thuat ngu luật | Food Safety | Hazard Analysis And Critical Control Points

MARD Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development

ADB 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 with

Agrifood Consulting International

LIST OF ACRONYMS
ADB ASEAN AusAID CAC CIDA COC CPRGS CSP DANIDA DARD DCP DMF DMTP DPP DST EUREPGAP FAVRI FAO FAPQDCP FFA GAP GATT GHP GLOBALGAP GMP HACCP ICD IEC IFAD IPM IPPC ISO JAS-ANZ LIFSAP MARD MIO MOF MOH MPI MOIT MOST NAFEC NAFIQAD NGO NZ ODA OIE PFZ PM PPRI QCDP QCVN QUACERT SAZ SBV SEDP Asian Development Bank Association of Southeast Asia Nations Australian Agency for International Development Codex Alimentarius Commission Canadian International Development Agency Code of Conduct Comprehensive Poverty Reduction and Growth Strategy Country Strategy and Program Danish International Development Agency Provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural Development Department of Crop Production Design and Monitoring Framework Department of Multilateral Trade Policy Department of Plant Protection Department of Science and Technology European Good Agricultural Practices Fruit and Vegetables Research Institute Food and Agriculture Organization Food Agricultural Products Quality Development Control Project Food and Foodstuff Association Good Agricultural Practices General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade Good Handling Practices Global Good Agricultural Practices (previously EUREPGAP) Good Manufacturing Practices Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point International Cooperation Department Information, Education, and Communication International Fund for Agriculture Development Integrated Pest Management International Plant Protection Convention International Standards Organization Joint Accreditation System – Australia and New Zealand Livestock Foodstuffs Safety Project Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development Ministerial Inspection Office Ministry of Finance Ministry of Health Ministry of Planning and Investment Ministry of Industry and Trace Ministry of Science and Technology National Agricultural and Fisheries Extension Center National Agro-Forestry and Fisheries Quality Assurance Department Non Governmental Organization New Zealand Official Development Assistance World Organization for Animal Health (Office International de Pest Free Zone Prime Minister Plant Protection Research Institute Technical Regulation – Local Technical Regulation - National Certification Body under MOST Safe Agricultural Zone State Bank of Vietnam Socio-Economic Development Plan

2

SME SOFRI SPS STAMEQ STDF SWOT TA TBT TCCS TCVN USAID VFA VIETGAP VINAFRUIT VITAS WB WHO WTO

Small and Medium Enterprise Southern Fruit Research Institute Sanitary and Phytosanitary Directorate for Standards and Quality Standards and Trade Development Facility Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats Technical Assistance Technical Barriers to Trade Vietnam Local Standards Vietnam National Standards United States Agency for International Development Viet Nam Food Administration Viet Nam Good Agricultural Practices Viet Nam Fruit Association Viet Nam Tea Association World Bank World Health Organization World Trade Organization

GLOSSARY OF VIETNAMESE REGULATIONS Term English National Assembly Standing Committee, National Assembly Government Prime Minister Ministry of Agriculture & Rural Development Ministry of Health Ministry of Fishery Ministry of Science & Technology Constitution Law Ordinance Decree Directive Decision Circular Inter-ministerial Circular Resolution English Abbreviation NA SC Term Vietnamese Vietnamese Abbreviation Quốc hội QH Ủy ban Thường Vụ Quốc UBTVQH hội Chính phủ CP Thủ tướng Chính phủ PM Bộ Nông nghiệp và Phát BNN triển Nông thôn Bộ Y tế BYT Bộ Thủy sản BTS Bộ Khoa học & Công BKHCN nghệ Hiến pháp HP Luật Pháp lệnh PL Nghị định NĐ Chỉ thị CT Quyết định QĐ Thông tư TT Thông tư liên bộ TTLT Nghị quyết NQ

PM MARD MOH MOFI MOST

ND QD

For example, the regulation 02/2007/ND-CP refers to the Resolution (QD) No 2 issued by the Government (CP) in 2007.

