)
method.
9. Certification that entities have met the Standards or follow the Codes of Practices.
10. Inspection and Auditing of entities to verify they continue to meet the Standards.
11. Monitoring of: (i) Certification Bodies to verify they are meeting the legal
requirements; (ii) the food safety products in the open market place.
12. Internal Control Systems to ensure that certified business units (including farmer
groups, cooperatives, and enterprises) comply with food safety Standards and Codes
of Practices.
13. Information, Education, and Communication to ensure that all the actors in the food
supply chain (from input providers to consumers) are aware of food safety issues and
can access knowledge about food safety.
14. Research to identify the most suitable technologies and socioeconomic mechanisms
to promote food safety.
362. The QSEAP will provide funding and investments that address the 7 elements above.
In particular, Component 1 on Institutional and Policy Development for Food Safety will
address elements 1-6 and Component 2 on Support Infrastructure and Facilities for Quality
and safe Agro-products addresses element.
8.10.4.2 Legislation
363. Policies and regulations are clearly defined to provide authority to the management
agencies and protect the rights and integrity of consumers and commercial entities. Key to
the development of legislation is a comprehensive Food Safety Law that completes and
harmonizes the existing large body of regulations. The management structure is defined in
the legislation. Within MARD different departments have functions and responsibilities for
various elements of the CFSMS; coordination is provided by the proposed Standing
Committee on Food Safety (SCFS).
364. The QSEAP will provide support to the review of existing regulations and the
formulation of new policies and regulations consistently with the new Food Safety Law
expected to be submitted to the National Assembly in 2009.
8.10.4.3 Management Structure
365. The CFSMS is part of a comprehensive management structure that clearly defines
the responsibilities for each of the elements of the system and the agencies involved. The
following is typical of many countries in the world:
9. Food Administration Authority – It has overall responsibility for food safety (eg Viet
Nam Food Administration)
10. Standards Authority – It has overall responsibility for issuing standards (eg STAMEQ).
The standards authority coordinates with sector agencies that are responsible for the
development of standards and codes of practices (eg DCP responsible for developing
standards and code of practices related to crops)
11. Certification – It includes Accreditation Bodies (eg DCP for crops) and Certification
Bodies (eg Enasa, Quacert)
12. Inspection and Auditing – It includes laboratories certified ISO 17025 and
professionals or companies trained and competent to ISO 9000.
96
13. Monitoring Body to manage and coordinate monitoring conducted by different units
14. Information, Education, and Communication Bodies – Public or private organizations
that disseminate information and provide access to knowledge to improve food safety
15. ICS Service Providers – Public or private organizations that help farmers and
enterprises achieving Internal Control Systems (ICS) to assure compliance with
Standards and Codes of Practices
16. Research Organizations – Public or private organizations that provide research on
socioeconomic and technological aspects of food safety.
366. The next section provides a model for the management structure at MARD that is
expected to address the issues of coordination, monitoring, and management discussed at
the beginning of this note.
8.10.5 MODEL OF MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE AT MARD
367. The proposed Crop Food Safety Management System includes a coordination body
at MARD (the Standing Committee on Food Safety), a department leading in monitoring,
information, and communication (NAFIQAD), a department leading in policy formulation,
development of standards, and accreditation of certification bodies (the Department of Crop
Production), and specialized positions at the central, provincial, district, and commune level
responsible for the management of the food safety system and facilitation of safe food
production. Figure 3 provides a graphical illustration.
8.10.5.1 Central Level - MARD
1. Standing Committee on Food Safety (SCFS) coordinates policy formulation,

monitoring and inspection, development of standards and codes of practices,
communication and information among different departments of MARD and ensures
coordination with other agencies outside of MARD including MOH, MOST, MOIT,
MPI, VFA, and STAMEQ. The committee is headed by a Vice Minister of MARD and
NAFIQAD provides the Secretariat for the Standing Committee.
2. NAFIQAD has lead responsibility in establishing and managing the monitoring system
for food safety and an information and communication system.
3. A Food Safety Monitoring, Information, and Communication Division is established at
NAFIQAD with staff responsible in the five areas of (i) methodologies; (ii) statistics;
(iii) evaluation and reporting; (iv) operations; and (v) information and communication.
Figure 4 provides a graphical illustration.
4. Monitoring of food crop safety is based on surveys, visits, and testing carried out by
national and regional laboratories under DCP, DPP, NAFIQAD, and any other
laboratory authorized by DCP. NAFIQAD has overall responsibility for managing the
monitoring system including the development of a Provincial Food Safety Index.
Indicative components and subcomponents of this Index are indicated in Table 21.
5. DCP has lead responsibility for policy formulation related to crop food safety,
accreditation and monitoring of VIETGAP certification bodies, development of
standards and manuals for VIETGAP and other standards, training of other
departments and DARDs staff in VIETGAP and other standards.
6. A Food Safety Division is established at DCP with staff responsible in the five areas
of (i) policy, (ii) standards, (iii) monitoring and inspection, (iv) accreditation, and (v)
communication. Figure 4 provides a graphical illustration.
7. Other relevant department such as Department of Plant Protection (DPP) and
Department of Science and Technology (DST) carry out activities in policy
97
formulation, standards development, monitoring, and communication; NAFEC carries
out extension programs for food safety. All these activities will be coordinated through
the SCFS.
8. A comprehensive program of capacity building of staff will be undertaken by the
QSIAP (see sub=component 1.2)
8.10.5.2 Province Level – DARD
1. A sub-Division of Food Safety is established at DARD with overall responsibility for

managing implementation of regulations on crop food safety in the 16 provinces
covered by the QSEAP, training, monitoring, accreditation of certification bodies,
promotion of safe agricultural zones (SAZ), and facilitation of the establishment of
internal control systems at business units (farmer groups and cooperatives) engaged
in safe food production.
2. Positions for Food Safety Specialists will be established. The QSIAP will provide
capacity building for the Food Safety Specialists at the province level. Some of the
staff will be trained and certified as VIETGAP inspectors.
8.10.5.3 District and Commune Level
1. Positions for Food Safety Facilitators will be created at the district and at the
commune level. At the commune level different options could be considered: (i)
create a new position; (ii) have the Agricultural Extension Worker to take the
additional function of Food Safety Facilitator; and (iii) use Facilitators from the district
or province level. The QSEAP will build capacity of facilitators to provide services to
farmers groups and cooperatives engaged in safe food production of fruit, vegetables,
and tea.
2. Services will include training, liaising with certification bodies and buyers, and
facilitating the establishing Internal Control Systems for food safety. This involve
ensuring that individual farmers maintain records required by the standards,
maintaining a register of farmer records, including monthly consolidated records of all
farm inputs, outputs and certified sales for auditing purposes; conducting regular
monitoring and spot checks of member farmers, and guiding them on any corrective
actions; conducting an internal audit of the certified entity, prior to each audit by the
Certification Body, and at least once per year; ensuring all Corrective Action
Requests by the Certification Body are complied in a timely fashion; and facilitating
the production of all certification compliance, quality assurance and traceability
documents. (
3.
4.
5. Figure 6 provides a graphical illustration).
6. The facilitator will pass an accredited VIETGAP inspector or manager course (gaining
a certificate) and attend annual or bi-annual refresher training courses to maintain
current accreditation status.
8.10.5.4 Sustainability of the System
368. The proposed system is a pilot that could be institutionalized over time. The
sustainability and replicability of the system beyond the project life depend on the following:
1. As the demand for certification increases and knowledge about safe food production
becomes more widespread, several services of facilitators will be provided by the
private sector; alternatively the services could be provided by the public sector based
98
on a fee. The pilot will allow to understand what services could be delivered for a fee
and which services will still require public funding.
2. The services provided by the food safety specialists (at MARD and DARD level) are
likely to remain essential (with the possible exception of accreditation that could be
outsourced outside of the public sector). There is a strong rationale for them to
continue to be publicly funded, as they provide public goods. This is the practice in
most countries. As Viet Nam moves towards middle income country status and
beyond, it will increase its emphasis on food safety both to promote health of the
population and to meet the increasing domestic and international demand for safe
agroproducts. The need of policies and regulations, monitoring, certification,
inspection, information and communication about food safety will increase and will
require an adequately sourced public sector.
99
MARD Standing Committee on Food Safety
Head: Vice Minister
Members: DCP, DPP, NAFIQAD, DST, ICD, NAFEC
Department of NAFIQAD
Crop Production
Division of Division … Division of Food

Food Safety Safety Monitoring,
Information and
DARD Communication
Sub-Division of Sub-
Food Safety Division …
District
Food Safety Other

Facilitators Specialists
Commune
Food Safety Other

Facilitators Facilitators
Figure 3 The Crop Food Safety Management System
NAFIQAD
Division Food Safety Division 1 Division …

Monitoring, Information
and Communication
Methodologies Statistics Evaluation and Operations Informationand

Reporting Communication
Figure 4 The Division of Food Safety Monitoring, Information and Commnication at

NAFIQAD
100
Department of
Crop Production
Division of Division 1 Division …

Food Safety
Policy Standards Accreditation Monitoring Information

and and and
Certification Inspection Communication
Figure 5 The Division of Food Safety at DCP
Safe Food Certification

Food Safety Bodies
Business Units
Facilitators
Farmer groups, (FSS)
Cooperatives Buyers
Internal Control System • Help gain certification

(ICS)
• Train farmers Contractual relation
• Farmer Records
• Help maintaining ICS
• Internal auditing Facilitation relation
• Liaise with CB and buyers
• Certification compliance,
quality assurance, and • Maintain register of
traceability documents farmer records
Figure 6 Food Safety Facilitators at District and Commune Level
8.11 Policy and Institutional Development for Food Safety at the

central level - Outputs, Targets, Activities, Inputs, and Monitoring
369. The design and monitoring framework of the Policy and Institutional Component is
presented in Annex 9.13.
370. The objective of this component is to improve the institutional, management, and
regulatory framework to assure that safe agricultural products are produced, processed, and
distributed. As an outcome, producers, processors, and traders are better able to provide
buyers an independent verification that a recognized program of safe agricultural production,
handling, processing, and distribution practices has been followed. Keeping in line with the
101
scope of the project, food safety refers to fruit, vegetables, and tea. The sub-components of
this component include (1) Review of food safety regulations and formulation of new policies
and regulations on food safety and quality; (2) Capacity building and strengthening of
agencies and institutions responsible for policy formulation, monitoring, accreditation and
certification, inspection, laboratory analysis, review and development of standards, and
communication; and (3) Pilot a Crop Food Safety Management System (CFSMS) in order to
facilitate the coordination, monitoring, and management of food safety from the central
(MARD) to the commune level.
371. Sub-component 1.1: Review and formulation of policies and regulations. With
over 200 food safety regulations over the past years24, these will be reviewed, consolidated,
and harmonized to facilitate certification, enforcement, inspection, and monitoring by
concerned agencies as well as allow producers, processors, and traders to easily conform
with these regulations and with international food quality and safety standards. A detailed
review of existing decrees, policies, and strategies for ensuring agro-product safety and
quality in Viet Nam will be undertaken. This will include an assessment of the consistency of
regulations with policies and strategies, and identification of requirements for further
regulations. The review and assessment of existing regulations, policies, and strategies will
form the basis for the formulation of new regulations, policies, and strategies for improving
safety and quality of fruit, vegetables, and tea. The review and formulation of policies and
regulations will address the following issues: (i) coordination within MARD for food safety; (ii)
identification of lead agencies for different aspects of food safety and establishment of a food
safety system from central to local level; (iii) establishment of monitoring, information, and
communication systems; (iv) planning of safe agricultural zones (SAZ); (v) development of
standards, accreditation, and certification; and (vi) incentives policies for certification. A Fund
for Promotion of Certification Bodies will be established and managed by DCP on a
competitive basis.
Sub-component 1.2: Capacity building
372. MARD has traditionally being focused on improving productivity and accelerating
agricultural diversification. The role of MARD in food safety has been limited in the past to
pesticides control. It is however increasingly realized that improving agro-products quality
and safety depends on meeting more comprehensive standards and engaging in practices
that are relatively new in Viet Nam. Current capacity at MARD and DARD to meet these
more complex standards is low and the capacity needs are high. This implies a considerable
effort in capacity building of agencies at MARD. Activities under this subcomponent will (i)
facilitate the development and completion of policies and regulations on food safety and
quality; (ii) strengthen the lead agency for crop food safety within MARD (the Department of
Crop Production); (iii) strengthen the capacity of supporting staff to the lead body for food
safety coordination within MARD (the proposed Standing Committee on Food Safety); (iv)
strengthen the lead agencies for monitoring and certification for agro-product quality and
safety (NAFIQAD and DCP); (v) design and test the establishment of a Province Food Safety
Index (PFSI) and an agro-product safety information and communication system; (vi) improve
skills and knowledge of food safety specialists at MARD and DARD who will be capable to
train food safety facilitators at district and commune level; (vii) further develop VIETGAP and
other standards for agro-product safety and quality; (viii) improve inspection; (ix) improve
planning and management of safe agricultural zones (SAZ); (x) improve capacity to test,
demonstrate, and disseminate good agricultural practices; and (x) improve capacity of
laboratories in testing and risk analysis. About 134 staff from different departments of MARD
(and NAFEC) and 144 staff of DARDs in the 16 provinces will be trained on a regular basis.
These staff will in turn conduct training of trainers at the province, district and commune
24
See Appendix on Regulations
102
level. In addition staff from 100 certified organizations and 20 laboratories will also be
trained.
Sub-component 1.3: Management of Crop Food Safety System
373. A Crop Food Safety Management System (CFSMS) will be piloted in order to facilitate
the coordination, monitoring, and management of food safety from the central level (MARD)
to the commune level25. The proposed Crop Food Safety Management System includes (i) a
coordination body at MARD (the Standing Committee on Food Safety) headed by a MARD
Vice Minister; (ii) a lead department for monitoring (NAFIQAD); (iii) a lead department for
policy formulation, development of standards, accreditation of certification bodies, and
communication about crop food safety (DCP); and (iv) specialized positions at the central,
provincial, district, and commune level responsible for the management of the food safety
system and facilitation of safe food production and internal control system (ICS) of certified
producers. The proposed system is consistent with existing regulations giving a mandate to
DCP in crop food safety and a mandate to NAFIQAD for overall food safety and monitoring.
Positions for food safety specialists and facilitators will be required for project implementation
and are piloted in the project for institutionalization. The activities in this component include:
(1) establishment of Standing Committee on Food Safety headed by Vice Ministry and
Secretariat provided by NAFIQAD; (2) establishment of units within NAFIQAD for Food
Safety Monitoring; (3) establishment of units within DCP for food safety; and (4) identification
of staff to reassign or recruit for the positions of Food Safety Specialists and Food Safety
Facilitators.
8.11.1 List of outputs
1. Improved regulatory framework and coordination of state agencies involved in the

management of food quality and safety of fruit, vegetables, and tea
2. Strengthened capacity of state agencies, certification bodies, and laboratories
involved in the implementation of quality and safe food production, processing, and
trading of fruit, vegetables, and tea.
3. Establishment of a pilot Crop Food Safety Management System (CFSMS) from
the central level of MARD to the commune level for fruit, vegetables, and tea.
8.11.2 Output 1: Improved regulatory framework and coordination

for state management of safety and quality of fruit, vegetables, and
tea
8.11.2.1 Activities for Output 1
374. This output aims at improving the regulatory framework and coordination for state
management of safety and quality of fruit, vegetables, and tea. The sets of activities under
this output consist of
1.2.1. Review of existing regulations

1.2.2. Regulation of the piloting of a CFSMC
1.2.3. Planning of SAZ
1.2.4. Establishment of monitoring system unit
25
See Appendix on CFSMS.
103
1.2.5. Piloting of Provincial Food Safety Index
1.2.6. Establishment of information system
1.2.7. Establishment of communication system
1.2.8. Development of VIETGAPs and establishment of Standing Committee
on Good Practices
1.2.9. Development of standards
1.2.10. Incentive policy
375. Activity 1.1.1 Review of existing regulations. This activity consists in a detailed
review of the existing regulations, policies, and strategy to ensure food safety and quality in
Viet Nam. The objective of this review is to assess the consistency of regulations, identify the
needs for further regulations, and make recommendations about the time sequence in which
various regulations should be formulated. Regulations are the outcome of policies and
strategies, which may be explicitly or implicitly stated. Part of the terms of reference for the
review will include a review and assessment of current policies and strategies and
recommendations related to the need of formulated new policies and strategies. The review
and its recommendation will then be submitted to MARD for approval. The document will be
the basis for planning the formulation of regulations, policies, and strategies related to food
safety.
376. Activity 1.1.2 – Regulation for the piloting of crop food safety management
system at MARD. The piloting of the proposed crop food safety management system (see
sub-component 1.3) will require the formulation of appropriate regulations, including roles
and responsibilities for the coordination body and the lead agencies at MARD on different
aspects of food safety. Technical assistance and advisory services will be required to support
the formulation of the regulations.
377. Activity 1.1.3 - Develop policies and regulations for planning of SAZ. While there
are procedures and expertise for land use planning, including agricultural land, there are not
yet procedures, standards, and regulations about safe agricultural zones. Technical
assistance and advisory services will be needed to facilitate the planning of SAZ.
378. Activity 1.1.4 - Develop policies and regulations for the establishment of
monitoring system. While all the agencies at MARD are responsible for monitoring, no
specific agency or unit is responsible for monitoring food safety and quality regularly and
effectively. Technical assistance will facilitate the establishment of such a unit at NAFIQAD,
its roles and responsibility, and the institutional framework to accompany a monitoring
system for food quality and safety.
379. Activity 1.1.5 - Design and Implementation of Provincial Food Safety Index.
Technical assistance will be needed to design, test, and formulate implementation
arrangements for the establishment of a PFSI. Regulations to ensure that the pilot phase of a
PFSI becomes institutionalized will need to accompany the design and implementation of the
PFSI.
380. Activity 1.1.6 - Develop policies and regulations for the establishment of
information system. Similar situation as in the monitoring system. Every agency is
responsible for providing information, but no single agency coordinates and ensures that
information is systematically organized and provided. Technical assistance and advisory
services will ensure that a true information system for food safety and quality emerges at
MARD.
381. Activitiy 1.1.7 - Develop policies and regulations for the Establishment of
communication system. Similar situation as in the monitoring system. Every agency is
responsible for communication, but no single agency coordinates and ensures that
104
communication is systematically organized and provided. Technical assistance and advisory
services will ensure that a true communication system for food safety and quality emerges at
MARD.
382. Activity 1.1.8 - Development and review of VIETGAPs. After the development of
the first good practices for fruit, vegetables, and tea, MARD is in the process of implementing
the existing VIETGAP. The implementation will pose new issues to consider and perhaps
lead to revisions of the VIETGAP. New VIETGAP might have to be formulated for either
different groups of commodities, or for specific products within each of the three groups of
commodities (fruit, vegetables, and tea) for which VIETGAP have already been established.
The experience of other countries and organizations involved in good practices should be
considered. Technical assistance and advisory services will be needed to ensure that
VIETGAP is reviewed and improved over time. A VIETGAP Standards Committee will review
annually the progress on VIETGAP and make recommendations.
383. Activity 1.1.9 - Development of standards. Technical assistance will facilitate the
review and formulation of standards for specific products and processes within the fruit,
vegetables, and tea groups. There are dozens of different fruit and vegetables that might
require the establishment of standards. In the case of tea, there are already 28 TCVN. A
revision of the existing ones and a formulation of new ones might also be needed.
384. Activity 1.1.10 - Incentive Policy. This is the area where considerable inputs in
terms of technical and advisory services will be require to formulate incentive policies,
including certification and lab testing subsidies that will facilitate the emergence of a large
number of certifying bodies and certified organizations. An incentive fund to promote
emergence of Certification Bodies will be established and administered by DCP on a
competitive basis (see Box 1).
Box 1. The Fund for the Promotion of Certification
The Fund will be established at MARD and managed by the DCP to promote the emergence of
national certification bodies and certified bodies.
Eligibility criteria
In order to apply to the grant, organizations have to provide evidence about:
(i) Having being accredited as national Certification Bodies for VIETGAP or having been
certified for VIETGAP
(ii) Being in good legal standing and compliance with their tax obligations
(iii) In the case of certification bodies: having certified at least 5 different business units
(including farmer groups and cooperatives) in VIETGAP
(iv) In the case of certified organizations: having at least 100 members in the certified
organizations
(v) Having human resource capacity to undertake certification and a human resources
development plan
(vi) Having a business plan to expand their operations
(vii) Financial statements (assets and liabilities, profit and losses) for the past 2 years or since
they have become Certification Bodies or Certified Organizations
(viii) Having a business plan on how to utilize the grant
Selection criteria
For each of the following criteria, the selection committee will establish a weight and each candidate
105
will be scored. A minimum score of 700 will be required to be awarded a grant.
Criteria Weight (%)

Human resource capacity
Business plan
Past experience in certification
Management and organization
100%
A steering committee headed by the Director of DCP might includie the following members:
(i) Head of Accreditation Unit at DCP
(ii) Head of NAFIQAD Quality Assurance Division
(iii) Head of Finance Division of DCP
(iv) Director of CPMU
Submissions of eligible candidates will be solicited through advertising in local media and in the
website of MARD.
Decisions about allocation of funds will be taken on a semi-annual basis. Awarded candidates will be
publicly announced. Candidates who have not been selected (because of eligibility criteria) or not
awarded a grant (because of low score) will be notified in writing with an explanation of the reasons.
Disbursements of the grant will occur through the CPMU. The Fund will be active until it is completely
used up.
8.11.2.2 Targets for Output 1
7. A review of existing regulations submitted to MARD decision makers

8. Standing Committee on Food Safety headed by Vice Minister of MARD for food
quality and safety established with Secretariat provided by NaFIQAD
9. A comprehensive and readily accessible set of regulations for the implementation
of food safety and quality of fruit, vegetables, and tea including regulations on
a. SAZ
b. Incentive policy for the adoption of VIETGAP and other GAPs
c. Monitoring, communication, and information
10. A consistent and readily available set of good practices (VIETGAP) and standards
in production and postharvest operations (TCVN) related to fruit, vegetables, and
tea (standards for at least 10 different types of vegetables, 10 different types of
fruit, and tea; including organic production)
11. Food safety monitoring system, information system, and communication system
for fruit, vegetables, and tea established
a. Monitoring system producing regular quarterly reports based on survey and
testing conducted by an adequate number of well functioning laboratories; the
system will include the establishment of a Provincial Food Safety Index.
b. Information system maintaining website with all the relevant information on
food safety at MARD such as standards, GAPs, regulations, publications,
training, market news, price information, trade data;
c. Communication system conducting regular awareness campaign, publishing a
food safety newsletter, organizing yearly conference on food safety
106
8.11.2.3 Inputs for Output 1
1. Technical assistance in the review and formulation of regulations, development of

standards and practices, certification, monitoring, information, and communication
2. Equipment, computer and software systems
3. Recurrent services (staff, surveys)
4. Incentive Fund
8.11.2.4 Costs for Output 126
385. The summary costs are reported in the following table. Details are provided in the
Annex (see section 9.12).
Table 22 Summary of Costs for Output 1

Item USD
Investment costs $ 1,592,000
Recurrent costs $ 1,076,000
Total Costs $ 2,668,000
Note. Recurrent costs are for 5 years
8.11.2.5 Data sources and reporting mechanisms for Output 1
7. CPMU reports and document records

8. Standing Committee on Food Safety minutes and list of meeting attendance
9. MARD decrees, decisions on food safety and quality
10. STAMEQ-approved TCVN related to fruit, vegetables, and tea
11. Reports of the monitoring unit under MARD, including Provincial Food Safety Index
12. Reports of the information and communication units at MARD
8.11.3 Output 2: Strengthened capacity of state agencies,

certification bodies, and laboratories involved in the
implementation of quality and safe food production, processing,
and trading of fruit, vegetables, and tea.
8.11.3.1 Activities for Output 2
386. The aim of this output is to strengthen capacity of state agencies, certification bodies,
and laboratories involved in food safety for fruit, vegetables, and tea. The outcome of this
output would be an improved service delivery to producers and enterprises and an overall
increase in food safety as measured by an index (the Provincial Food Safety Index see
section 8.3.1.1) that the project will establish.
387. The sets of activities under this output consist of:
1.2.1. Assessment of current capacity and capacity needs for food safety at
MARD, certification bodies, and laboratories for fruit, vegetables, and
tea
26
The costs are preliminary indications of what will be in the COSTAB of the project.
107
1.2.2. Capacity of formulating food safety regulations, policies, and strategies
1.2.3. Capacity of accreditation agency (DCP) to certify, provide training, and
audit certification bodies
1.2.4. Capacity of certification bodies to provide training and audit certified
organizations
1.2.5. Capacity of laboratories to provide testing and analytical services to
monitoring and inspection agencies
1.2.6. Capacity of testing, demonstrating, and disseminating GAPs effectively
1.2.7. Capacity of developing and harmonizing domestic standards with
international standards
1.2.8. Capacity of monitoring food safety from pre-production to
postproduction level
1.2.9. Capacity of inspecting food safety from pre-production to
postproduction level
1.2.10. Capacity of informing effectively about food safety issues
1.2.11. Capacity of communicating effectively about food safety issues
1.2.12. Capacity of planning for SAZ
1.2.13. Capacity in Risk Analysis
388. Activity 1.2.1 - Assessment of current capacity and capacity needs for food
safety at MARD, certification bodies, and laboratories for fruit, vegetables, and tea,
and planning. Technical assistance will be required to assess capacity needs of state
agencies, laboratories, and DARDs, identify needs, and establish an action plan for the
implementation of a capacity strengthening plan. The content of the capacity strengthening
activities will include the items described in the following sections.
389. Activity 1.2.2 – Strengthen capacity of formulating food safety regulations,

policies, and strategies. The capacity strengthening activities will consist of technical
assistance and advisory services to train state agency staff in the formulation of policies and
strategies for improving food safety. Study tours will be organized in order to learn directly
from other countries with more advanced food safety assurance systems.
390. Activity 1.2.3 – Strengthen capacity of accreditation agency (DCP) to certify,

provide training, and audit certification bodies. Accreditation and certification are new
activities for MARD agencies. Considerable training and technical assistance will be required
to implement this activity. Both staff at DCP and DARDs in the 16 project provinces will be
trained.
391. Activity 1.2.4 – Strengthen capacity of certification bodies to provide training

and audit certified organizations. There are still few certification bodies in Viet Nam in the
field of agriculture and few certified organizations. Training of certification bodies for
VIETGAP is currently undertaken by DCP and DARDs but the training is insufficient.
Technical assistance to provide this training is required for this activity.
392. Activity 1.2.5 – Strengthen capacity of laboratories to provide testing and

analytical services to monitoring and inspection agencies. Technical training in various
methods of testing including rapid testing will be part of this activity.
393. Activity 1.2.6 – Strengthen capacity of testing, demonstrating, and

disseminating GAPs effectively. The innovations in production and postharvest operations
will require adequate training of trainers which is the content of this activity. Both MARD staff
and NAFEC training of trainers will be undertaken.
108
394. Activity 1.2.7 – Strengthen capacity of developing and harmonizing domestic
standards with international standards. Training courses in developing and harmonizing
standards for a variety of specific products in fruit, vegetables, and tea will ensure increase
capacity and a smoother process of approval of standards by the competent authority.
395. Activity 1.2.8 – Strengthen capacity of monitoring food safety from pre-
production to postproduction level. Food safety monitoring requires specific methods that
could be effectively implemented. The main beneficiaries of the training will be the staff of the
monitoring unit responsible for the management of the (yet to be established) food safety
monitoring system at MARD and DARD.
396. Activity 1.2.9 – Strengthen capacity of inspecting food safety from pre-
production to postproduction level. Training in inspection methods to ensure safety at the
pre-production level (eg pesticides trade), production level (eg application of pesticides,
clean water), postharvest operations (eg storage, handling, packaging), and delivery to the
markets (eg trucks). Both staff at DCP and DARDs in the 16 project provinces will be trained.
397. Activity 1.2.10 – Strengthen capacity of informing effectively about food safety
issues. Training will teach what should be in an information system and how to manage the
updating of information. Both staff at DCP and DARDs in the 16 project provinces will be
trained.
398. Activity 1.2.11 – Strengthen capacity of communicating effectively about food

safety issues. This will include training to improve communication of MARD agencies in
food safety, workshops, conferences, website, and publication material. Both staff at DCP
and DARDs in the 16 project provinces will be trained.
399. Activity 1.2.12 – Strengthen capacity of planning for SAZ. Training course in
planning of safe agricultural zones will be undertaken by technical assistance using methods
of regional planning and community participation. Both staff at DCP and DARDs in the 16
project provinces will be trained.
400. Activity 1.2.13 – Strengthen capacity in Risk Analysis. Risk analysis has been
included in the Action Plan for Food Safety (2007). However, capacity for risk analysis is still
quite low, particularly within MARD agencies. Considerable technical assistance in this area
will be provided through regular training courses.
1. About 130 staff from MARD and 140 staff from DARD trained in regulations and
policy formulation, certification, GAP, standards, monitoring, inspection, information,
communication, planning, and risk analysis
2. Staff from 100 certified/certifying bodies trained
3. Staff from 20 laboratories trained
4. Staff from 16 DARD provinces trained in planning SAZ
1. Training staff and training of trainers

2. Technical assistance
3. Study tours
109
401. The summary costs are reported in the following table. Details are provided in the
Annex (see section 9.12).

Item USD
Investment costs $ 1,140,000
Recurrent costs $ -
Total Costs $ 1,140,000
402. Monitoring of targets will be through quarterly reports made available on the website
of MARD. Periodic (bi-annual) surveys of farmers and business enterprises will assess
quality of service of relevant agencies of MARD and DARD.

2. Reports of the monitoring unit under MARD, including Provincial Food Safety Index
3. Number of certified bodies by DCP
4. Area of SZA established by DARD
5. Quality of service surveys conducted by independent organization
8.11.4 Output 3: Establishment of a pilot Crop Food Safety

Management System (CFSMS) from the central level of MARD to
the commune level for fruit, vegetables, and tea.
403. Activities under sub-component 1.3 will be carried out by MARD and DARD.
404. Activity 1.3.1 - Establish the Standing Committee for Food Safety. As a pilot of
the Crop Food System Management system, the project will establish a Standing Committee
to coordinate food safety on crops. The members of the committee include NAFIQAD, DCP,
DPP, DST, ICD, and AEC. The committee is headed by a Vice Minister of MARD. The
Secretariat of the Committee will be based at NAFIQAD and will be responsible for providing
support services to the Committee (organize meetings, keep minutes, etc.). Regularly
quarterly meetings (or more often if needed) will be held.
405. Activity 1.3.2 - Establish a Pilot Unit of Food Safety Monitoring at NAFIQAD.
The unit will include various units for methodology, statistical analysis, reporting, and
operations (organization and management of monitoring surveys and testing, collection of
information from other departments and agencies). Part of this activity will include identifying,
re-assigning or recruiting staff.
27
The costs are preliminary indications of what will be finalized in the COSTAB of the project.
110
406. Activity 1.3.3 - Establish Pilot Units of Food Safety at DCP and at DARD of 16
provinces. The unit at DCP will include staff for policy, standards, accreditation and
certification, monitoring and inspection, and communication and information.
407. Activity 1.3.4 - Identify, re-assign, or recruit staff for the positions of Food
Safety Specialists (at MARD and DARD), and Food Safety Facilitators (at district or
commune level). Several of the positions for Food Safety Specialists and Food Safety
Facilitators will be filled by reassigning responsibility of existing staff. In some cases, new
staff will need to be recruited. Provisions of salaries of new staff at MARD are included.
5. Standing Committee for Food Safety established by first half of 2009

6. Pilot units for Food Safety Monitoring established by second half of 2009 at NAFIQAD
7. Pilot units for Food Safety established at DCP and DARDs in 16 provinces by second
half of 2009
8. Job descriptions, reassignment of staff, and identification of staff for the positions of
Food Safety Specialists and Food Safety Specialists (at district and commune level)
completed by second half of 2009.
1. Staff and specialists

Item USD
Investment costs $ 312,000
Recurrent costs $ 360,000
Total Costs $ 672,000