3

.........................................................................40 4..2........42 5............................................................7 Markets and Supermarkets ....53 5...................6 Government Decree on the Implementation of Ordinance on Food Hygiene and Safety No......11 Ministry of Health Decision on Food Safety No........................................................................................44 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....... and the Regulation on Management of Plant Protection Drugs No...........................................13 MARD Decision on Good Practices for the Production of Fresh Fruit and Vegetables No................ 89/2006/ND-CP dated 30 August 2006 .......................................................................46 5..............................12 MARD Directive on Declaring 2008 to be the Year of Quality and Safety No 56/CT-BNN-KHCN dated 8 January 2008...36 4..................................................................................................................52 5...............34 4.......... Processing.....................................50 5..2 National Assembly Standing Committee Ordinance on the Plant Protection and Quarantine No........46 5..1 Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development ...............4 Ministry of Industry and Trade .163/2004/ND-CP dated 7 September 2004...........................................1 Introduction........................................................16 Government Decree on Labeling of Goods No................10 MARD Decision on Safe Vegetable Production and Trading Management No 106/2007/QD-BNN dated 28 December 2007 ..........6 Private Sector and NGOs .....................................................3 Ministry of Health.............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....................31 4.........2..........................................3 Government Decree on the Regulation on Plant Protection..........................1 Introduction.......................................................................................... 02/2007/ND-CP dated 5 January 2007.............................. 1121/QĐBNN-KHCN dated 14 April 2008 ...............................34 4............................. the Regulation on Plant Quarantine and the Regulation on Plant Quarantine.......................15 Ministry of Fisheries Decision on Establishing the National Agriforestry and Fisheries Quality Assurance Department (NAFIQAD) No.............2 Ministries and Related Agencies .................5 National Assembly Standing Committee Ordinance on Food Hygiene and Safety No...... 58/2002/ND-CP dated 3 June 2002 44 5.........................39 4.................................................11 Introduction ................................................................................9 MARD Decision on Regulations on Safe Tea Production.....................................2................. 57/QD-BYT dated 9 January 2008...........52 5..........1 Definition of Food Safety and Quality... 29/2008/QD-BTS dated 28 January 2008..2 Institutional Dimensions of Food Quality and Safety ........................................5 Associations and Cooperatives ...48 5...................................................... 379/QĐ-BNN-KHCN dated 28 January 2008......40 5 Key Legislation.................................. 36/2001/PL-UBTVQH10 of 25 July 2001 ..14 MARD Decision on Good Practices for the Production of Tea No.............................37 4.................................... and Business Management No......................................37 4....................2.............................................46 5.................28 3........................................51 5.....53 1 2 3 4 ............................................2 Ministry of Science and Technology.................... 43/2007/QD-BNN dated 16 May 2007 ..........................28 4 The Institutions Involved in Food Quality and Safety.................................3 International Organizations and Agencies.........39 4.............................................................TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary .................42 5................52 5...............28 3......37 4....31 4.....................4 Research Institutes and Universities ....12/2003/PL-UBTVQH11 dated 26 July 2003.49 5............................................................26 Approach and Methodology ..................4 Government Decree on Plant Quarantine No.................

................65 6......................................................................2 Issues in Standards ................................22 MARD Circular on guiding mandate duties......70 6.................10..........1 Current Situation in Planning for Safe Agricultural Zones .......1 Current Situation in Education...................... 153/2005/NĐ-CP dated 15 December 2005 55 5.............. inspection and testing .1 Current Situation in Certification.....1 Current situation in Laboratories ...............18 Government Decree on Detailed Implementation of several Articles of Law on Standards and Technical Specifications No...53 5...74 5 .73 6...........................1 Current Situation in Monitoring .........................59 6................3.....................69 6...72 6....................................................71 6......58 6.......61 6....................1 Current Situation on Information...........................................................................72 6...4..........................................................19 Government Decree on administrative fine in plant protection and quarantine No...............................................54 5...................2........... 26/2003/NĐ-CP dated 19 March 2003...62 6..................................... fruit and tea up to year of 2015 .7 Monitoring....................................2 Issues in Inspection .............................................72 6...............67 6.......................................................................................10...................................................64 6...........................5..............23 Government Decree on administrative fine in plant protection and quarantine No..................................................7......................................21 Government Decree on Organization and Operation of Inspection in Agriculture and Rural Development No...................................... organization and personnel of inspection in agricultural and rural development and inspection of agencies under MARD No.....5 Planning for Safe Agricultural Zones............. 79/2008/NĐ-CP dated 18 July 2008 stipulating systems of food safety management...2 Issues in Education .....................................................6...8................................3....................................27 MARD Decision No......69 6............64 6..56 5....................................55 5....................58 6.......6 Inspection .......................................................................60 6......1 Current Situation in Inspection ............................... on issuing regulations on VietGap certification for vegetable....................................................2 Issues in Monitoring......1 Current Situation in Good Practices .... 68/2006/QH11 dated 29 June 2006.................................70 6......................67 6........................................2...........4..72 6................62 6...............9.......................... 84/2008/QĐ-BNN....56 5............6....63 6....26 Prime Minister Decision No.........................................55 5.......................58 6...................................................................1 Introduction...........4 Certification .... 26/2003/NĐ-CP dated 19 March 2003..............................54 5.......................... fruit and tea . 22/2004/QH11 dated 15 June 2004.......................................9 Information ................. dated 28 July 2008............................................3 Good Practices..............72 6.....................................2 Standards ........................................................ 127/2007/NĐ-CP dated 1 August 2007 54 5........................................58 6..........28 Summary ..................24 Criminal Code......................................... 107/2008/QĐ-TTg dated 30 July 2008 on several policies to support production......... processing and consuming development of safe vegetable.............2 Issues on Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones..................20 Law on Inspection No...................56 5.9..........................................................................11 Extension.....................................................................................................................................................2 Issues in Certification ..2 Issues in Good Practices................8.......................................................................................................................................69 6.................55 5...............1 Current Situation in Standards ........................2 Issues on Information ......7...68 6.............17 Law on Standards and Technical Specifications No...............5........................2 Issues in Laboratories .........................................................................................................................25 Government Decree No......57 6 Key Issues ......60 6.......10 Education ...... 73/2006/TT-BNN dated 18 September 2006....8 Laboratories ...............................5...............................................

..........................................2 Recommendations regarding Establishing Food Monitoring System at MARD 89 8................................13.1...................80 7........91 8..................................................75 6.......10.................3..............................................................77 6................................1.............................13 Research ......10.........1.....74 6...................77 6.................................................................................................1 Coordination .......................86 Policy and Institutional Development for Food Safety........1........2 Recommendations regarding Lead Agency for Food Safety at MARD 87 8...........................1.......1 General Framework....................................7..........................................................................................76 6....8...............................Current Situation on Extension..90 8...............5..................2 Issues in Regulations..93 8.................2 PROPOSED SOLUTIONS ..........................................15...........................91 8..........10 PILOT CROP FOOD SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (CFSMS).......... Policies.....................1 Options for the leading agency ......................10..............88 8..................... Labs...3 Management of Food Safety ....................5 Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones ............................ and Strategies ...........2..........................78 6...........................4..........2 Monitoring .......................81 7......................................................90 8............14......74 6................1 Recommendations regarding Development and Harmonization of Standards 91 8.....13.................................3 VISION .........77 6..........................................2 Thailand.......................76 6.....1...............1 Recommendations regarding Establishing Food Safety Information and Communication Systems at MARD . and Strategies ..............................83 8 Recommendations ..9 Institutional Capacity of Key Agencies at MARD.........................2 Issues on Communication .................................1.....................2 Issues in Extension............................10......14 Regulations...1 Current Situation in Regulations........95 8........................93 8.92 8........76 6................11.......1 Current situation on Communication ...86 8...................................2.........................3 Other Countries ........95 6 ......................7 Development of Good Practices...............14........1 Recommendations regarding Incentives Policies for Adoption of Good Practices........4 Establishment of Food Safety Information and Communication Systems at MARD 89 8........9.....11..................................1.................2.......75 6.................................1 Current Situation in Capacity.............88 8..1 Current Situation on Research ................1.....86 8......................................12................................3................1 Recommendations regarding Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones 90 8.... Policies...........................................3 Establishment of a Food Safety Monitoring System at MARD .10....94 8............6 Development and Harmonization of Standards..................1 Recommendations regarding Development of Good Practices............80 7..............................................1 Malaysia ........15 Capacity .............1.......................10..................................1...2 Issues on Research.......................................90 8.............................................1 RATIONALE ...................................................94 8............1.1 Lead Agency at MARD for food safety .................................................93 8.......................................................... and Certification Bodies 92 8.. Policies..............1 6........................................ and Strategies.79 7 Relevant Experiences of Other Countries in Food Safety ...............................2 Issues in Capacity ..............................78 6...1..86 8.12.........15..........................6.......................1 Recommendations regarding Institutional Capacity for Food Safety 93 8...............2...86 8...................................................76 6.......91 8..............................................12 Communication ...8 Incentive Policy for Adoption of Good Practices ...........................86 8...............................1 The Provincial Food Safety Index....................................

.....11...............10.................5 Data sources and reporting mechanisms for Output 1 ...............11..3.......103 8................. and tea.......2 Risks for Output 1 .....1 Technical Committees of Vietnam Codex Alimentarius commission 116 9.............................5......................11....11......2 Inputs for Output 3 ..1 Office of Vietnam food standardization commission (Abbreviated Vietnam Codex Contact Point ...12..............10.....12.................... certification bodies.........3....................3..................................................11....114 9......... vegetables.....................1..........96 8................110 8........2 Targets for Output 1..............................111 8..................12............1........ Benefits............2.............1 Activities for Output 1..............3.....111 8.........5 Data sources and reporting mechanisms for Output 2 .........3 Inputs for Output 2 .......4 Costs for Output 1.....2..2 Legislation.............................................................107 8......................12 Justification..2........... and laboratories involved in the implementation of quality and safe food production.113 8..........117 9..............11.....112 8........................ and tea....5.................... vegetables....................11.MARD...................1 Justification...................5 Assumptions for Output 3 .... and tea............. Targets...................10......11 Policy and Institutional Development for Food Safety at the central level Outputs....11.............98 8........................1.........1........1......2......................4 Risks for Output 2 ...............................98 8......11..........................11................10..................VCAC) ...........................................5...........................................112 8..3....3 Output 2: Strengthened capacity of state agencies....4.............11..........2...........5..................111 8..3 Management Structure ............12................3 Costs for Output 3................................113 9 ANNEXES...........97 8.........10..........12.............................3..12....5 MODEL OF MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE AT MARD...........4........................................11...................... .....................11............4...........107 8......................2 Output 1: Improved regulatory framework and coordination for state management of safety and quality of fruit.....................................1 Activities for Output 2.................4.....................1 Elements............109 8..3.......96 8..............103 8............98 8.............4............................ and Monitoring ....................................110 8....................2 Benefits..3 The SPS Agreement .10....................................................107 8.............1 Assumptions for Output 1 ....2 Contact Address: ..............115 9..................107 8....................................................11........................1 What Is the WTO Sanitary and Phytosanitary (WTO-SPS) Agreement? 118 7 .4 Costs for Output 2................COMPONENTS OF THE CFSMS ................3.............................112 8...................................................116 9.4 8.3 District and Commune Level...3 Inputs for Output 1 .............. Activities.96 8.............................................1 Targets for Output 3................109 8.......97 8.. vegetables...................4 Data sources and reporting mechanisms for Output 3 ........................................12.........................................112 8.......112 8..111 8....3 Assumptions and Risks .. processing.........................110 8......10.............................................................10................3 Assumptions for Output 2 ...........................................................118 9............................4...11.....2 Targets for Output 2....1 Codex Alimentarius Commission ...............................2 Introduction to SPS and TBT Agreements ...........................111 8...........103 8..................................12......................11............3..................112 8.........................................115 9............11.................111 8........................1 List of outputs ........... and trading of fruit................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................................101 8................................3.......................95 8.................................106 8......3.........10.........3. Inputs..............12..................6 Risks for Output 3 .1 Central Level .................107 8............4 Sustainability of the System................ and Risks...................2 Province Level – DARD ........4......