6. Minutes of Standing Committee for Food Safety and attendance lists
7. Records of staff fully devoted to food safety activities in the project
8. Quality of service surveys conducted by independent organization
8.12 Justification, Benefits, and Risks
8.12.1 Justification
408. The policy and institutional framework for improving food safety and quality is
gradually emerging since the early 2000s. The concepts of food safety and quality are still
28
The costs are preliminary indications of what will be finalized in the COSTAB of the project.
111
relatively new both to the key institutional players and to majority of farmers, enterprises, and
consumers. The novelty of the concepts implies that a large body of regulations has still to be
issues, policies and strategies have to be better formulated, and the required capacity for
institutions has to be build.
8.12.2 Benefits
409. The improved legal and institutional environment will results in improved incentives
for farmers and enterprises to engage in safe and quality production, processing, and
marketing; increase the trust of consumers in the food they eat and their readiness to pay a
premium for safe food; increase the opportunity for exports; and contribute to improve health
of the population by reducing the chemical and microbiological contamination of food leading
to food-born diseases and long-term health negative impacts.
8.12.3 Assumptions and Risks
8.12.3.1 Assumptions for Output 1
6. Sustained commitment of MARD to improving policy and regulatory framework

7. Cooperation among departments to transfer responsibilities and assets as necessary
8. Rationalization of laboratory system may involve making use of analytical services of
agencies outside of MARD
9. GAP and other standards reviewed annually and revised to meet user concerns and
any changes in market requirements
10. Phasing out of subsidies to certified bodies over the course of the Project
8.12.3.2 Risks for Output 1
4. High global food prices might retard the emphasis on food safety and quality
5. Rent seeking behavior might result from an empowered inspection system
6. Resistance to separate monitoring agency from implementation agency
4. Sustained commitment of MARD to capacity strengthening of state organizations,

laboratories, and certified bodies
5. Coordination with other projects involved in capacity strengthening activities for food
quality and safety
6. Food safety reflected in new degree programs at education institutions and research
programs at research organizations
1. Scheduling of training activities might conflict with other activities
112
2. Sustained commitment of MARD to pilot the crop food safety management system.
2. The piloted system does not lead to replicable outcome in other provinces.
113
9 ANNEXES
Annex 1. Codex Alimentarius Commission
Annex 2. Introduction to SPS and TBT Agreements
Annex 3. The SPS Agreement
Annex 4. The TBT Agreement
Annex 5. Risk Analysis
Annex 6. Standards and Trade Development Facility
Annex 7. Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP)
Annex 8. Codex Standards, Code of Practice, Max Residue Limits, Guidelines
Annex 9. Viet Nam Standards (TCVN) for Food and Agriculture
Annex 10. Examples of some Vietnamese Standards related to VIETGAP
Annex 11. Implications of Food Safety Regulations for Different Actors along the Value
Chain
Annex 12. Preliminary Estimation of Costs for the Project Component: Policy and
Institutional Development for Food Safety at the central level
Annex 13. Design and Monitoring Framework
Annex 14. Food Safety in Thailand
9.1 Codex Alimentarius Commission
410. The Codex Alimentarius Commission was created in 1963 by FAO and WHO to
develop food standards, guidelines and related texts such as codes of practice under the
Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme. The main purposes of this Programme are
protecting health of the consumers and ensuring fair trade practices in the food trade, and
promoting coordination of all food standards work undertaken by international governmental
and non-governmental organizations.
411. The Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) is an intergovernmental body that

coordinates food standards at the international level. Its main objectives are to protect the
health of consumers and ensure fair practices in food trade. The CAC has proved to be most
successful in achieving international harmonization in food quality and safety requirements. It
has formulated international standards for a wide range of food products and specific
requirements covering pesticide residues, food additives, veterinary drug residues, hygiene,
food contaminants, labeling etc. These Codex recommendations are used by governments to
determine and refine policies and programmes under their national food control system.
More recently, Codex has embarked on a series of activities based on risk assessment to
address microbiological hazards in foods, an area previously unattended. Codex work has
created worldwide awareness of food safety, quality and consumer protection issues, and
has achieved international consensus on how to deal with them scientifically, through a risk-
based approach. As a result, there has been a continuous appraisal of the principles of food
safety and quality at the international level. There is increasing pressure for the adoption of
these principles at the national level.
For more information on CODEX see the official website at

http://www.codexalimentarius.net/web/index_en.jsp
9.1.1 Office of Vietnam food standardization commission (Abbreviated

Vietnam Codex Contact Point - VCAC)
412. Vietnam Codex Contact Point which is established and operated by Directorate for
Standards and Quality, is standing out organ of Vietnam Codex Alimentarius Commission;
communication agency of Vietnam Codex Alimentarius Committee with regional and
International Food Standardization Commission CAC, ISO/TC 34.
413. The tasks of VCAC are:
1. Prepares the content, program of planning and organizes meetings of VCAC,

Secretariat and the Technical Committees.
2. Organizes the research works, comment and build up the Codex standards.
3. Proposes methods to put the international standards in application in Vietnam.
Organizes collection, makes analysis, systematize and distributes domestic
and international documents concerned to activities of Vietnam Codex
Alimentarius Commission.
4. Informs, circulates and introduces the standards, recommendations of CAC
and ISO/ TC34 to relevant bodies and contact CAC and Technical Committee
on Agricultural Products of ISO/ TC34.
115
9.1.1.1 Technical Committees of Vietnam Codex Alimentarius commission
414. The Technical Committees of Vietnam Codex Alimentarius Commission are

organized and conducted by the Decision No 246/ TDC dated 13 October 1993 Directorate
for Standards and Quality the "Operating Regulations of the Vietnam Food Standardization
Organization" issued.
1. Technical Committee on Cereals, Legumes and Pulses.

2. Technical Committee on Fats and Oils.
3. Technical Committee on General Principles on Foods.
4. Technical Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants.
5. Technical Committee on Food Hygiene.
6. Technical Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses.
7. Technical Committee on Pesticide Residues.
8. Technical Committee on Meat.
9. Technical Committee on Drinking Waters.
10. Technical Committee on Fresh Fruits and Vegetables.
11. Technical Committee on Fish and Fishery Products.
12. Technical Committee on Milk and Milk Products.
13. Technical Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling.
14. Technical Committee on Food Import Export Inspection and Certification
Systems.
15. Technical Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods.
9.1.1.2 Contact Address:

Directorate for standards and quality (stameq)
Vietnam food standardization committee
Vietnam codex contact point
70 Tran Hung Dao, Hanoi, Vietnam
Tel: (84-4) 9426605
Fax: (84-4) 8222520
Email: codex@tcvn.gov.vn
116
9.2 Introduction to SPS and TBT Agreements
415. Government regulations or industry standards for goods can impact trade in at least
three ways: (i) they can facilitate exchange by clearly defining product characteristics and
improving compatibility and usability; (ii) they also advance domestic social goals like public
health by establishing minimum standards or prescribing safety requirements; finally, (iii) they
can hide protectionist policies. During the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade negotiations,
member nations established The Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and
Phytosanitary (SPS) Measures and the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) to
address the emerging debate over the use of standards in international trade. The SPS and
TBT Agreements can be interpreted as an attempt to balance the first two uses of standards
and to minimize the third. In other words, these Agreements balance the competing demands
for domestic regulatory autonomy and the global harmonization of product standards. At the
same time, the agreements attempt to prevent standards from becoming a protectionist
device.
416. The Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement (SPS) allows members to take
scientifically based measures to protect public health. The agreement commits members to
base these measures on internationally established guidelines and risk assessment
procedures. In the case of particularly stringent measures, countries must present scientific
justification. When existing scientific evidence is insufficient to determine risk, members may
adopt measures on the basis of available information, but must obtain additional information
to objectively ground their assessment of risk within a reasonable period of time. Generally
speaking, the SPS Agreement is a compromise that permits countries to take measures to
protect public health within their borders so long as they do so in a manner that restricts
trade as little as possible.
417. Likewise, the Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement (TBT) strikes a delicate
balance between the policy goals of trade facilitation and national autonomy in technical
regulations. The agreement attempts to extricate the trade-facilitating aspects of standards
from their trade-distorting potential by obligating countries to ensure that technical
regulations and product standards do not unnecessarily restrict international trade. The TBT
Agreement works toward this end in three ways. The agreement encourages 'standard
equivalence' between countries, in other words, the formal acceptance of the standards of
other countries through explicit agreements. It also promotes the use of international
standards. Lastly, it mandates that countries establish enquiry points and national notification
authorities (the two may be the same body) in order to answer questions about SPS
regulations and notify other nations of new regulations respectively. Enquiry points compile
all available information in that country on product standards and trade regulations and
provide it to other members upon request. The national notification authorities report
changes in trade policy to the WTO and receive and take comments on these measures.
418. STAMEQ is the coordinating agency for the Agreement on TBT in Viet Nam.
117
9.3 The SPS Agreement
Source: http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/FE492
9.3.1 What Is the WTO Sanitary and Phytosanitary (WTO-SPS)

Agreement?
419. WTO is the acronym for World Trade Organization. It is the only international body
that sets and oversees the global rules of trade between nations. At the heart of the WTO is
a set of agreements, negotiated and signed by the bulk of the world's trading nations and
ratified by their governments. These agreements are the legal ground rules for international
commerce. They encourage governments to keep their trade policies within agreed limits to
everybody's benefit (http://www.wto.org ).
420. The Sanitary (human and animal safety) and Phytosanitary (plant safety) Agreement
(SPS Agreement) is one such agreement forming part of the 1994 Accords that established
the WTO, which replaced the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). Regulations
(http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/sps_e.htm ) under the purview of the WTO-SPS
Agreement include:
• the protection of animal or plant life or health within a territory from risks
arising from the entry, establishment, or spread of pest, disease, disease-
carrying organisms, or disease-causing organisms.
• the protection of human or animal life or health within a territory from risks
arising from additives, contaminants, toxins, or disease-causing organisms in
foods, beverages, or feedstuffs.
• the protection of human life or health within a territory from risks arising from
diseases carried by animals, plants, or products thereof, or from entry,
establishment, or spread of pests.
• the prevention or reduction of the risks of other damages within a territory from
the entry, establishment, or spread of pests (Appendix A of WTO-SPS
Agreement 1994, Annex A).
9.3.2 What Is the Economic Rationale for Governments to Become

Involved?
421. The rationale for involving governments in establishing policies and implementing
measures to prevent or control the introduction and spread of invasive pests and diseases
can be found in the economic concepts of public services (goods) and externalities. As
defined here, public service/good is something that provides a "free rider" benefit (it is
available to everyone). Since no one can take ownership, the government assumes the
responsibility of providing public services/goods (recouping costs by means such as
taxation). One example of a public service is the measures aimed at preventing or controlling
the spread of invasive pests and diseases. The concept of a public service can easily be
extended to global public service when there is cooperation among governments of many
countries to take action to reduce, say, the threat of invasive pests and diseases.
422. An externality arises when the action or inaction of one party affects another party in
a positive or negative manner without the party responsible for the action or inaction being
rewarded if the impact is positive or charged if the impact is negative. For example, a
118
negative externality may arise when imported goods arrive accompanied by invasive pests or
diseases, which may reduce domestic output and/or increase production costs. Usually the
exporting country is not made to stand the cost of damages to the importing country. In such
cases where the market mechanisms alone fail to prevent or correct such negative
externalities, then governments are justified in providing regulations (public services) that will
prevent entry or reduce the risks of the threat.
423. The need for a government to protect its citizens and environment against imported
externalities (such as invasive pests and diseases) is recognized and embraced by the WTO
Agreement (discussed below), which promotes increased trade among countries. Take, for
example, the following two scenarios:
424. In the first scenario, government-imposed regulations to protect human and

environmental resources from negative externalities (e.g., the threat of harmful organisms)
through trade barriers may benefit a country.
425. In the second scenario, regulations imposed for the sole purpose of protecting
domestic producers from international competition may harm a country.
426. The first scenario is acceptable to the WTO, but the second scenario is not. It is this
dual nature of the SPS regulations--having on the one hand the potential to provide genuine
protection, while on the other hand the potential to be used for economic-based protection--
that has made their implementation so contentious and has signaled the need for an SPS
Agreement among governments.
9.3.3 Why Does the WTO-SPS Agreement Promote Free Trade?
427. The main purpose of the WTO-SPS Agreement is to promote free trade. In principle,
a country can increase its real national income by more efficiently utilizing its limited
resources and engaging in mutual trade, which means consumers can enjoy a higher level of
satisfaction and producers can sell their products in an expanded market. In general the
global economy as a whole is expected to benefit. However, when such trade encounters
negative externalities or hidden costs (e.g., from importing harmful pests and diseases),
acceptance of the general premise becomes blurred. The gains from trade are no longer a
certainty.
9.3.4 What Is the Genesis of the WTO-SPS Agreement?
428. The decision to negotiate a separate Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and
Phytosanitary Measures during the 1986-1994 GATT Uruguay Round of multilateral trade
negotiations marked a turning point in the development of multilateral trade rules and gave
prominence to issues related to agricultural trade and the risk of importing invasive pests and
diseases and food-borne illnesses. Although the SPS measures were recognized as having
the potential to impede trade and were considered important under previous GATT rounds,
they were relegated to being included as parts of other agreements and as exceptions to the
main provisions fostering increased trade. [SPS measures were found in the original GATT
Articles, mainly Article XX "General Exceptions," and later in the 1979 Tokyo Round
Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade, a plurilateral agreement known as the Standards
Code (http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/fact4_e.htm ).] The impetus for
negotiating a separate Agreement for SPS measures and for bringing quarantine issues to
the forefront can be attributed to the deeper integration of agriculture into the international
trading system (open markets and free trade) in general and to the decision to discipline the
use of quantifiable nontrade barriers (quotas, subsidies, and licenses) in particular. Many
119
countries, including the United States, feared that, with a reduction in the use and levels of
these support measures, some importing countries might turn to technical trade barriers
(notably SPS measures) as a means of allowing them to continue providing support to their
farming community. Consequently, the intent of the Agreement was to ensure that when SPS
measures were applied, they were used only to the extent necessary to ensure food safety
and animal and plant health, and not to unduly restrict market access for other countries
(James and Anderson, 1998; Roberts, 1998).
9.3.5 What Are the Main Provisions of the WTO-SPS Agreements?
429. To achieve its objectives, the WTO-SPS Agreement contains a set of substantive and
procedural provisions. The substantive provisions are aimed at protecting human, animal,
and plant health and life while preventing unjustifiable barriers to trade. The procedural
provisions create a framework to improve communication between members regarding
proposed SPS changes and to provide a forum for dispute settlement.
430. The WTO-SPS Agreement creates a framework for border protection and eradication
measures while facilitating freer trade. The Agreement is based on the following five general
principles:
• Harmonization--encourages the adoption of measures that conform to

international standards, guidelines, and/or recommendations of international
agencies.
• Equivalence--mutual recognition of different but equivalent measures to

achieve international standards.
• Non-discriminatory--treating imports no differently than domestic produce.
• Transparency--notifying trading partners of changes in their SPS measures,

especially when the measures differ from international standards.
• Regionalization--allows continued exports from clean (disease-free) areas of

affected countries.
• The Agreement reaffirms the freedom of countries to choose their appropriate
level of protection against imported pests and pathogens. However, when the
measures do not conform to international standards, the importing country
must scientifically investigate why the measures are needed and how they
control risk.
431. The main substantive provisions can be found in Articles 5 and 6:
• Article 5.1, requires members (when possible and as appropriate) to base

their SPS measures on risk assessment methodologies developed under the
auspices of the appropriate relevant international organization.
• Article 5.2 stipulates that countries should consider direct risk-related costs
(e.g., potential production or sales losses or control and eradication costs)
both in assessing and managing risks through the choice of an SPS measure
to protect plant or animal health.
• Article 5.5 states that each member is also obligated to avoid arbitrary or
unjustifiable distinctions in the levels of protection it considers to be
120
appropriate (if these distinctions would result in disguised restrictions on
international trade) to achieve the objective of consistency in the application of
SPS measures.
• Article 6 requires that import protocols be based on risk assessments that