....14........125 9........5 Risk Analysis .......14................................................... MAX RESIDUE LIMITS.....................4........10.....4 Discriminatory measures and technical barriers to trade ....4..................................................4.. GUIDELINES..5 Standard elaboration steps..............................1 The focus of GATT ...6..............................................................144 9................10 Examples of some Vietnamese Standards related to VIETGAP ..................................163 9...............................2 Permitted Residue Limit for some chemicals in irrigation water .............................122 9...4 ACFS and Standards Establishment ......122 9...120 9.....................................................146 9............2 The GMO Debate ..............................14 Model of Food Safety in Thailand......126 9..............................6 Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) ...........3......144 9...........................124 9..........................................7 GAP Implementation ..126 9.........6 Utilization of Standardization ..........................4.......9 Viet Nam National Standards (TCVN) for Food and Agriculture .................166 9....129 9.............................167 9.......................... CODE OF PRACTICE...............121 9..........14....................................................................4 What Is the Genesis of the WTO-SPS Agreement?...............................11 Implications of Food Hygiene and Safety Regulations for Different Actors along the Value Chain ...1 What Is Risk Analysis? ...........................................................144 9......123 9..130 9........7 References ..................................4 The TBT Agreement..................8 CODEX STANDARDS.....5.................................2 What Is the Origin of Risk Analysis? ..........125 9...................14.........4..................................................................164 9.........162 9.............................................7 The rules pertaining to standards ........................163 9....8 Conformity Assessment Procedures .........................................3..........1 Principle of Equivalence .121 9......119 9..........8 GAP Certification Procedure ..3..............What Is the Economic Rationale for Governments to Become Involved? 118 9..........7 Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) .................................3 Permitted Residue Limit for some harmful bioorganisms and toxic chemicals in fresh vegetables.........10...144 9........................5 The structure of the TBT Agreement ..................................5....129 9......162 9..........148 9..............124 9.....14.....................2 The problem of de facto discrimination...................3 Structure ........122 9............................4................................................................14...............10 Dispute settlement.............................................14.3 The concept of "technical barriers to trade"................................................119 9...................................................164 9.6 The rules pertaining to technical regulations ......10..................3..126 9........6 Final Comments .......................................................5 What Are the Main Provisions of the WTO-SPS Agreements? .....3 Why Does the WTO-SPS Agreement Promote Free Trade? ....4......................................12 Preliminary Estimation of Costs for the Project Component: Policy and Institutional Development for Food Safety at the central level ...1 National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food Standards (ACFS) 162 9..................6.......................................................................................122 9...............125 9........9 Other provisions .....................14........3...................4.......................................................3...143 9............1 Permitted Residue Limit for some heavy metals in cropping soil ......129 9..13 Design and Monitoring Framework for the Policy and Institutional Component of the Project................................131 9..4...............123 9..............................160 9........4.........................2 Responsibilities of ACFC.........................................................2 8 ............

..................33 Table 5 Summary of relevant Legislation related to Food Safety and Quality .........................79 Table 20 Analysis of Alternative Options for a Lead Agency at MARD on Food Safety .............................23 Table 2 Design and Monitoring Framework for the Policy and Institutional Component of the QSIAP ................77 Table 18 SWOT Analysis of Regulations...............................................76 Table 17 SWOT Analysis of Research..............................24 Table 3 Institutional Issues and Ministries along the Value Chain of Food and Agricultural products ........................................78 Table 19 SWOT Analysis of Capacity .......70 Table 12 SWOT Analysis of Laboratories .............71 Table 13 SWOT Analysis of Information ......LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Summary of Costs for Subcomponents of the Policy and Institutional Development Component of the Project ...............................................................................................................................................143 Table 26 Investment Costs for Output 1 of Policy and Institutional Component – Improving Regulatory Framework and Coordination....110 Table 24 Summary of Costs for Output 3...................................................................................64 Table 9 SWOT Analysis of Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones.....................................................................................................................................................................................................66 Table 10 SWOT Analysis of Inspection........................................................................................................................160 9 .......107 Table 23 Summary of Costs for Output 2....................................................................................................................................................73 Table 15 SWOT Analysis of Extension .........................152 Table 29 Investment Costs for Output 3 of Policy and Institutional Component – Crop Food Safety Management System....................................................................................................88 Table 22 Summary of Costs for Output 1..............................32 Table 4: Key Players in Food Quality and Safety Improvement................72 Table 14 SWOT Analysis of Education ............................................................................................................................................................87 Table 21 Elements for the design of a Provincial Food Safety Index.............................148 Table 27 Recurrent Costs for Output 1 of Policy and Institutional Component – Improving Regulatory Framework and Coordination........................................................................................................... and Strategies .................................................................................. Policies....................................68 Table 11 SWOT Analysis of Monitoring ...............................................60 Table 7 SWOT Analysis of Practices ...............75 Table 16 SWOT Analysis of Communication ....................151 Table 28 Investment Costs for Output 2 of Policy and Institutional Component – Strengthening Capacity...............62 Table 8 SWOT Analysis of Certification .........................................................................................................111 Table 25 Number of National Standards Related to Food and Agricultural Products and Processes ......157 Table 30 Recurrent Costs for Output 3 of Policy and Institutional Component – Crop Food Safety Management System....................................159 Table 32 Design and Monitoring Framework for the Policy and Institutional Component of the QSIAP..................................................43 Table 6 SWOT Analysis of Standards...................................158 Table 31 Summary of Costs for Outputs and Component on Policy and Institutional Development .........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

..............................................166 Figure 9 GAP steps.........................................................................LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Approach and Methodology of Report .........................................................................................................................31 Figure 3 The Crop Food Safety Management System................100 Figure 4 The Division of Food Safety Monitoring................................101 Figure 7 Structure of National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food Standards in Thailand................................................................................................101 Figure 6 Food Safety Facilitators at District and Commune Level ........................................................163 Figure 8 Roles of MOAC and MOPH in food safety management............30 Figure 2: Ministries Responsible Along the Food Chain .......................100 Figure 5 The Division of Food Safety at DCP ............................................................................................ Information and Commnication at NAFIQAD ..167 10 ............

According to the Law on Standards and Technical Specifications No. There is still considerable work to be done on establishing a comprehensive regulatory framework for food safety. About 48% of Vietnam’s food and agricultural standards are harmonized with Codex. vegetables. there has been an intense regulatory activity related to food safety and quality in Viet Nam.1 Executive Summary BACKGROUND 1. and the approval of the National Action Plan for Food Safety in 2006. the laws on Plant Protection. Since the early 2000s. and tea already make reference to the TCVN system. 2. Most of this work is planned to occur over the 5-year period 2008-2012 of the Action Plan for Food Safety. Laws on Standards. feasibility. and Inspection were also issued during this period. and Food Safety are currently under preparation and expected to be drafted in 2008. Currently. 106/2007/QĐ-BNN and No. While it is the intention of the Government to conform to international standards in the longer term. The Law on Inspection will be amended. The VIETGAP regulations are based on ASEAN GAP and GLOBALGAP. The objective is to harmonize 50% of all standards in Viet Nam by 2010. The current process of development of standards led by STAMEQ is consistent with the principles of the TBT Agreement. only about 30% of standards are harmonized. The Ministry of Agricultural and Rural Development (MARD) has issued Regulations No. 68/2006/QH11 all standards have to be issued as national standards (TCVN) or local standards (TCCS). Animal Health. 6. and a review committee including different stakeholders ensures the relevance. technical accuracy.43/2007/QD-BNN on management of production and business of the three commodity groups includes rules for accreditation and certification processes. The defining moments were the issuing of the National Assembly Standing Committee Ordinance of Food Hygiene and Safety in 2003. 11 . vegetables and tea were issued during the first 4 months of 2008. The national organization for establishing standards is STAMEQ under MOST. Good Labels. INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES Standards 4. The new VIETGAP for fruits. the current state of hygiene in Vietnam prevents this from being achieved in the short to medium term. which was followed by several decrees and directives. VIETGAP for fruits. Any organization (public or private) can submit a standard for approval. 3. Having harmonized 48% of its standards already. 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. for the country as a whole. agriculture fares a little better than the average of all sectors in Viet Nam. 5. Regulations on good agricultural practices have been issued. and transparency of the standard.

10.7. It is likely that farmers and enterprises engaged in international trade will comply with VIETGAP and even more advanced practices such as EUREPGAP/GLOBALGAP. There remain however several standards to be developed to improve quality and safety of specific food and agricultural products. It is likely that supermarkets and enterprises engaged in exporting food products will be the earliest adopters of VIETGAP. 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. and dissemination. Incentives for the adoption of VIETGAP should be established. Considerable progress has already occurred in improving standards and communicating them to the public. There are organizations already certified for EUREPGAP. The adoption of VIETGAP will require testing. and by DARDs to operate at the province level. However. Vietnam has nineteen other certification bodies. Product-specific standards for the numerous types of fruits and vegetables need to be developed. there are only 5 certified organizations in VIETGAP for safe vegetables located in Hanoi. VIETGAP is closely inspired by ASEANGAP. development of manuals. all of which are foreign with the exception of QUACERT. Good Practices 8. handling. The growth of supermarkets in Viet Nam is an opportunity for establishing safer production. accreditation is obtained free of charge. 2 organizations will be certified in HCMC and one will be certified in Dalat. Constraints to the adoption of VIETGAP by smallholder farmers and SME need to be assessed. the certification body under MOST. 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. and FRESHCARE. and tea is obtained by paying the certification bodies. 13. As of now. adoption of VIETGAP for domestic markets might be more problematic. training. 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. establishing of demonstration sites. Certification 12. 11. fruit. QUACERT is accredited by JAS-ANZ (Australia and 12 . EUREPGAP/GLOBALGAP. As of May 2008. The VIETGAP certification is obtained from certification bodies which must be accredited by DCP to operate over the national territory. particularly if the VIETGAP are perceived as procedures increasing the cost of production without a corresponding increase in the price paid by consumers. The Catalogue of Standards issued by STAMEQ is a laudable effort in this direction. for example the Ham Minh Dragon Fruit Cooperatives located in Binh Thuan Province. it is not clear whether most farmers and enterprises will benefit from the adoption of VIETGAP. 14. The certification follows procedures explained in the related regulations and must be renewed after 3 years. Currently. 9. whereas certification of safe vegetable. Apart from the VIETGAP certification bodies. and distribution of food products and supermarkets are already engaging in VIETGAP-like procedures.