evaluate the claims by exporting countries that certain regions are free of
quarantine diseases or pests, or that the prevalence of quarantine pests and
disease is low.
9.3.6 Final Comments
432. The challenge confronting member countries is how to balance unique regulatory
needs against the general goal of freer trade (enjoying the benefits that come with trade
liberation and globalization while simultaneously minimizing the risks of the introduction and
spread of pests, weeds, and diseases). A global SPS Agreement helps, but it is not a
panacea. The main purpose of the WTO-SPS Agreement is to facilitate trade. However, we
need to make sure that the benefits attained from trade can be sustained. Imports of harmful
organisms could easily erase such gains. It must be remembered that a country's first line of
defense is prevention and that prevention is always less costly than eradication.
9.3.7 References
1. Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO). 2001. The State of Food and Agriculture
2001. Rome, Italy: FAO.
2. James, S., and K. Anderson. 1998. On the Need for More Economics Assessment of
Quarantine Policies. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics
42(4):425-444.
3. McNeely, J.A. 1999. An Introduction to Human Dimensions of Invasive Alien Species.
In The Great Reshuffling: Human Dimensions of Alien Invasive Species, edited by
J.A. McNeely, pp 5-22. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN Publishers.
4. Roberts, D. 1998. Implementation of the WTO Agreement on the Application of
Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures.. Agriculture in the WTO/WRS-98-44.
Economic Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Washington,
D.C.
5. USDA Briefing Room. 2003. Invasive Species Management: Trends in Emergency
Program Expenditures.
http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/invasivespecies/indemnities.htm
6. USDA. 2003. Floriculture and Nursery Crops Situation and Outlook Yearbook.
FLO2003, Market and Trade Economics Division, Economic Research Service,
USDA, Washington, D.C. (June).
7. World Trade Organization (WTO). 1995. Agreement on the Application of Sanitary
and Phytosanitary Measures. In Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade
Negotiations: The Legal Texts. Geneva, Switzerland: WTO.
8. World Trade Organization (WTO) website at http://www.wto.org .
121
9.4 The TBT Agreement
Source: http://www.tralac.org/scripts/content.php?id=2733
9.4.1 The focus of GATT
433. Historically, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) - which came into
being in 1947 and existed until 1995, when it was replaced and broadened by the World
Trade Organisation (WTO) Agreement - dealt primarily with the reduction of tariffs and the
elimination of other import restrictions, and prohibited states to discriminate between their
trading partners (the so-called Most-Favoured-Nation principle) and between imported and
domestic goods (the so-called National Treatment Principle). In other words, the GATT
limited a country's ability to impose tariffs on goods upon their importation (states were
committed to a maximum tariff level they could charge on a given product) and restricted
their ability to create quantitative restrictions such as outright import bans, or quotas, tariff-
rate quotas, etc. Once imported goods had crossed the border and the tariff had been paid,
the GATT prohibited states from giving "less favourable treatment" to imported products in
comparison to domestic products. For instance, a state is prohibited from imposing a greater
sales tax upon an imported product than on a domestic product; or it may not impose
labelling requirements on imported goods that are more stringent or onerous than those
imposed on domestic goods.
9.4.2 The problem of de facto discrimination
434. But what if a certain measure does not distinguish between domestic and imported
goods expressly? For instance, a tax measure can stipulate that alcohol shall be taxed
progressively with increasing alcoholic strength, without distinguishing expressly between
alcoholic drinks of national and foreign provenience. However, even if such a measure does
not draw a express bright line between domestic and imported alcoholic drinks, it can
nevertheless violate WTO rules if it is applied "so as to afford protection" to domestic
products. For instance, while seemingly original-neutral in its express terms, the measure
can in fact discriminate against imported products if for instance the vast majority of imported
alcoholic drinks falls within the higher tax bracket (this was for instance the case in the WTO
cases Japan - Alcoholic Beverages, Korea - Alcoholic Beverages and Chile - Alcoholic
Beverages). Another example is a regulation which imposes significantly more stringent
labelling requirements on a type of product which is mostly imported (for instance, grain-feed
beef) than those imposed upon another, but similar type of product which is mostly
domestically produced (for instance, grass-fed beef).
9.4.3 The concept of "technical barriers to trade"
435. While an express discrimination against imported products (so-called de jure

discrimination) presents no major difficulties in legal terms and can be found to be in violation
of WTO rules rather easily, implicit discrimination (so called de facto discrimination) can
present very complex problems. It can become very difficult to say that a particular measure
is discriminatory against imported products (or services, for that matter, under the GATS
Agreement) - and thus in violation of WTO law - if the measure pursues a non-trade purpose
(for instance, consumer protection or environmental protection), but has some kind of
122
negative impact upon imports. For sure, de facto discrimination against imports can
sometimes be found relatively easily - the above-mentioned alcohol cases were rather
blatant examples of protectionism through seemingly original-neutral taxation measures. But
what about the following measures: a requirement that electrical appliances function on a
220V level, rather than 110V? Or that a particular toy safety standard must be observed?
436. It is clear that the measure concerning voltage reflects one particular kind of standard
that has historically evolved in a given country. But it is also clear that this requirement has a
trade implication - a company in a third country which produces electric appliances and
which wants to sell in countries with two differing voltage requirements will be unable to sell
both products in one market. Rather, this company will have to have two lines of production,
one for products functioning with 220V and the other for products functioning with 110V. This
will of course increase costs and prices.
437. The same will occur in the toy safety standard example. Even if the toy safety
requirement is perfectly reasonable, a company in a third country wanting to supply two
markets with two different safety requirements will incur additional costs and will be unable to
generate economies of scale because of the existence of different requirements in different
countries.
9.4.4 Discriminatory measures and technical barriers to trade
438. The two examples given here are generally referred to as "technical barriers to trade".
They are "technical", because they arise as a result of technical specifications concerning
product quality, packaging, labelling, safety features, etc. While the trade impeding effect of
de jure or de facto discrimination between domestic and imported products arises because
various differing regulations exist in one country, the trade impeding effect of technical
barriers to trade is due to the fact that technical requirements and different technical
standards vary from one country to another. It has to be admitted that technical requirements
can also be deliberately designed to afford protection to domestic production - conceptually,
they can then be said to be de facto discriminatory. This can happen if a government enacts
a technical measure with which, for some reason, domestic producers will have an easier
time complying. But trade impeding effects of a technical requirement arise even if a
measure is prepared in good faith and without any protectionist intention.
439. In this latter situation, the remedy cannot consist in telling a WTO member to simply
scrap the measure at issue - the measure fulfills an important purpose, for instance it
provides rules for consumer protection. The situation can only be remedied either by
enjoining states to prepare their technical regulations in a way which minimizes negative
trade impact, to recognize other countries' technical regulations as comparable to their own
or to work together to "harmonize" their technical regulations, i.e. to agree upon one
particular standard or regulation which will then be applicable everywhere. These latter three
things are what the TBT Agreement does. The TBT Agreement is independent from the
GATT and goes beyond the rules contained in the GATT. We have seen why - technical
barriers to trade exist when original-neutral rules have a negative trade impact even if one
cannot really claim that there is discrimination against imported products in a particular
country. The GATT rules would "catch" only those national regulations which could be said to
have such a discriminatory element to them. As a result, the TBT Agreement provides a
basis to eliminate a range of obstacles to trade wider than the GATT can eliminate.
9.4.5 The structure of the TBT Agreement
123
440. The Agreement deals with two broad categories of rules: so-called technical
regulations and so-called standards. The first category contains mandatory, binding rules,
while the latter category contains rules created by institutions other than the government, for
instance national norming institutions. These standards are not binding per se, but very often
become dominant in a particular industry and thus rise to the level of being de facto binding,
simply because an economic operator cannot meaningfully do business without adhering to
these standards.
9.4.6 The rules pertaining to technical regulations
441. The TBT Agreement defines a technical regulation as a document which spells out
product characteristics or their related processes and production methods, including the
applicable administrative provisions, with which compliance is mandatory. A technical
regulation may furthermore include or deal exclusively with terminology, symbols, packaging,
marking or labelling requirements, as they apply to a product, process or production method.
442. Article 2 spells out the basic rules for technical regulations. WTO members shall not
provide less favourable treatment to imported products (this is of course just a repetition of
an obligation already provided for under the GATT) and shall not be prepared, adopted or
applied with the effect of creating unnecessary barriers to trade. Furthermore, they shall not
have a trade-restrictive effect which is greater than that necessary to fulfill a legitimate
objective, such as national security requirements, prevention of deceptive practices,
protection of human health or safety, animal or plant life or health, or the environment.
443. Pursuant to Article 2.4, members shall use international standards (developed by
international institutions) as a basis for their domestic regulation - i.e. members shall strive to
bring about harmonization between their differing national technical regulations, unless the
existing international standards would be ineffective or inappropriate for the achievement of
the policy objectives the member has set for itself. The advantage a member obtains from
basing its measure on an international standard is that such a measure shall be (rebuttably)
presumed not to create unnecessary obstacles to international trade.
444. When members intend to adopt technical regulations which are not based on an
international standard, they are required to notify their intention to other WTO members so as
to give these a possibility to influence the regulatory process and through such consultation
minimize negative trade impacts of technical regulations.
445. Article 3 provides for a set of rules similar to those contained in Article 2, but it relates
to technical regulations prepared by local (i.e. not central) government bodies.
9.4.7 The rules pertaining to standards
446. The TBT Agreement defines a standard as a document approved by a recognized

body that provides, for common and repeated use, rules, guidelines and characteristics for
products or related processes or production methods, with which compliance is not
mandatory. Standards may also include or deal exclusively with terminology, symbols,
packaging, marking or labelling requirements, as they apply to a product, process or
production method.
447. The TBT Agreement requires WTO members to ensure that central governmental
standardizing bodies adopt the so-called Code of Good Practice, contained in one of the
Annexes of the TBT Agreement. This Code of Good Practice spells out certain mostly
substantive and procedural requirements to be observed by the standardizing bodies in the
124
preparation of standards, requirements which mirror closely those contained in Article 2.
Members shall also take such measure as may be reasonably available to them to ensure
that local government and non-governmental standardizing bodies also adopt this Code of
Good Practice.
9.4.8 Conformity Assessment Procedures
448. A very important aspect of the issue of technical barriers to trade is not only their
substance, but also the way in which conformity of products with these requirements is
assessed. For instance, an importer will require a certification (confirmation) that the product
he is about to import complies, for instance, with the toy safety requirements contained in the
national regulations. Obtaining such certifications may not be easy: it requires time and
resources to obtain such official certification. As a result, the TBT Agreement, in Article 5,
also spells out certain fundamental rules about such conformity assessment procedures.
Specifically, such procedures shall not put foreign producers at a disadvantage, shall not
create unnecessary barriers to trade and shall be transparent and expedient.
449. Article 6 then exhorts a member to accept, wherever feasible, the conformity
assessment procedures of other members. The advantage arising under such recognition is
of course that an exporter does not necessarily have to go to an institution of the importing
country first in order to have his product certified (which certainly increases his costs), but
can do so right in his home country. Article 6 encourages members to enter into so-called
Mutual Recognition Agreements (MRAs).
9.4.9 Other provisions
450. The TBT Agreement, under Article 10, obliges each member to set up so-called
enquiry points, i.e. locations where information about technical regulations and other related
issues can be obtained. Other provisions of the TBT Agreement provide for technical
assistance and special and differential treatment for developing country members.
9.4.10 Dispute settlement
451. The TBT Agreement has so far not been dealt with extensively in WTO dispute
settlements. Only one case so far has dealt with the TBT Agreement, and in that case, only
the issue whether a particular measure fell under the definition of a technical regulation was
discussed (EC - Asbestos). Another case (EC - Sardines) which dealt with the TBT
Agreement more in detail, has recently been suspended according to Article 12.12 of the
Dispute Settlement Understanding and it is unclear whether and when it will be resumed.
125
9.5 Risk Analysis
Source: http://depts.washington.edu/foodrisk/analysis.html
9.5.1 What Is Risk Analysis?
452. Risk analysis encompasses three target areas:
• Risk assessment - a process that involves identifying a potential hazard that

can cause a negative impact.
• Risk management - a process that involves identifying, evaluating, selecting,

and implementing specific management measures to mitigate risk.
• Risk communication - a process that includes the exchange of information

about the risk.
9.5.2 What Is the Origin of Risk Analysis?
453. Risk analysis got its start from the original model used to determine the source of
anthropogenic pollution. The concept of "risk" arose from Rachel Carson's book, Silent
Spring. Carson, a marine biologist, primarily focused on the effects of polychlorinated
biphenyls on the environment. Carson's book made a powerful plea for less harmful methods
of insect control. Two main themes were the initial sparks that ignited the environmental
movement and established the formative definition of risk:
• A technology (such as pesticide to control insect pests) that seems harmless may
have long-term environmental effects.
• The actions of human beings have become a primary influence on the health of the
earth.
454. Industry spoke out strongly against Carson's book, claiming that the book was based
on feeling and not hard scientific evidence. This perceived lack of scientific evidence
prompted the President of the United States to convene a scientific committee to investigate
the long-term environmental effects of the application of DDT. The initial study demonstrated
no threat to human health. A later study, of course, found that not only was DDT bio-
accumulative, but that is was also causing a decline in the raptor population because it
affected reproductive ability, mainly by making the egg shells too thin to survive incubation.
455. The environmental health and public health movements converged in the 1970s. Most
people were concerned about their risk of cancer from exposure to certain man-made
pollutants. The combination of this popular movement and politics resulted in the testing of
chemicals, usually via animal testing, to determine if the chemical was carcinogenic.
Because it was difficult, and in some cases impossible in the short term, to determine the
126
effect of exposure on humans of many chemicals, the birth of the concept of risk assessment
resulted.
456. The approach to assessing human health risk from chemical exposure differs
substantially from the approach for assessing microbiological risks.
Chemical Risk Microbiological Risk

Feature
Assessment Assessment
Pollutant Concentration Assumed to be lowered over Pathogen concentration may
time through dilution. increase or decrease or
change in virulence.
Hazard Identification Compiling a list of pollutants Compiling a list of bacteria
and potential sources which associated with the source of
contribute to increased food or the method of
loading of the environment. production or processing.
Requires experimental trials
to determine and prove
causal association.
Exposure Characterization Single-cell pathogen may be
undetectable at slaughter but
can reproduce to pose a later
problem.
Pathogens may be introduced

at any point.
Risk may change at any point

in food processing and
distribution.
Impact of Exposure Cumulative for long-term May be acute or chronic.
exposure.
Estimation of Risk Risk based on pollutant Difficult to estimate risk of
concentration, body weight, human infections because of
and other factors. multiple factors involved in
individual susceptibility.
457. Risk assessment is the science of identifying and evaluating potential hazards and
potential exposures. The two basic factors associated with risk assessment are
• The likelihood of an event, and

• The consequences if it occurs.
458. Risk assessment provides an analytical framework to support decisions related to

food safety. Food safety risk assessment involves the development of either quantitative or
qualitative models. A model is basically a mathematical framework of components that are
used to assess the risk for any given commodity or process.
459. The first step in the risk assessment framework is to identify the potential
microbiological hazard. The goal of microbiological hazard identification is to identify the
organism and determine its potential effect on people.
460. Microbiological hazard identification is accomplished by observing and defining the
types of adverse health effects associated with exposure to foodborne agents. These health
effects are evaluated through measures such as morbidity ratios, disease severity as
127
determined by the ratio of hospitalized cases to the total number of cases in an outbreak,
mortality ratio, and attack rates. Hazard identification also involves specific routes of
transmission. Hazard identification may also involve statistical analyses and literature
reviews for existing information/studies regarding the pathogen of concern.
461. Risk characterization, the next step in risk analysis, is one of the most important
steps. Risk characterization takes information from microbiological hazard identification and
uses qualitative or quantitative tools to assess and predict the exposure for people. Risk
characterization serves to bridge risk assessment and risk communication, allowing for the
discussion of confidence and uncertainties in analysis. The foundations of risk
characterization are embodied in:
• Exposure assessment - determining the routes of exposure and the likelihood of

being exposed
• Dose-response assessment - determining the variation in impact following exposures

to differing levels of foodborne pathogens.
462. Exposure assessments may be either qualitative or quantitative. Qualitative exposure

assessments are generally used when there is insufficient quantitative information about the
bacteria. Many qualitative exposure assessment models focus on identifying the point of
entry of the pathogen. At a minimum, they should identify and rank the microbes' entry
potential and identify and rank the potential of the microbes to spread.
463. Quantitative exposure assessments often involve more elaborate mathematical or

predictive models. These models are used to:
• Predict the effect of changes in food processing or food storage on microbial growth,
and
• Model food handling procedures to obtain optimal reduction in microbial growth.
464. Dose-response risk assessment also may be either qualitative or quantitative.