That requires frequent monitoring (including un-announced visits) and auditing by the accreditation and the certification agencies. Reputation and trust require a multi-dimensional process of capacity strengthening. publications. 21. wells (29%).320 ha of safe production areas have been declared safe by DARD(s). 16. In spite of these and other initiatives. main roads and hospitals. For certification to be effective and ensure consumers that the promise of “safe food” is maintained. Programs for safe production of vegetables in Viet Nam started in 1999. As the number of organizations requiring certification increases. The current capacity (both in terms of number and skills of staff) will have to increase over time. As of April 2008. the demand for accreditation will grow. 15. The project on Dragon Fruit in Binh Thuan and Tien Giang. up to the present. The planned safe vegetable production areas are 13. awareness. dissemination of information. 17. Reputation and trust are probably the two most important elements of a good certification system. 23. In 1995 the GOV launched a safe vegetable program in response to public concerns of vegetable safety. and transparency. Almost 100% of vegetable production is not tested and about 12% of vegetable production occurs near industrial zones. safe production zones occupy just a small proportion of total cultivated area. websites. public hearings. lakes. Agricultural land has been allocated to farmers who are mostly smallholders and usually have fragmented landholdings.New Zealand Joint accreditation system) to provide certification for HACCP and ISO 9000 and 14000. etc). These are elements that need to be promoted by both regulation and initiatives of the government and the industry (workshops. the availability of a code of conduct that is respected by the industry. 19. Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones (SAZ) 20. 22. and waste water (11%) are not adequately controlled for safety. and the availability of reliable diagnostics and testing centers. Unsafe water for irrigating vegetables is common and sources from river.216 ha which represents only 13% of the total vegetable cultivated area in the region. This situation might also need to change over time in order to ensure sustainability of the accreditation system. and pools (60% of the total). Most of the staff involved in accreditation do not have a sufficient background in food safety and accreditation and certification. 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. funded by USAID and AUSAID and implemented by Southern Fruit Research Institute (SOFRI) uses EUREPGAP standards for monitoring production of dragon fruit. QUACERT is planning to become a GAP Certifying Body. Capacity of the accreditation organizations (DCP and DARDs) is still weak. Currently. To establish contiguous land plots of land which could be declared part 13 . In the ISO 9000 certification market. in the Red River Delta only 6. reputation and trust have to be established. QUACERT has 34 percent market share. Infrastructure for safe production zones is often poor. some farmers in Viet Nam are EUREPGAP certified. field visits. Accreditation is currently obtained free of cost. 18. Planning of safe production zone is a complex task.

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

50. partly motivated by the incentives of capturing new export markets and higher value consumers in the domestic market. Clear evidence that adoption of safe practices could benefit smallholding farmers should be provided. with a larger number of specialists involved in food safety issues. the situation is similar. 52. 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. 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. Unless there are adequate incentives for adoption. participation in study tours (eg to certified farmers in dragon fruit). and develop strategies. Technical and socioeconomic research could support the production of such evidence. facilitating access to markets (through contracts with enterprises and supermarkets) and participation in producer marketing groups. the situation seems to be better. In the research organizations. of which only 7 are full time. At the province level. At the DPP there are 37 inspectors. There is a limited number of staff within MARD and related research organizations who are specialists in food safety. including EUREPGAP and HACCP. In the DCP there are only 4 staff involved in food safety. information. training of trainers. 54. and only 2 are full time. Certified organizations for safe food production and trading are increasing. 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.47. 49. Since the early 2000 there has been an intense regulatory activity on food hygiene and safety. 17 . There remains considerable work to be done to complete the regulatory framework. VIETGAP (and other GAPs) require considerable behavioral changes by farmers and enterprises. Capacity 55. on average there are less than 7 staff who have responsibilities related to food safety and most of them are not specialists. Policies. In the livestock production and animal health department. and Regulations 53. and an incentive policy for adoption of good practices. the planning of safe agricultural zones. the establishment of monitoring. The Laws on Standards and Good Labels have already been approved. as food safety research programs are just starting to be established. the development of standards and good practices. formulate policies. 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. Currently the amendment to the Law on Inspection and a new Law on Food Safety are under preparation. 48. Strategies. the food safety practices will remain limited to few leading farmers. establishment of models. The priorities for action include the establishment of a lead agency for food safety at MARD. development of manuals and guidelines. and communication systems. and in the fishery department. 51. and focused extension activities. There are leading farmers and organizations who have already adopted 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. packaging. the subsequent priorities for capacity strengthening are in certification. 57. Conduct an in-depth capacity needs assessment for food safety and quality 18 . policies. safe stalls in fruits and vegetable markets). and strategies. Establish a lead agency at MARD devoted to food safety. matching grants for investment in good practices. practices. inspection. Lead Agency for Food Safety at MARD. 62. 61. rewards to best performers. from standards. handling. monitoring. and indirect incentives through improvement of infrastructure (eg for building safe agricultural zones. Good sorting. to regulations. Establish an action plan for the development of standards to ensure food quality and safety and improve capacity to carry out the action plan. the planning of infrastructure. 65. and information. There are capacity needs at all levels of the food safety institutional dimensions examined in this report. and the establishment of a monitoring system. Development and Harmonization of Standards. 59. Develop a methodology and pilot the construction and monitoring of a Provincial Food Safety Index. washing. Establish a road map to ensure a gradual convergence of national good practices with internationally recognized good practices. RECOMMENDATIONS 58. and access to credit. Incentive Policy for Adoption of Good Practices. policies. Issue a new regulation on planning of Safe Agricultural Zones including the participation of communities in developing code of conducts. 60. Labs. vegetables. technical assistance. and strategies. and labeling practices in the marketing chains from farm to consumers are also largely lacking. Issue regulations to develop existing VIETGAP and formalize a Standing Committee for the Development of VIETGAP. and Certification Bodies. The immediate gaps seem to be those related to improving capacity for formulating regulations. Issue a regulation to establish a food safety monitoring system under the responsibility of a unit at MARD. packaging. handling. 63. and tea that contribute to improve safety and quality. Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones. and information. Farmers lack knowledge and capacity for safe food production and basic postharvest operations such as grading. extension. Establishment of a Food Safety Monitoring System at MARD. Establishment of Food Safety Information and Communication Systems at MARD. Development of Good Practices. Institutional Capacity of Key Agencies at MARD. Focus on the development of standards for the specific products in fruit.56. 64. 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. As the regulatory framework becomes better defined. Issue regulations for developing new VIETGAP.

(ii) who will take the lead in monitoring. Specific resources. budgets. The QSEAP will contribute to the establishment of an effective food safety system at MARD by addressing the issues of coordination. either at the central (MARD) or at the provincial level (DARD). Assess scope and plans of ongoing capacity building projects. For an effective management of food safety system to emerge. no food safety units exist. the Ministry of Industry and Trade (MOIT). monitoring. and tea have been established and a body of related regulations has been developed.improvement of MARD agencies and DARDS. At MARD. The issue of coordination is both internal and external to MARD. Staff engaged in food safety are usually involved in other activities and not fully specialized in food safety. 67. There is not yet a body within MARD that is coordinating with external agencies. standards and practices for safe production of fruit. Proposed Solutions. and management. operational structures have to be established. MARD needs to coordinate its activities on food safety with other key ministries. the Ministry of Planning and Investment (MPI). Externally. with NAFIQAD in charge of supervising specialized monitoring activities by other departments. Monitoring. the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST). communication. However. vegetables. there only 3 part-time staff at DCP are involved in these activities. for example. while the Department itself is charged with numerous functions and responsibilities including policy formulation. certification programs. accreditation of certification bodies. Existing regulations indicate monitoring as a responsibility of all departments at MARD. monitoring. accreditation. 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. It is not clear however who will take the lead in coordination and how various efforts will be harmonized. and training. mostly notably the Ministry of Health (MOH). Conduct capacity building activities including training. and (iii) how the food safety management system will be managed. Rationale. the development of national food standards is managed by STAMEQ. namely (i) who will take the lead in coordinating the efforts of various departments. Currently. but requires considerable input from MARD. Management. monitoring and inspection. and development of standards related to food safety. communication. management. This indication of responsibility however does not translate into an actual system of monitoring. Establish a coordination body for capacity building activities. and various key organizations such as the Viet Nam Food Administration (VFA) and STAMEQ. and degree programs. study tours. The project will pilot a crop food safety management 19 . inspection. PROPOSED CROP FOOD SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (CFSMS) 66. Internally at MARD. 69. promotion of safe agricultural zones. A number of regulations indicate functions and responsibilities of various departments of MARD related to policy formulation. The existing regulations however do not provide sufficient clarity on three key institutional issues. Coordination. various departments are mandated with monitoring (for example DCP and NAFIQAD) and all departments are mandated with communication and policy formulation. 70. For example. 68. and tools to carry out a monitoring system for food safety are not in place. Formulate a 5-year plan for capacity building.

73. The proposed solutions address the problem of coordination. 74. Internal Control Systems to ensure that certified business units (including farmer groups. Review and formulation of policy and regulations for food safety 71. 5. 3. Research to identify the most suitable technologies and socioeconomic mechanisms to promote food safety. through certification to mutually agreed and recognized standards. Monitoring to ensure progress towards policy objectives on food safety. Establishment of a Food Safety Monitoring Division at NAFIQAD for overall crop food safety monitoring. The proposed solutions include: 1. 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. Information. The system benefits both consumers and producers. 4. retailers. based on the hazard analysis critical control point (HACCP) method. monitoring. processors. Capacity building program of staff involved in the crop food safety 6. 6. and importers are able to provide buyers an independent verification that a recognized program of safe agricultural products production. Legislation. Producers. 72. (ii) assigning leadership to NAFIQAD in establishing a monitoring system for the Ministry. Elements. processed. The management structure is defined in the legislation. 2. Creation of new staff positions for Food Safety Specialists (at DCP/MARD and DARD) and Food Safety Facilitators at district and commune level 5. including WTO. Vision. processing. and Communication to ensure that all the actors in the food supply chain are aware and can access knowledge about food safety. Policies and regulations are clearly defined to provide authority to the management agencies and protect the rights and integrity of consumers and commercial entities. cooperatives. and enterprises) comply with food safety Standards. Standards and Codes of Practices which prevent or minimize potential food safety hazards. exporters. The proposed CFSMS is consistent with 7 essential elements of a food safety system. wholesalers. and distributed. Key to the development of legislation is a comprehensive Food Safety Law that completes and harmonizes the existing large body of regulations. The CFSMS will meet food safety requirements of domestic consumers and international trading partners. Within MARD different 20 . Inspection and Auditing of entities to verify they continue to meet the Standards. Establishment of a Standing Committee on Food Safety headed by a Vice Minister of MARD with Secretariat at NAFIQAD 2. and (iii) using the comparative advantage and experience of DCP by giving to DCP the leadership in several functions related to crop food safety. handling. The vision for the crop food safety management system (CFSMS) is a regulatory and management system that assures that safe agricultural products are produced. Certification that entities have met the Standards or follow the Codes of Practices. Education.system (CFSMS) that that could eventually be institutionalized and extended to other agri-products. and management by (i) establishing a standing committee on food safety to coordinate the work of the departments. communication and information 4. namely: 1. 7. and distribution practices has been followed.