Qualitative dose-response risk assessments, in many cases, are limited by available data.
Some times, because of the paucity of data, they are based on anecdotal information. In this
case, it is difficult to determine the minimum exposure necessary to cause a negative effect -
the so-called Lowest Observed Effect Level (LOEL).
465. Quantitative dose-response risk assessments attempt to determine the number of

vegetative cells - or spores - that will result in morbidity. Animal studies are often employed,
with the results being extrapolated to humans. As any toxicologist knows, this method is not
nearly as reliable as actually observing infection and resulting morbidity in humans. The
acute nature of foodborne illness, as well as its extensive underreporting by clinicians, who
many times fail to identify either the agent of the disease, militate against quantitative dose-
response risk assessments.
128
9.6 Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF)
466. The Doha Development Round is striving to address a myriad issues underlying the
SPS and TBT Agreements, but the most progress to date has been on the needs of
developing countries. In August 2002, the WTO initiated a program to enhance the capacity
of developing countries to participate in negotiations and implement standards. The program,
called the Standards and Trade Development Facility, joins the efforts of the WTO, World
Health Organization (WHO), the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the World
Organization for Animal Health (OIE), the Codex Alimentarius, and the World Bank. The
principle aims of the Standards and Trade Development Facility are to increase participation
of developing countries in forming international standards and facilitate the implementation of
existing requirements.
9.6.1 Principle of Equivalence
467. At the March 17-18 2004 meeting, the WTO Committee on Sanitary and
Phytosanitary Measures finalized their Decision on Equivalence. Equivalence is the mutual
acceptances of another Member's standards that while different in process have the same
effect. This decision is aimed at helping developing nations prove that their products are as
safe as those in developed nations. The decision aims to speed up recognition of
equivalence of SPS measures for products previously traded or those for which information
already exists.
9.6.2 The GMO Debate
468. Few issues are raising as many concerns about food safety and environmental
impact as that of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO). The UK's GM public debate found
that most people were uneasy with GM and the more they learn the more intense their
concerns become. [The EU has a moratorium on the approvals of new genetically modified
organisms, and also had passed laws mandating labeling requirements. On March 4th, 2004,
the WTO Director-General appointed a panel in the US, Argentina and Canada complaint
against the EU de facto moratorium on the approval of new GMO. The US, Canada and
Argentina argue that the moratorium violates provisions of the SPS, TBT and Agreement on
Agriculture, since the prohibition of GMO imports is not legally or scientifically justified. The
EU responded that market authorization had been granted to numerous GMOs, with
applications pending for others.
129
9.7 Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP)
469. HACCP is a seven-step process of examining product flow in all meat and poultry
slaughter and processing establishments. The seven steps are:
1. Hazard Analysis - a formal examination of every step in the food

slaughter/manufacturing process to determine if any biological, chemical, or physical
hazards are potentiallypresent. The analysis conclusions must be supported by either
scientific knowledge or historical data from the establishment's operations
2. Determination of Critical Control Points (CCP's) - determining where, in each process,

the critical point(s) for process control exist
3. Specification of Criteria - determining what criteria will indicate that process control
has been achieved, or is in effect
4. Implementation of a Monitoring System - deciding how the criteria defining the critical
control points will be overseen - i.e., how and how often must the process controls at
the CCP's be checked
5. Corrective Actions - corrective actions is a four-step process:

a. The cause of the deviation is identified and eliminated
b. The CCP will be under control after the corrective action is taken
c. Measures to prevent recurrence are established
d. No product that is injurious to health or otherwise adulterated as a result of the
deviation enters commerce
6. Verification - plant management shall verify that the process is under control prior to
allowing the establishment's product(s) to enter commerce - simply put, the company
has to certify that all CCP's were met and the product is safe for human consumption
before it can be sold
7. Documentation - paperwork, paperwork, paperwork!
470. Each establishment's HACCP plan must be examined by a Program employee

annually to verify that it meets the requirements of the law and, if any changes are made or
processes added, a re-verification must be completed by a Program employee at that time.
130
9.8 CODEX STANDARDS, CODE OF PRACTICE, MAX RESIDUE
LIMITS, GUIDELINES
Source: http://www.codexalimentarius.net/web/standard_list.do?lang=en
Year of
Reference Number Title Revision Year Amendment Year
adoption
General Standard for Named
CODEX STAN A- 8 (a) 1978 Variety Process(ed) Cheese and
Spreadable Process(ed) Cheese
Standard for Process(ed) Cheese
CODEX STAN A- 8 (b) 1978 and Spreadable Process(ed)
Cheese
Standard for Process(ed) Cheese
CODEX STAN A- 8 (c) 1978
Preparations
CODEX STAN A- 1 1971 Standard for Butter 1 1999 2 2006
CODEX STAN A- 2 1973 Standard for Milkfat Products 1 1999 2 2006
CODEX STAN A- 3 1971 Standard for Evaporated Milks 1 1999
Standard for Sweetened
CODEX STAN A- 4 1971 1 1999
Condensed Milks
CODEX STAN A- 6 1978 Standard for Cheese 1 1999 2 2006
General Standard for Whey
CODEX STAN A- 7 1971 1 1999 2 2006
Cheeses
Standard for Cream and Prepared
CODEX STAN A- 9 1976 1 2003
Creams
CODEX STAN A- 15 1995 Standard for Whey Powders 1 2003 2 2006
Standard for Edible Casein
CODEX STAN A- 18 1995 1 2001
Products
Regional Standard for Canned
CODEX STAN 257-R 2007
Humus with Tehena
Regional Standard for Canned
CODEX STAN 258-R 2007
Foul Medames
CODEX STAN 259-R 2007 Regional Standard for Tehena
General Standard for the Labelling
CODEX STAN 1 1985 1 1991 4 2005
of Prepackaged Foods
CODEX STAN 3 1981 Standard for Canned Salmon 2 1995
CODEX STAN 12 1981 Standard for Honey 2 2001
CODEX STAN 13 1981 Standard for Preserved Tomatoes 1 2007
Standard for Canned Green Beans
CODEX STAN 16 1981
and Wax Beans
CODEX STAN 17 1981 Standard for Canned Applesauce 1 2001
CODEX STAN 18 1981 Standard for Canned Sweet Corn
Standard for Edible Fats and Oils
CODEX STAN 19 1981 not Covered by Individual 2 1999
Standards
Standard for Olive Oils and Olive
CODEX STAN 33 1981 1 1989 2 2003
Pomace Oils
Standard for Quick Frozen Finfish,
CODEX STAN 36 1981 1 1995
Eviscerated or Uneviscerated
Standard for Canned Shrimps or
CODEX STAN 37 1981 1 1995
Prawns
131
Standard for Edible Fungi and
CODEX STAN 38 1981
Fungus Products
CODEX STAN 39 1981 Standard for Dried Edible Fungi
Standard for Fresh Fungus
CODEX STAN 40 1981
"Chanterelle"
CODEX STAN 41 1981 Standard for Quick Frozen Peas
CODEX STAN 42 1981 Standard for Canned Pineapple 1 1987
Standard for Quick Frozen
CODEX STAN 52 1981
Strawberries
Standard for Special Dietary Foods
CODEX STAN 53 1981 1 1983
with Low-Sodium Content
CODEX STAN 55 1981 Standard for Canned Mushrooms
CODEX STAN 56 1981 Standard for Canned Asparagus
Standard for Processed Tomato
CODEX STAN 57 1981 1 2007
Concentrates
CODEX STAN 58 1981 Standard for Canned Green Peas
CODEX STAN 60 1981 Standard for Canned Raspberries
CODEX STAN 61 1985 Standard for Canned Pears 1 2001
CODEX STAN 62 1987 Standard for Canned Strawberries
CODEX STAN 66 1981 Standard for Table Olives 1 1987
CODEX STAN 67 1981 Standard for Raisins
CODEX STAN 69 1981
Raspberries
Standard for Canned Tuna and
CODEX STAN 70 1981 1 1995
Bonito
STANDARD FOR INFANT
FORMULA AND FORMULAS FOR
CODEX STAN 72 1981 1 2007 4 1997
SPECIAL MEDICAL PURPOSES
INTENDED FOR INFANTS
CODEX STAN 73 1981 Standard for Canned Baby Foods 3 1989
Standard for Processed Cereal-
CODEX STAN 74 1981 Based Foods for Infants and 1 2006
Young Children
CODEX STAN 75 1981
Peaches
CODEX STAN 76 1981
Bilberries
CODEX STAN 77 1981
Spinach
CODEX STAN 78 1981 Standard for Canned Fruit Cocktail
Standard for Jams (Fruit
CODEX STAN 79 1981
Preserves) and Jellies
CODEX STAN 80 1981 Standard for Citrus Marmalade
Standard for Canned Mature
CODEX STAN 81 1981
Processed Peas
CODEX STAN 86 1981 Standard for Cocoa Butter 1 2001
CODEX STAN 87 1981 Standard for Chocolate 1 2003
CODEX STAN 88 1981 Standard for Corned Beef 1 1991
CODEX STAN 89 1981 Standard for Luncheon Meat 1 1991
CODEX STAN 90 1981 Standard for Canned Crab Meat 1 1995
CODEX STAN 92 1981 1 1995
Shrimps or Prawns
CODEX STAN 94 1981 Standard for Sardines and 2 2007
132
Sardine-Type Products
CODEX STAN 95 1981 1 1995
Lobsters
CODEX STAN 96 1981 Standard for Cooked Cured Ham 1 1991
Standard for Cooked Cured Pork
CODEX STAN 97 1981 1 1991
Shoulder
Standard for Cooked Cured
CODEX STAN 98 1981 1 1991
Chopped Meat
Standard for Canned Tropical Fruit
CODEX STAN 99 1981
Salad
CODEX STAN 103 1981
Blueberries
CODEX STAN 104 1981 Standard for Quick Frozen Leek
Standard for Cocoa powders
CODEX STAN 105 1981 (cocoas) and dry mixtures of cocoa 1 2001
and sugars
General Standard for Irradiated
CODEX STAN 106 1983 1 2003
Foods
General Standard for the Labelling
CODEX STAN 107 1981 of Food Additives when sold as
such
Standard for Natural Mineral
CODEX STAN 108 1981 1 1997 1 2001
Waters
CODEX STAN 110 1981 Standard for Quick Frozen Broccoli
CODEX STAN 111 1981
Cauliflower
CODEX STAN 112 1981
Brussels Sprouts
Standard for Quick Frozen Green
CODEX STAN 113 1981
and Wax Beans
Standard for Quick Frozen French
CODEX STAN 114 1981
Fried Potatoes
CODEX STAN 115 1981 Standard for Pickled Cucumbers
CODEX STAN 116 1981 Standard for Canned Carrots
Standard for Bouillons and
CODEX STAN 117 1981 2 2001
Consommés
CODEX STAN 118 1981 Standard for Gluten-Free Foods 1 1983
CODEX STAN 119 1981 Standard for Canned Finfish 1 1995
CODEX STAN 130 1981 Standard for Dried Apricots
Standard for Unshelled Pistachio
CODEX STAN 131 1981
Nuts
Standard for Quick Frozen Whole
CODEX STAN 132 1981
Kernel Corn
Standard for Quick Frozen Corn-
CODEX STAN 133 1981
on-the-Cob
CODEX STAN 140 1983 Standard for Quick Frozen Carrots
Standard for Cocoa (Cacao) Mass
CODEX STAN 141 1983 (Cocoa/Chocolate Liquor) and 1 2001
Cocoa Cake
CODEX STAN 143 1985 Standard for Dates
CODEX STAN 144 1985 Standard for Canned Palmito
Standard for Canned Chestnuts
CODEX STAN 145 1985
and Chestnut Purée
CODEX STAN 146 1985 Standard for Labelling of and
133
Claims for Prepackaged Foods for
Special Dietary Use
CODEX STAN 150 1985 Standard for Food Grade Salt 1 1997 3 2006
CODEX STAN 151 1985 Standard for Gari 1 1995
CODEX STAN 152 1985 Standard for Wheat Flour 1 1995
CODEX STAN 153 1985 Standard for Maize (Corn) 1 1995
Standard for Whole Maize (Corn)
CODEX STAN 154 1985 1 1995
Meal
Standard for Degermed Maize
CODEX STAN 155 1985 (Corn) Meal and Maize (Corn) 1 1995
Grits
CODEX STAN 156 1987 Standard for Follow-up formula 1 1989
CODEX STAN 159 1987 Standard for Canned Mangoes
CODEX STAN 160 1987 Standard for Mango Chutney
Standard for Wheat Protein
CODEX STAN 163 1987 1 2001
Products
Standard for Quick Frozen Blocks
of Fish Fillets, Minced Fish Flesh
CODEX STAN 165 1989 1 1995
and Mixtures of Fillets and Minced
Fish Flesh
Standard for Quick Frozen Fish
Sticks (Fish Fingers), Fish Portions
CODEX STAN 166 1989 2 2004
and Fish Fillets - Breaded or in
Batter
Standard for Salted Fish and Dried
CODEX STAN 167 1989 Salted Fish of the Gadidae Family 1 1995 1 2005
of Fishes
Standard for Whole and
CODEX STAN 169 1989 1 1995
Decorticated Pearl Millet Grains
CODEX STAN 170 1989 Standard for Pearl Millet Flour 1 1995
CODEX STAN 171 1989 Standard for Certain Pulses 1 1995
CODEX STAN 172 1989 Standard for Sorghum Grains 1 1995
CODEX STAN 173 1989 Standard for Sorghum Flour 1 1995
General Standard for Vegetable
CODEX STAN 174 1989
Protein Products
CODEX STAN 175 1989 Standard for Soy Protein Products
CODEX STAN 176 1989 Standard for Edible Cassava Flour 1 1995
Standard for Grated Desiccated
CODEX STAN 177 1991
Coconut
Standard for Durum Wheat
CODEX STAN 178 1991 1 1995
Semolina and Durum Wheat Flour
Standard for Labelling of and
CODEX STAN 180 1991 Claims for Foods for Special
Medical Purposes
Standard for Formula Foods for
CODEX STAN 181 1991
Use in Weight Control Diets
CODEX STAN 182 1993 Standard for Pineapple 1 1999 1 2005
CODEX STAN 183 1993 Standard for Papaya 1 2001 1 2005
CODEX STAN 184 1993 Standard for Mangoes 1 2005
CODEX STAN 185 1993 Standard for Nopal 1 2005
CODEX STAN 186 1993 Standard for Prickly Pear 1 2005
CODEX STAN 187 1993 Standard for Carambola 1 2005
CODEX STAN 188 1993 Standard for Baby Corn 1 2005
CODEX STAN 189 1993 Standard for Dried Shark Fins
134
General Standard for Quick Frozen
CODEX STAN 190 1995
Fish Fillets
Standard for Quick Frozen Raw
CODEX STAN 191 1995
Squid
General Standard for Food
CODEX STAN 192 1995 8 2007
Additives
General Standard for
CODEX STAN 193 1995 3 2007 2 2004
Contaminants and Toxins in Foods
CODEX STAN 196 1995 Standard for Litchi 1 2005
CODEX STAN 197 1995 Standard for Avocado 1 2005
CODEX STAN 198 1995 Standard for Rice
Standard for Wheat and Durum
CODEX STAN 199 1995
Wheat
CODEX STAN 200 1995 Standard for Peanuts
CODEX STAN 201 1995 Standard for Oats
CODEX STAN 202 1995 Standard for Couscous
Standard for Formula Foods for
CODEX STAN 203 1995 Use in Very Low Energy Diets for
Weight Reduction
CODEX STAN 204 1997 Standard for Mangosteens 1 2005
CODEX STAN 205 1997 Standard for Bananas 1 2005
General Standard for Use of Dairy
CODEX STAN 206 1999
Terms
Standard for Milk Powders and
CODEX STAN 207 1999
Cream Powder
Standard for Cheeses in Brine
CODEX STAN 208 1999 1 2001
(Group Standard)
Standard for Named Vegetable
CODEX STAN 210 1999 1 2001 2 2005
Oils
CODEX STAN 211 1999 Standard for Named Animal Fats
CODEX STAN 212 1999 Standard for Sugars 1 2001
CODEX STAN 213 1999 Standard for Limes 3 2005
Standard for Pummelos (Citrus
CODEX STAN 214 1999 2 2005
grandi)
CODEX STAN 215 1999 Standard for Guavas 1 2005
CODEX STAN 216 1999 Standard for Chayotes 1 2005
CODEX STAN 217 1999 Standard for Mexican Limes 1 2005
CODEX STAN 218 1999 Standard for Ginger 1 2005
Standard for Grapefruits (Citrus
CODEX STAN 219 1999 2 2005
paradisi)
General Methods of Analysis for
CODEX STAN 219 2003 1 2004
Food Additives
CODEX STAN 220 1999 Standard for Longans 1 2005
Group Standard for Unripened
CODEX STAN 221 2001
Cheese including Fresh Cheese
Standard for Crackers from Marine
CODEX STAN 222 2001 and Freshwater Fish, Crustaceans
and Molluscan Shellfish
CODEX STAN 223 2001 Standard for Kimchi
CODEX STAN 224 2001 Standard for Tannia 1 2005
CODEX STAN 225 2001 Standard for Asparagus 1 2005
CODEX STAN 226 2001 Standard for Cape Gooseberry 1 2005
CODEX STAN 227 2001 General Standard for
135
Bottled/Packaged Drinking Waters
(Other Than Natural Mineral
Waters)
General Methods of Analysis for
CODEX STAN 228 2001 1 2004
Contaminants
Analysis of Pesticide Residues:
CODEX STAN 229 1993 1 2003
Recommended Methods
General Codex Methods for the
CODEX STAN 231 2001 1 2003
Detection of Irradiated Foods
Recommended Methods of
CODEX STAN 234 1999 2 2007
Analysis and Sampling
Standard for Boiled Dried Salted
CODEX STAN 236 2003
Anchovies
CODEX STAN 237 2003 Standard for Pitahayas 1 2005
CODEX STAN 238 2003 Standard for Sweet Cassava 1 2005
Standard for Aqueous Coconut
CODEX STAN 240 2003 Products: Coconut Milk and
Coconut Cream
Standard for Canned Bamboo
CODEX STAN 241 2003
Shoots
CODEX STAN 242 2003 Standard for Canned Stone Fruits
CODEX STAN 243 2003 Standard for Fermented Milks
Standard for Salted Atlantic
CODEX STAN 244 2004
Herring and Salted Sprat
CODEX STAN 245 2004 Standard for Oranges 1 2005
CODEX STAN 246 2005 Standard for Rambutan
General Standard for Fruit Juices
CODEX STAN 247 2005
and Nectars
CODEX STAN 249 2006 Standard for Instant Noodles
Standard for a Blend of
CODEX STAN 250 2006 Evaporated Skimmed Milk and
Vegetable Fat
Standard for a Blend of Skimmed
CODEX STAN 251 2006 Milk and Vegetable Fat in
Powdered Form
Standard for a Blend of Sweetened
CODEX STAN 252 2006 Condensed Skimmed Milk and
Vegetable Fat
CODEX STAN 253 2006 Standard for Dairy Fat Spreads
Standard for Certain Canned
CODEX STAN 254 2007
Citrus Fruits
CODEX STAN 255 2007 Standard for Table Grapes
Standard for Fat Spreads and
CODEX STAN 256 2007
Blended Spreads
Standard for Pickled Fruits and
CODEX STAN 260 2007
Vegetables
CODEX STAN 262 2007 Standard for Mozzarella
CODEX STAN 263 1966 Standard for Cheddar 1 2007
CODEX STAN 264 1966 Standard for Danbo 1 2007
CODEX STAN 265 1966 Standard for Edam 1 2007
CODEX STAN 266 1966 Standard for Gouda 1 2007
CODEX STAN 267 1966 Standard for Havarti 1 2007
CODEX STAN 268 1966 Standard for Samsoe 1 2007
CODEX STAN 269 1967 Standard for Emmental 1 2007
136
CODEX STAN 270 1968 Standard for Tilsiter 1 2007
CODEX STAN 271 1968 Standard for Saint-Paulin 1 2007
CODEX STAN 272 1968 Standard for Provolone 1 2007
Standard for Cottage Cheese incl.
CODEX STAN 273 1968 1 2007
Creamed Cottage Cheese
CODEX STAN 274 1969 Standard for Coulommiers 1 2007
CODEX STAN 275 1973 Standard for Cream Cheese 1 2007
CODEX STAN 276 1973 Standard for Camembert 1 2007
CODEX STAN 277 1973 Standard for Brie 1 2007
Standard for Extra Hard Grating
CODEX STAN 278 1978
Cheese
Recommended International Code
CAC/RCP 1 1969 of Practice - General Principles of 4 2003
Food Hygiene
CAC/RCP 2 1969 of Hygienic Practice for Canned
Fruit and Vegetable Products
CAC/RCP 3 1969 of Hygienic Practice for Dried
Fruits
CAC/RCP 4 1971 of Hygienic Practice for Desiccated
Coconut
of Hygienic Practice for
CAC/RCP 5 1971
Dehydrated Fruits and Vegetables
including Edible Fungi
CAC/RCP 6 1972
of Hygienic Practice for Tree Nuts
System for the Description of
CAC/RCP 7 1974 Carcasses of Bovine and Porcine
Species
CAC/RCP 8 1976 of Practice for the Processing and 2 1983
Handling of Quick Frozen Foods
CAC/RCP 15 1976 of Hygienic Practice for Egg 1 2007 2 1985
Products
CAC/RCP 18 1978 of Hygienic Practice for Molluscan
Shellfish
CAC/RCP 19 1979 of Practice for Radiation 2 2003
Processing of Food
Code of Ethics for International
CAC/RCP 20 1979 1 1985
Trade in Food
CAC/RCP 21 1979 of Hygienic Practice for Foods for
Infants and Children
CAC/RCP 22 1979 of Hygienic Practice for
Groundnuts (Peanuts)
of Hygienic Practice for Low-Acid
CAC/RCP 23 1979 2 1993
and Acidified Low-Acid Canned
Foods
CAC/RCP 24 1979 Recommended International Code
137
of Hygienic Practice for Lobsters
CAC/RCP 25 1979 of Hygienic Practice for Smoked
Fish
CAC/RCP 28 1983
of Hygienic Practice for Crabs
CAC/RCP 30 1983 of Hygienic Practice for the
Processing of Frog Legs
of Hygienic Practice for Collecting,
CAC/RCP 33 1985
Processing and Marketing of
Natural Mineral Waters
of Hygienic Practice for the
CAC/RCP 36 1987 1 1999 3 2005
Storage and Transport of Edible
Oils and Fats in Bulk
CAC/RCP 38 1993 of Practice for the Control of the
Use of Veterinary Drugs
Code of Hygienic Practice for
CAC/RCP 39 1993 Precooked and Cooked Foods in
Mass Catering
CAC/RCP 40 1993 Aseptically Processed and
Packaged Low-Acid Foods
CAC/RCP 42 1995
Spices and Dried Aromatic Plants
Code of Hygienic Practice for the
Preparation and Sale of Street
CAC/RCP 43 1995 1 2001
Foods (Regional Code - Latin
America and the Caribbean)
of Practice for the Packaging and
CAC/RCP 44 1995 1 2004
Transport of Tropical Fresh Fruit
and Vegetables
Code of Practice for the Reduction
of Aflatoxin B1 in Raw Materials
CAC/RCP 45 1997
and Supplemental Feedingstuffs
for Milk-Producing Animals
CAC/RCP 46 1999 Refrigerated Packaged Foods with
Extended Shelf-Life
Code of Hygienic Practice for the
CAC/RCP 47 2001 Transport of Food in Bulk and 1 2001
Semi-Packed Food
Recommended Code of Hygienic
Practice for Bottled/Packaged
CAC/RCP 48 2001
Drinking Waters (Other than
Natural Mineral Waters)
Code of Practice Concerning
Source Directed Measures to
CAC/RCP 49 2001
Reduce Contamination of Foods
with Chemicals
Code of Practice for the Prevention
and Reduction of Patulin
CAC/RCP 50 2003
Contamination in Apple Juice and
Apple Juice
CAC/RCP 51 2003 Code of Practice for the Prevention
138
and Reduction of Mycotoxin
Contamination in Cereals,
including Annexes on Ochratoxin
A, Zearalenone, Fumonisins and
tricothecenes
Code of Practice for Fish and
CAC/RCP 52 2003 3 2007
Fishery Products
CAC/RCP 53 2003
Fresh Fruits and Vegetables
Recommended Code of Practice
CAC/RCP 54 2004
on Good Animal Feeding
CAC/RCP 55 2004 and Reduction of Aflatoxin
Contamination in Peanuts
CAC/RCP 56 2004 and Reduction of Lead
Contamination in Foods
Code of Hygienic Practice for Milk
CAC/RCP 57 2004
and Milk Products
CAC/RCP 58 2005 Code of Hygienic Practice for Meat
CAC/RCP 59 2005 and Reduction of Aflatoxin
Contamination in Tree Nuts
CAC/RCP 60 2005 and Reduction of Tin
Contamination in Canned Foods
Code of Practice to Minimize and
CAC/RCP 61 2005
Contain Antimicrobial Resistance
and Reduction of Dioxin and
CAC/RCP 62 2006
Dioxin-like PCB Contamination in
Food and Feeds
cac/rcp 63 2007 and Reduction of Ochratoxin A
Contamination in Wine
Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs)
CAC/MRL 1 2001
for Pesticides
Maximum Residue Limits for
CAC/MRL 2 2006
Veterinary Drugs in Food
Extraneous Maximum Residue
CAC/MRL 3 2001
Limits (EMRLs)
CAC/MISC 2 1976 Statement on Infant Feeding
CAC/MISC 3 Inventory of Processing Aids
Classification of Foods and Animal
CAC/MISC 4 1 1993
Feeds
Glossary of Terms and Definitions
CAC/MISC 5 1993 (Veterinary Drugs Residues in 1 2003
Foods)
List of Codex Advisory
CAC/MISC 6 13 2007
Specifications for Food Additives
Design of Control Measures for
CAC/GL 22-R 1997 1 1999
Street-Vended Foods in Africa
CAC/GL 1 1979 General Guidelines on Claims 1 1991
CAC/GL 2 1985 Guidelines on Nutrition Labelling 1 1993 2 2006
Guidelines for Simple Evaluation of
CAC/GL 3 1989
Food Additive Intake
CAC/GL 4 1989 General Guidelines for the
139
Utilization of Vegetable Protein
Products (VPP) in Foods
Guideline Levels for Vinyl Chloride
CAC/GL 6 1991 Monomer and Acrylonitrile in Food
and Packaging Material
Guidelines for Formulated
CAC/GL 8 1991 Supplementary Foods for Older
Infants and Young Children
General Principles for the Addition
CAC/GL 9 1987 2 1991
of Essential Nutrients to Foods
Advisory List of Mineral Salts and
CAC/GL 10 1979 Vitamin compounds for Use in 2 1991
Foods for Infants and Children
Guidelines for the Preservation of
CAC/GL 13 1991 Raw Milk by Lactoperoxidase
System
Guide for the Microbiological
Quality of Spices and Herbs Used
CAC/GL 14 1991
in Processed Meat and Poultry
Products
Guidelines for the Use of Non-
Meat Protein Products in
CAC/GL 15 1991
Processed Meat and Poultry
Products
Guidelines for the Establishment of
a Regulatory Programme for
CAC/GL 16 1993
Control of Veterinary Drug
Residues in Foods
Guideline Procedures for the
CAC/GL 17 1993 Visual Inspection of Lots of
Canned Foods
Guidelines for the Exchange of
CAC/GL 19 1995 Information in Food Control 1 2004
Emergency Situations
Principles for Food Import and
CAC/GL 20 1995
Export Certification and Inspection
Principles for the Establishment
CAC/GL 21 1997 and Application of Microbiological
Criteria for Foods
Guidelines for Use of Nutrition and
CAC/GL 23 1997 2 2004
Health Claims
General Guidelines for Use of the
CAC/GL 24 1997
Term Halal
Guidelines for the Exchange of
CAC/GL 25 1997 Information between Countries on
Rejections of Imported Foods
Guidelines for the Design,
Operation, Assessment and
CAC/GL 26 1997 Accreditation of Food Import and
Export Inspection and Certification
Systems
Guidelines for the Assessment of
the Competence of Testing
CAC/GL 27 1997 1 2006
Laboratories Involved in the Import
and Export Control of Foods
International Harmonized Protocol
CAC/GL 28 1995 for the Proficiency Testing of 1 1997
(Chemical) Analytical Laboratories
CAC/GL 29 1985 General Requirements for Natural
140
Flavourings
Principles and Guidelines for the
CAC/GL 30 1999 Conduct of Microbiological Risk
Assessment
Guidelines for the Sensory
CAC/GL 31 1999 Evaluation of Fish and Shellfish in
Laboratories
Guidelines for the Production,
Processing, Labelling and
CAC/GL 32 1999 1 2001 3 2007
Marketing of Organically Produced
Foods
Recommended Methods of
Sampling for Pesticide Residues
CAC/GL 33 1999
for the Determination of
Compliance with MRLs
Guidelines for the Development of
Equivalence Agreements
CAC/GL 34 1999 Regarding Food Imports and
Export Inspection and Certification
Systems
Class Names and the International
CAC/GL 36 1989 Numbering System for Food 6 2001 4 2006
Additives
Harmonised IUPAC Guidelines for
CAC/GL 37 2001 the Use of Recovery Information in
Analytical Measurement
GUIDELINES FOR DESIGN,
PRODUCTION, ISSUANCE AND
CAC/GL 38 2001 2 2007
USE OF GENERIC OFFICIAL
CERTIFICATES
Guidelines on Good Laboratory
CAC/GL 40 1993 1 2003
Practice in Pesticide Residue
Analysis
Portion of Commodities to which
CAC/GL 41 1993
Codex MRLS Apply and which is
Analyzed
African Regional Guidelines for
CAC/GL 43 2003 Codex Contact Points and National
Codex Committees
Principles for the Risk Analysis of
CAC/GL 44 2003 Foods Derived from Modern
Biotechnology
Guideline for the Conduct of Food
Safety Assessment of Foods
CAC/GL 45 2003
Derived from Recombinant-DNA
Plants
Guideline for the Conduct of Food
Safety Assessment of Foods
CAC/GL 46 2003
Produced Using Recombiant-DNA
Microorganisms
Guidelines for Food Import Control
CAC/GL 47 2003 1 2006
Systems
Model Certificate for Fish and
CAC/GL 48 2004
Fishery Products
Harmonized IUPAC Guidelines for
CAC/GL 49 2003 Single-Laboratory Validation of
Methods of Analysis
141
CAC/GL 50 2004 General guidelines on sampling
Guidelines for Packing Media for
CAC/GL 51 2003
Canned Fruits
Guidelines on the Judgement of
Equivalence of Sanitary Measures
CAC/GL 53 2003
associated with Food Inspection
and Certification Systems
Guidelines on Measurement
CAC/GL 54 2004
Uncertainty
Guidelines for Vitamin and Mineral
CAC/GL 55 2005
Food Supplements
Guidelines on the Use of Mass
Spectrometry (MS) for
CAC/GL 56 2005 Identification, Confirmation and
Quantative Determination of
Residues
Asian Regional Guidelines for
CAC/GL 57 1999 National Codex Contact Points and
National Codex Committees
Regional Guidelines for Codex
CAC/GL 58 2005 Contact Points and National Codex
Committees (Near East Region)
Guidelines on Estimation of
CAC/GL 59 2006
Uncertainty of Results
Principles for Traceability / Product
Tracing as a Tool Within a Food
CAC/GL 60 2006
Inspection and Certification
System
Guidelines on the Application of
General Principles of Food
CAC/GL 61 2007 Hygiene to the Control of Listeria
monocytogenes in Ready-to-Eat
Foods
Working Principles for Risk
CAC/GL 62 2007 Analysis for Food Safety for
Application by Governments
Principles and Guidelines for the
CAC/GL 63 2007 Conduct of Microbiological Risk
Management
Protocol for the Design, Conduct
CAC/GL 64 1995 and Interpretation of Method
Performance Studies
Harmonized Guidelines for Internal
CAC/GL 65 1997 Quality Control in Analytical
Chemistry Laboratories
142
9.9 Viet Nam National Standards (TCVN) for Food and Agriculture
471. The Catalogue of Standards 2008 lists the following number of standards related to
food and agricultural producs and related processes:
Table 25 Number of National Standards Related to Food and Agricultural Products and
Processes
Standards Related to Number of Standards
Agriculture 331
Food 129
Fruit and Vegetables 94
Tea 28
Meat, meat products, and other animal products 42
Fish and fish products 70
Subtotal 694
Water quality 90
Soil quality 91
Industrial waste water quality 84
Subtotal 265
143
9.10 Examples of some Vietnamese Standards related to VIETGAP
9.10.1 Permitted Residue Limit for some heavy metals in cropping

soil
No. Element Permitted Residue Testing Method

Limit (mg/kg)
1 Arsenic (As) 12,0 TCVN 6498:1999; 10 TCN 797:2006
2 Cadimium (Cd) 2,0 TCVN 6498:1999; 10 TCN 796:2006
3 Lead (Pb) 70,0 TCVN 6498:1999; 10 TCN 796:2006
9.10.2 Permitted Residue Limit for some chemicals in irrigation

water
No Element Permitted Residue Testing Method

Limit (mg/litre)
1 Mercury(Hg) 0,001 TCVN 5941:1995
TCVN 6665:2000
2 Cadmium(Cd) 0,01 TCVN 6665:2000
3 Arsenic (As) 0,1 TCVN 6665:2000
4 Lead (Pb) 0,1 TCVN 6665:2000
9.10.3 Permitted Residue Limit for some harmful bioorganisms and

toxic chemicals in fresh vegetables
Permitted Testing Method

No. Indicator
Residue Limit
I Nitrate content (NO3) mg/ kg TCVN 5247:1990
1 Lettuce 1.500 -
2 Herbs 600 -
Cabbage, Bok Choy, -
3 500
Cauliflower, Radish, Garlic
Chinese chives, Cucurbit, -
4 400
Chille pepper, Aubergine
5 Maze 300 -
6 Potato, Carrot 250 -
Fruity beans, Asparagus, -
7 200
Bell pepper
8 Tomato, Cucumber 150 -
9 Melon 90 -
10 Onion 80 -
11 Watermelon 60 -
Heavy metals and toxic
II mg/ kg
substances content
144
TCVN 7601:2007;
1 Arsenic (As) 1,0
TCVN 5367:1991
2 Lead (Pb) 1,0 TCVN 7602:2007
3 Mercury (Hg) 0,3 TCVN 7604:2007
TCVN 5368:1991;
4 Copper (Cu) 30
TCVN 6541:1999
5 Cadmium(Cd) TCVN 7603:2007
- Root type 0,05
- Lettuce 0,1
- Leafy type 0,2
- Other vegetables 0,02
6 Zinc (Zn) 40 TCVN 5487:1991
7 Stannum (Sn) 200 TCVN 5496:2007
III Harmful bioorganism CFU/ g
1 Samonella 0 TCVN 4829:2005
TCVN 4883:1993;
2 Coliforms 100
TCVN 6848:2007
3 Escherichia coli 10 TCVN 6846:2007
IV Pesticide Residue
According to According to CODEX
1 Chemicals listed in CODEX
CODEX
According to According to ASEAN or
Chemicals not listed in ASEAN or Taiwanese standards
2
CODEX Taiwanese
standards
Note: Identifying potentially harmful chemicals that need to be analysed is based on
actual pesticide usage situation on vegetables at production units.
145
9.11 Implications of Food Hygiene and Safety Regulations for
Different Actors along the Value Chain
Source: Interim Report of Food Safety Specialist Ha Thi Anh Dao, dated 14 May 2008
472. Input providers (organizations, households and individuals) engaging in production

of fresh vegetables, fruits and tea must assure that places for seeding, planting crops are not
polluted by surrounding environments and be away from premises likely causing
environmental pollution, food contamination and take measures for waste disposal in
compliance with the law and regulations on environmental protection. MARD in coordinating
with MOST and MOH exercises some steps at which contamination may occur and can be
controlled. In others, the existing infrastructure and common practices will need modification
in order to reduce or prevent contamination.
473. The producers (growers, farmers) have the responsibility to assure that fresh/raw
vegetables, fruits and tea produced by them are not contaminated and be away from places
storing chemicals, especially toxic chemicals and from other pathogenic sources. They are
also responsible for the origins of the produced fresh/raw food. MARD preside over to
manage the use of fertilizers, animal feeds, plant protection drugs, veterinary drugs, growth-
promoting substance, and other substances relating to food hygiene and safety, it must
strictly comply with the stipulations of law and regulations.
474. The processors have the responsibility to assure that place reserved by them is
located in an area having adequate conditions; designed, built, install and operated in a
manner that meets the requirements for food hygiene and safety. The use of material for
food processing complies with requirement for hygiene and safety prescribed by law. During
the procedure for food processing, processors have the responsibility of using
tools/equipment, containers, packages, tools, equipment meeting the requirements for food
hygiene and safety and without causing food contamination; using detergents, bactericides
and antidotes with safety, without causing an adverse impact on human lives and health or
environmental pollution. MOIT coordinating with MARD, MOST, MOH implement State
management on food hygiene and safety of food product throughout the premise’s process
of production until market circulation; preside over and coordinate with MOST, MOH in
developing and promulgating guidance documents exercising authority of management on
food hygiene and safety.
475. Distributors, traders, retailers that produce or trade in food must meet the
conditions for food hygiene and safety as conditions stipulated with producers and
processors and requirements for knowledge about food hygiene and safety. They shall only
produce or trade in food meeting the standards for food hygiene and safety. Pre-packaged
foods shall be labeled. Food labels shall fully, accurately, clearly and truthfully be inscribed
with food compositions and other details as prescribed by law. MOIT coordinate with MOST,
MOH in developing and promulgating guidance documents exercising authority of
management on food hygiene and safety; exercising food safety supervision and inspection
in market circulation and export; developing and promulgating legal and regulatory document
on trade condition of food service; organizing the inspection of implementing of legal and
regulatory documents; MOST preside over and coordinate with MOH and MOIT in
developing Vietnam Standards on food, certification and accreditation procedure of food
business meeting quality and safety standards.
146
476. MOH coordinates with concerning sectors to conduct and organize the implement
control of biological and chemical contamination in vegetables, fruits and tea for
consumption. Consumers shall be entitled to information about food hygiene and safety;
choice and use of suitable foods as well safety foods; compensated for use on unhygienic
and unsafe food as prescribed by law, give the comments of compiling and implementing
policy on food hygiene; responsible for practicing food hygiene and safety, protecting their
self in food consumption and fully complying with guidance on food hygiene and safety,
voluntarily declare incident of food poisoning and food borne diseases.
477. If food borne disease occurs, it shall be reported immediately to the health agencies
and the nearest local People’s Committee. Where it is a mass outbreak which means having
many cases or death or occurring in more than 2 central provinces or cities, any
organizations or individuals discovering firstly shall immediately inform the Health
Department for timely taking measures to solve and remedy of consequences. Ministry of
Health shall stipulate the reporting regime for food poisoning and food borne diseases. The
People’s Committee at all levels shall investigate, remedy and solve the consequences
immediately. In case out of control, the People’s Committee at all levels shall be responsible
for reporting to the direct senior People’s committee and the competent State agencies for
food hygiene and safety in order to coordinate in taking strict measures to treat and remedy
the consequences of food poisoning and food borne diseases occurred in their localities.
478. Safety and quality assurance should be ongoing processes incorporating activities
beginning with selecting and preparing the soil and proceeding through to consumption of the
product. Both safety and quality assurance should focus on the prevention of problems, not
simply curing them since, once safety or quality is reduced, it is virtually impossible to go
back and improve it for that item. It is possible however, to assure that the same problem
does not affect future products.
147
9.12 Preliminary Estimation of Costs for the Project Component: Policy and Institutional Development for
Food Safety at the central level
Table 26 Investment Costs for Output 1 of Policy and Institutional Component – Improving Regulatory Framework and Coordination
No Activity Inputs Unit Unit Cost Quantity Total
Review and assess
regulations and roles on
1.1.1 food safety and quality Consulting services - International month $ 15,000 2 $ 30,000
Consulting services - National month $ 3,000 8 $ 24,000
Regulations for the piloting
of crop food safety
1.1.2 management system Consulting services - International month $ 15,000 0.5 $ 7,500
Develop policies and
regulations for planning of
1.1.3 SAZ Consulting services - International month $ 15,000 0.5 $ 7,500
regulations for the
establishment of
1.1.4 monitoring system Consulting services - International month $ 15,000 1 $ 15,000
Design and
Implementation of
Provincial Food Safety Consulting services for methodology development
1.1.5 Index of PFSI (international) month $ 15,000 2 $ 30,000
Consulting services for methodology development
of PFSI (local) month $ 3,000 4 $ 12,000
Baseline in 16 provinces(10,000 per province) survey $ 160,000 1 $ 160,000
regulations for the
establishment of
1.1.6 information system Consulting services - International month $ 15,000 1 $ 15,000
regulations for the
establishment of
1.1.7 communication system Consulting services - International month $ 15,000 1 $ 15,000
Development and review
1.1.8 of VIETGAPs Consulting services - International month $ 15,000 4 $ 60,000
1.1.9 Development of standards Consulting services - International month $ 15,000 3 $ 45,000
1.1.10 Incentive Policy Consulting services - International month $ 15,000 3 $ 45,000

Fund for certification (avg $10,000/certified
organization) - 100 national certification bodies to
be funded competitively by accreditation agency
at DCP $ $ 10,000 100 $ 1,000,000
149
Subtotal - Investment
Costs Sub-comp 1 $ 1,592,000
150
Table 27 Recurrent Costs for Output 1 of Policy and Institutional Component – Improving Regulatory Framework and Coordination

Design and Implementation of Surveys (2 per year in each
1.1.5 Provincial Food Safety Index province survey $ 3,000 160 $ 480,000
Staff at NAFIQAD (2 additional full
time); staff at DCP (1 additional
full time); staff at provinces (1
additional full time) month $ 200 1140 $ 228,000
Staff at NAFIQAD (1 additional full
time); staff at DCP (1 additional
1.1.6 Establishment of information system full time) month $ 200 120 $ 24,000
Establishment of communication Staff at NAFIQAD (1 additional full
1.1.7 system time) month $ 300 120 $ 36,000
Workshops (2/year/province) workshop $ 1,000 160 $ 160,000
Conference (1/year) conference $ 10,000 5 $ 50,000
Newsletters, posters, etc lump sum $ 10,000 5 $ 50,000
1.1.8 Development and review of VIETGAP Staff at DCP (1 additional full time) month $ 200 120 $ 24,000
1.1.9 Development of standards Staff at DCP (1 additional FT) month $ 200 120 $ 24,000
Subtotal - Recurrent Costs sub-
comp 1 $ 1,076,000
151
Table 28 Investment Costs for Output 2 of Policy and Institutional Component – Strengthening Capacity

Assessment of current
capacity,capacity needs for food
safety at MARD, certification bodies,
and laboratories for fruit, vegetables,
1.2.1 and tea, and planning Consulting services - International month $ 15,000 1 $ 15,000
Capacity of formulating food safety
1.2.2 regulations, policies, and strategies Consulting services - International month $ 15,000 2 $ 30,000
Training 10 staff at NAFIQAD, 10
staff at DCP, 5 staff at DPP, 2 staff
at Dept Legislation, 2 staff at DST (2 Training
staff/dept); 2 training course/year course $ 3,000 10 $ 30,000
Study tours abroad for 5 staff from
NAFIQAD and DCP (3 study tours
to 3 different countries) Study tour $ 15,000 3 $ 45,000
Capacity of accreditation agency
(DCP) to certify, provide training, and
1.2.3 audit certification bodies Consulting services - International month $ 15,000 2 $ 30,000
152
Training 10 staff at DCP and 16 staff Training
from DARD; 3 training course/year course $ 3,000 12 $ 36,000
Capacity of certification bodies to
provide training and audit certified
1.2.4 organizations Consulting services - International month $ 15,000 2 $ 30,000
Training for 20 organizations each Training
year; 2 training course/year course $ 5,000 10 $ 50,000
Capacity of laboratories to provide
testing and analytical services to
1.2.5 monitoring and inspection agencies Consulting services - International month $ 15,000 5 $ 75,000
Training for 20 laboratories each Training
year; 2 training course/year course $ 5,000 10 $ 50,000
Capacity of testing, demonstrating,
1.2.6 and disseminating GAPs effectively Consulting services - International month $ 15,000 3 $ 45,000
Training of trainers at NAFIQAD,
DCP, and DPP - training courses Training
per year for 15 staff course $ 2,000 10 $ 20,000
153
Training of trainers at NAFEQ - 2 Training
training course per year for 30 staff course $ 3,000 10 $ 30,000
Capacity of developing and
harmonizing domestic standards with
1.2.7 international standards Consulting services - International month $ 15,000 2 $ 30,000
Training for 10 staff from NAFIQAD,
DCP, DPP, and DST; 2 training Training
course/year course $ 3,000 10 $ 30,000
Capacity of monitoring food safety
from pre-production to postproduction
1.2.8 level Consulting services - International month $ 15,000 2 $ 30,000
DCP, DPP; and 16*2 staff from Training
DARD; 2 training course/year course $ 5,000 10 $ 50,000
Capacity of inspecting food safety
from pre-production to postproduction
1.2.9 level Consulting services - International month $ 15,000 2 $ 30,000
154
DCP, DPP; and 16*2 staff from Training
DARD; 2 training course/year course $ 5,000 10 $ 50,000
Capacity of informing effectively about
1.2.10 food safety issues Consulting services - International month $ 15,000 1 $ 15,000
Training for 10 staff from ICARD,
NAFIQAD, DCP, DPP; plus 16 staff
from province; 2 training Training
Capacity of communicating effectively
1.2.11 about food safety issues Consulting services - International month $ 15,000 1 $ 15,000
Training for 10 staff from ICARD,
NAFIQAD, DCP, DPP; and 16 staff
from provinces; 2 training Training
1.2.12 Capacity of planning for SAZ Consulting services - International month $ 15,000 1 $ 15,000
Training for 16*2 staff from DARD; 2 Training
training course/year course $ 5,000 10 $ 50,000
1.1.13 Capacity in Risk Analysis Consulting services - International month $ 15,000 3 $ 45,000
155
Training for 20 laboratories; 2 Training
training course/year course $ 5,000 10 $ 50,000
$ -
Subtotal - Investment Costs Output
2 $ 1,140,000
156
Table 29 Investment Costs for Output 3 of Policy and Institutional Component – Crop Food Safety Management System
Establish Standing Committee on
1.3.1 Food Safety $ -
$ -
Establish unit for Food Safety Equipment (1 server plus 3 PC
1.3.2 Monitoring at NAFIQAD computer system) Equipment $ 3,000 4 $ 12,000
Establish unit for Food Safety at

DCP and sub-units for Food Safety Equipment (1 + 16 PC computer
1.3.3 at DARD system) Equipment $ 3,000 4 $ 12,000
$ -
Training for 16*3 staff at district level (3
Food Safety Specialists at districts/province); and 16*6 staff at
MARD/DARD and Food Safety commune level (2 commune/province);
Facilitators at district and commune 2 training course/year; training delivered
1.3.4 level by MARD and DARD staff Training course $ 300 960 $ 288,000
$ -
Subtotal - Investment Costs Sub-
comp 1.3 $ 312,000
157
Table 30 Recurrent Costs for Output 3 of Policy and Institutional Component – Crop Food Safety Management System
New food safety staff at MARD (5

at NAFIQAD, 5 at DCP, 2 at DPP,
1.3.4 Food Safety Specialists at MARD/DARD 8 at NAFEC) - salaries month $ 300 1200 $ 360,000
Subtotal - Recurrent Costs Sub-comp

1.3 $ 360,000
158
Table 31 Summary of Costs for Outputs and Component on Policy and Institutional Development
Investment Cost Recurrent Cost Total Cost
Output 1 $ 1,592,000 $ 1,076,000 $ 2,668,000
Output 2 $ 1,140,000 $ - $ 1,140,000
Output 3 $ 312,000 $ 360,000 $ 672,000
Total $ 3,044,000 $ 1,436,000 $ 4,480,000
159
9.13 Design and Monitoring Framework for the Policy and
Institutional Component of the Project
Table 32 Design and Monitoring Framework for the Policy and Institutional Component of the
QSIAP

Monitorin Risks
g
Output 1 - 1. A review of existing 1. CPMU reports Assumptions
Improved regulations submitted to and document 1. Sustained
regulatory MARD decision makers records commitment of
framework and 2. Standing Committee on 2. Standing MARD to improving
coordination Food Safety headed by Committee on policy and regulatory
for state Vice Minister of MARD Food Safety framework
management of for food quality and minutes and 2. Cooperation among
safety and safety established with list of meeting departments to
quality of fruit, Secretariat provided by attendance transfer
vegetables, and NaFIQAD 3. MARD responsibilities and
tea 3. A comprehensive and decrees, assets as necessary
readily accessible set of decisions on 3. Rationalization of
regulations for the food safety laboratory system
implementation of food and quality may involve making
safety and quality of fruit, 4. STAMEQ- use of analytical
vegetables, and tea approved services of agencies
including regulations on TCVN related outside of MARD
SAZ, Incentive policy, to fruit, 4. GAP and other
and monitoring, vegetables, standards reviewed
communication, and and tea annually and revised
information. 5. Reports of the to meet user
4. A consistent and readily monitoring unit concerns and any
available set of good under MARD, changes in market
practices (VIETGAP) including requirements
and standards in Provincial 5. Phasing out of
production and Food Safety subsidies to certified
postharvest operations Index bodies over the
(TCVN) related to fruit, 6. Reports of the course of the Project
vegetables, and tea information
(standards for at least 10 and Risks
different types of communication 1. High global food
vegetables, 10 different units at MARD prices might retard
types of fruit, and tea; the emphasis on
including organic food safety and
production) quality
5. Food safety monitoring 2. Rent seeking
system, information behavior might result
system, and from an empowered
communication system inspection system
for fruit, vegetables, and 3. Resistance to
tea established separate monitoring
agency from
implementation
agency
Output 2 5. About 130 staff from 6. CPMU reports Assumptions

Strengthened MARD and 140 staff from and document
capacity of DARD trained in regulations records 1. Sustained
Monitorin Risks
g
state agencies, and policy formulation, 7. Reports of the commitment of
certification certification, GAP, standards, monitoring unit MARD to capacity
bodies, and monitoring, inspection, under MARD, strengthening of
laboratories information, communication, including state organizations,
involved in the planning, and risk analysis Provincial Food laboratories, and
implementation 6. Staff from 100 Safety Index certified bodies
of quality and certified/certifying bodies 8. Number of 2. Coordination with
safe food trained certified bodies by other projects
production, 7. Staff from 20 DCP involved in capacity
processing, and laboratories trained 9. Area of SZA strengthening
trading of fruit, 8. Staff from 16 DARD established by activities for food
vegetables, and provinces trained in planning DARD quality and safety
tea. SAZ 10. Quality of 3. Food safety reflected
service surveys in new degree
conducted by programs at
independent education institutions
organization and research
programs at
research
organizations
Risks
2. Scheduling of
training activities might
conflict with other
activities
Output 3: 1. Standing Committee for 1. CPMU reports Assumptions

Establishment Food Safety established and document 1. Sustained
of a pilot Crop by first half of 2009 records commitment of
Food Safety 2. Pilot units for Food 2. Minutes of MARD to pilot the
Management Safety Monitoring Standing crop food safety
System established by second Committee for management
(CFSMS) from half of 2009 at NAFIQAD Food Safety system.
the central level 3. Pilot units for Food and
of MARD to the Safety established at attendance
commune level DCP and DARDs in 16 lists Risks
for fruit, provinces by second half 3. Records of 1. The piloted system
vegetables, and of 2009 staff fully does not lead to
tea. 4. Job descriptions, devoted to replicable outcome
reassignment of staff, food safety in other provinces.
and identification of staff activities in the
for the positions of Food project
Safety Specialists and 4. Quality of
Food Safety Specialists service
(at district and commune surveys
level) completed by conducted by
second half of 2009. independent
organization
161
9.14 Model of Food Safety in Thailand
Source: Study on Strengthening Food Standards and the Certification System in the Socialist
Republic of Viet Nam
Engineering and Consulting Firms Association, Japan, Overseas Merchandise Inspection
Co., Ltd., February 2006
Two key ministries have the key role for food safety. Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives
(MOAC) is responsible for ensuring export food safety and Ministry of Public Health (MOPH)
is responsible for monitoring food imports and domestic consumption. In MOAC, the National
Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food Standards (ACFS) is the Accreditation Body
responsible to accredit Certification Bodies for food related systems (HACCP, GMP, GAP,
etc). ACFS has set new National Agricultural Standards that cover all quality and safety-
related issues in agricultural commodities and practices. ACFS also accredits food
laboratories. Other departments at MOAC such as Department of Agriculture, Department of
Livestock Development, and Department of Fishery support and facilitate exporting activities
to ensure the quality and safety in food products.
9.14.1 National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food

Standards (ACFS)
The National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food Standards (ACFS) was established
on October 9, 2002 in accordance with the Ministerial Regulations governing Division of
Government Service: the National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food Standards,
Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives as a Department under Ministry of Agriculture and
Cooperatives. The Bureau has been entrusted to serve as focal point of standardization of
agricultural commodities, processed agricultural commodities and food. Its duties include
standardization and certification of standard from farm to table, and negotiation for technical
resolution of trade issues and improvement and upgrading of the quality of Thai agricultural
commodity and food to achieve competitive standards worldwide.
The National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food Standards (ACFS) is the primary
agency to regulate and certify standards of agriculture commodities and foods for domestic
consumers and buyers abroad. Consumers’ safety is the agency’s first priority as it always
keeps its standards of works on par with internationally recognized practices so that the
same standards will be applied on all levels of productions from farms to tables and from
imports to exports.
9.14.2 Responsibilities of ACFC
• To set standards for primary agricultural, processed agricultural, and food products.
• To supervise, enforce, and monitor food safety Program.
• To issue certificate and accredit Certification Body.
• To coordinate and co-negotiate on non-tariff trade barrier issues as well as on
international standardizations.
• To serve as a key information center for primary agricultural, processed agricultural and
food products.
• To serve as a secretariat to the Board of National Agriculture Commodity and Food
Standards.
• To serve in other capacities as requested by law or the cabinet, or the minister
162
9.14.3 Structure
Figure 7 Structure of National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food Standards in

Thailand
9.14.4 ACFS and Standards Establishment
Agricultural commodity and food standards are used as references for manufacturing, trade,
exports and imports and certifications, are rather done on voluntary than compulsory basis
because people see the benefits of harmonization, their production standards to international
accepted. However if necessities on consumer health or export competitiveness arise, they
may soon be made compulsory. Although there are no existing laws demanding mandatory
safety standards for food and agriculture commodity, ACFS can ask for cooperation from
other authorized bodies to pass such laws. For instance, ACFS could ask the Food and Drug
Administration to pass a law that specifies levels of toxic residues. However ACFS will
always listen to opinions from all stakeholders before it passes any standard, either
voluntarily or compulsorily.
Any standard set by ACFS will cover all elements of safety and hygiene of human beings,
animals and plants and qualifications of specific consumer products both food and non-food.
Among standardizations are Good Agricultural Practice or GAP, toxic residues standards,
and method for identification of animal disease. ACFS divides its standardizations into three
categorie?s commodity standards, practice system standards and general safety standards.
Commodity Standards are set as national references for production, domestic and
international trade, and guarantees of products. The standards cover both safety and
qualifications of products that consumers need or minimum qualification of basic agriculture
commodities such as those of jasmine rice, durian, mangoes, asparagus, orchids, beef, pork,
fish, etc.
System standards are designed to be the criteria to assess and certify manufacturer’s
practices from farms to packing houses or factories including primary processors such as
163
abattoirs and millers. Among these standards are Good Agricultural Practice (GAP) Good
Manufacturing Practice (GMP) or Good Hygienic Practice (GHP). Such standards can be
used as benchmarks for farmers, distributors, or factories so that they can be assured that
they will get agriculture commodities or food that are safe and in accordance with the all
standards. Among manufacturing standards announced in 2004 were GAP for Food Crops,
GAP for Bee Farms and Requirements for Wood Packaging for Export.
General safety standards are specifically designed for safety and sanitation of animals and
plants, which are imposed on agriculture commodities and all kinds of food, for example,
Maximum Residue Limit (MRL) for pesticide maximum limit (ML) for contamination standards,
standards on samplings and analysis, or standards on autopsies.
9.14.5 Standard elaboration steps
ACFS has set up eight-steps for elaboration of standard, which are transparent and well
accepted by all parties. The procedures are as follows:
1) Prioritization of issues or items be standardized

2) Appoint a technical committee to consider draft.
3) Set up the draft standard.
4) Propose to the committee for consideration.
5) Hearing of opinion from all concerned parties
6) Submit to a scrutiny committee, then ACFS Board
7) Notify to WTO notify other countries (in case of compulsory standards)
8) Declare in the Royal Gazette
The most important step is the third one - Set up the draft standard - which requires
information gathering, studies and research, including risk assessment. Some information
derives from works of related agencies, namely Department of Agriculture, Department of
Fishery, Department of Livestock Development. But sometimes available information is
insufficient and ACFS has to fill in the gap by initiating its own research.
The fifth step, hearing of opinion from all concerned parties, is also very crucial. ACFS
usually organizes a public hearing forum for all sides from farmers, processors dealers,
exporters and consumers to discuss on any complications of the standards.
9.14.6 Utilization of Standardization
The National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food Standards works as Accreditation
Body to accredit Certification Body for food related systems. ACFS has set the new National
Agricultural Standards that cover all quality and safety related issues in agricultural
commodities and practices. Also, ACFS accredits the food laboratories.
To implement the government food safety policy, MOAC uses the Q-Mark – indication of
quality guarantee - as logo for certification of all agricultural commodities. Farm producers
who pass the National Food Safety Program at each step o the farm production procedures
will get a Q-Mark Certificate (Q GAP Food Safety Program) that ensures quality of their
products to comsumers. The Q-Mark logo is not only used for agricultural and food products
for export but also for the domestic food market.
http://www.doae.go.th/English/index.htmTo implement Thai food safety policies, MOAC uses

Q-Mark as national logo for certification of all agricultural commodities. All farm producers
164
who pass the National Food Safety Program at each step of the farm production procedures
will get a Q-Mark Certificate which assures the quality of their products to consumers.
GAP and HACCP are voluntary while implementation of GMP for packinghouses and
processing establishment are upon request. There are about 30 certification bodies in
Thailand currently providing various food safety certification services for the food industry.
Ministry of Public Health (MOPH) has the authority for food safety from the Food Law
(Amendment in 2000). The law makes illegal for anyone to produce, import or sell unsafe
food. The law is enforced by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).The Department of
Health (DOH) is responsible for ensuring food safety for food handling services and retail for
domestic consumers. The FDA issued food regulations titled: “Code of Practice General
Principles of Food Hygiene”, Food Act No. 193, subject: Manufacturing Processes,
Equipment and Storage of Food products. This regulation covers 57 food group products.
Figure 8 shows the roles of MOAC and MOPH in food safety management. The food safety
management system is in accordance with international food standards required by importing
countries related to food safety systems.
165
Ministry of Agriculture
and Cooperatives
(MOAC)
Ministry of Public Health
(MOPH)
Food business Department for
operators Livestock development
GAP, GMP, HACCP
Food and Drug Administration Exporters
(FDA) Manufacturers
Control and Monitoring Program Processors Department for Fishery
Primary GAP, COC, GMP,
producers HACCP
Department of Health Inputs
(DOH)
Control and Monitoring Program Department for
Agriculture
Organic, GAP, GMP,
HACCP
ACFS
Figure 8 Roles of MOAC and MOPH in food safety management
9.14.7 GAP Implementation
MOAC executed food safety strategic policy since 2003. A National GAP program was
developed with objectives to improve and maintain quality and safety of Thai’s fruit and
vegetable to meet the international market requirement standards. Thai government has
paid great effort to develop capacities of government officers and farmers in GAP
understanding and implementation. The national GAP program was divided into 2 parts:
One for government officers and the other for farmers and producers. MOAC developed
several manuals to guide GAP application to farmers, farm advisors, and farm inspectors.
Content of GAP includes:
1. GAP on crops: A manual describes practices required to improve quality and safety of
products. Suitable farm site, varieties, cultivation practices, fertilizer use, irrigation, crop
sanitation, crop protection, pesticide use, harvesting, transportation and record keeping
have also been addressed.
2. GAP inspection manual: A general manual for inspecting farms applying for GAP
certification.
3. GAP implementation guideline for growers and farm advisors:
• Quality management system: GAP on crops for growers and farm advisors.
• Supporting document on quality management system: GAP on crops for growers and
farm advisors.
• Recording forms on quality management system: GAP on crops for growers and farm
advisors
4. Check list for GAP inspection:
Check list for GAP inspection have right requirements including water source, growing
area, use of agro-chemicals and their application method, storage and transportation on
farm, record keeping, production process, post harvest.
166
Currently, GAP focuses more on foods for export than foods for domestic consumption. Many
requirements and regulations have been promulgated regarding inspection of pesticide
residues or antibiotics which may have contaminated vegetables, fruits, meat and fishery
products before exporting to various countries. Many importing countries require a Pesticide
Residues Certificate at the time of export. The level of maximum residue limited (MRL) of
agro-chemical substances or antibiotics and methods of analysis are in accordance with
importing country regulations.
9.14.8 GAP Certification Procedure
Farmer applies to
GAP Regional staff records
GAP members
Record the location

and ID of farmer
Regional staff trains
farmer/farm advisor for
Farmer GAP training GAP
(2 days)
Farmer advisor monitors
farmer
Farmer practices
GAP
Regional staff conducts
final inspection for
pesticide analysis
Farmer harvests
products
Passed
Not passed
Products supplied to
market/packer
Document sent to
Food Safety
Committee
Certificate Issuance
(1 year valid)
Figure 9 GAP steps
167

thuat ngu luật

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

thuat ngu luật

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MARD ADB

Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development Asian Development Bank

QUALITY AND SAFETY IMPROVEMENT IN

INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS AND CAPACITY

Francesco Goletti and Nguyen Thi Minh Hai

ADB Asian Development Bank

CIDA Canadian International Development Agency

GLOSSARY OF VIETNAMESE REGULATIONS

Term English English Term Vietnamese Vietnamese

1 Executive Summary ............................................................................................11

Table 1 Summary of Costs for Subcomponents of the Policy and Institutional

Figure 1: Approach and Methodology of Report ........................................................30

2. Regulations on good agricultural practices have been issued. VIETGAP for

3. There is still considerable work to be done on establishing a comprehensive

4. The national organization for establishing standards is STAMEQ under

5. While it is the intention of the Government to conform to international

6. The current process of development of standards led by STAMEQ is

11. Incentives for the adoption of VIETGAP should be established. Constraints to

Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones (SAZ)

26. The declaration of a safe production zone could also be linked to

31. When a violation is discovered, inspectors have the right to issue

32. While coordination between inspectorates and MOI at MARD is relatively

33. The power of inspectorates appears to be limited either in terms of applying

Information, Education, Communication

41. In spite of an intense regulatory activity related to food safety, information

48. VIETGAP (and other GAPs) require considerable behavioral changes by

50. The development of an extension system capable and effective in ensuring

52. Well established methods of extension such as demonstrations and farmer

Strategies, Policies, and Regulations

54. There remains considerable work to be done to complete the regulatory

59. Establishment of a Food Safety Monitoring System at MARD. Issue a

60. Establishment of Food Safety Information and Communication Systems

61. Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones. Issue a new regulation on planning of

62. Development and Harmonization of Standards. Establish an action plan

63. Development of Good Practices. Issue regulations to develop existing

64. Incentive Policy for Adoption of Good Practices. Issue a policy on

65. Institutional Capacity of Key Agencies at MARD, Labs, and Certification

PROPOSED CROP FOOD SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (CFSMS)

66. Rationale. A number of regulations indicate functions and responsibilities of

67. Coordination. The issue of coordination is both internal and external to

68. Monitoring. Existing regulations indicate monitoring as a responsibility of all

69. Management. For an effective management of food safety system to emerge,

70. Proposed Solutions. The QSEAP will contribute to the establishment of an

1. Establishment of a Standing Committee on Food Safety headed by a Vice

73. Elements. The proposed CFSMS is consistent with 7 essential elements of a

75. Management Structure - Overall. The CFSMS will be part of a national

76. Management Structure - MARD. The proposed Crop Food Safety

77. Central Level – MARD. The CFSMS envisages the following:

78. Province Level – DARD. The CFSMS envisages the following:

PROJECT DESIGN OF THE POLICY AND INSTITUTIONAL COMPONENT

Table 1 Summary of Costs for Subcomponents of the Policy and Institutional

Investment Cost Recurrent Cost Total Cost

Output Targets Data Sources and Assumptions and

Output 2 1. About 130 staff from 1. CPMU reports Assumptions

Output 3: 1. Standing Committee for 1. CPMU reports Assumptions

85. The Working Paper is organized as follows:

• Chapter 1 provides the Executive Summary

• Chapter 2 contains the Introduction

• Chapter 3 provides the conceptual framework used in the analysis of food

• Chapter 7 presents experience of other countries

• Chapter 8 presents recommendations, including the outcomes, outputs,

• Chapter 9 contains various Annexes including:

1. Codex Alimentarius Commission

3.1 Definition of Food Safety and Quality