MARD. The CFSMS envisages the following: 1. DPP. Monitoring Bodies to manage and coordinate monitoring conducted by different units 6. 5. Information. Inspection and Auditing – It includes laboratories certified ISO 17025 and professionals or companies trained and competent to ISO 9000. and testing carried out by national and regional laboratories under DCP. district. NAFIQAD has lead responsibility in establishing and managing the monitoring system for food safety and an information and communication system. 2. Management Structure . 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. The proposed Crop Food Safety Management System (CFSMS) includes a coordination body at MARD (the Standing Committee on Food Safety). Central Level – MARD. 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. (iii) evaluation and reporting. Information. (ii) statistics.departments have functions and responsibilities for various elements of the CFSMS. Food Administration Authority – VFA has overall responsibility for food safety 2. vegetables. 75.Overall. and (v) information and communication. Certification – It includes Accreditation Bodies (eg DCP for VIETAP) and Certification Bodies 4. Education. and Communication Division is established at NAFIQAD with staff responsible in the five areas of (i) methodologies. NAFIQAD has overall 21 . 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. a department leading in policy formulation. A Food Safety Monitoring. 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. and communication (NAFIQAD). monitoring and inspection. and tea. development of standards. 77. members include all departments involved in food safety. provincial. Monitoring of food crop safety is based on surveys. 4. information. The committee is headed by a Vice Minister of MARD and NAFIQAD provides the Secretariat for the Standing Committee. and Communication Bodies – Public or private organizations that disseminate information and provide access to knowledge to improve food safety 7. visits. coordination is provided by the proposed Standing Committee on Food Safety (SCFS). Management Structure . The following is typical of many countries in the world: 1. Research Organizations – Public or private organizations that provide research on socioeconomic and technological aspects of food safety. (iv) operations. and accreditation of certification bodies (the Department of Crop Production). a department leading in monitoring. NAFIQAD. 3. Standing Committee on Food Safety (SCFS) coordinates policy formulation. communication and information among different departments of MARD and ensures coordination with other agencies outside of MARD. and positions at the central. 76. and any other laboratory authorized by NAFIQAD. development of standards. and commune level responsible for the management of the food safety system and facilitation of safe food production for fruit.

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. and facilitating the production of all certification compliance. and facilitation of the establishment of internal control systems at business units (farmer groups and cooperatives) engaged in safe food production. monitoring. prior to each audit by the Certification Body. quality assurance and traceability documents. 7. and facilitating the establishing Internal Control Systems for food safety. variable on certification (number of certification bodies and certified organizations). training. vegetables. Positions for Food Safety Facilitators (FSF) will be created at the district and at the commune level. and consumer confidence variables. and communication. including monthly consolidated records of all farm inputs. ensuring all Corrective Action Requests by the Certification Body are complied in a timely fashion. NAFEC carries out extension programs for food safety. 8. outputs and certified sales for auditing purposes. Some of the staff will be trained and certified as VIETGAP inspectors. training of other departments and DARDs staff in VIETGAP and other standards. The CFSMS envisages the following: 1. food-borne diseases. District and Commune Level. Positions for Food Safety Specialists will be established. MRL. promotion of safe agricultural zones (SAZ).5. packhouses and cold storage). Other relevant departments such as Department of Plant Protection (DPP) and Department of Science and Technology (DST) carry out activities in policy formulation. development of standards and manuals for VIETGAP and other standards. conducting an internal audit of the certified entity. 2. 79. maintaining a register of farmer records. The CFSMS envisages the following: 1. heavy metals. liaising with certification bodies and buyers. accreditation and monitoring of VIETGAP certification bodies. All these activities will be coordinated through the SCFS. 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. A Food Safety Division is established at DCP with staff responsible in the five areas of (i) policy. The QSIAP will provide capacity building for the Food Safety Specialists at the province level. and guiding them on any corrective actions. 6. 78. 2. standards development. This involve ensuring that individual farmers maintain records required by the standards. Services by FSF will include training. and tea. QSIAP will undertake a comprehensive program of capacity building at MARD and in the provinces covered by the project. 3. The QSEAP will build capacity of FSF to provide services to farmers groups and cooperatives engaged in safe food production of fruit. monitoring. Province Level – DARD. 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. (iv) accreditation. but also infrastructure variables (eg number of water treatment units. DCP has lead responsibility for policy formulation related to crop food safety. (ii) standards. (iii) monitoring and inspection. and microbiological contamination). conducting regular monitoring and spot checks of member farmers. 22 . and at least once per year. inspection (number and gravity of violations). and (v) communication. accreditation of certification bodies.

000 $ 1. monitoring.1 Sub-component 1.000 $ 672. The sustainability and replicability of the system beyond the project life depend on the following: 1. certification.000 Recurrent Cost $ 1.076. alternatively the services could be provided by the public sector based on a fee. as they provide public goods. 2.3 Total 23 .000 $ 3.044.140. This is the practice in most countries.000 $ 1. 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).140. The design and monitoring framework for the Policy and Institutional Component of the Project is summarized in Table 2. As the demand for certification increases and knowledge about safe food production becomes more widespread. Sustainability of the System.480. There is a strong rationale for them to continue to be publicly funded. several services of facilitators will be provided by the private sector.668.000 $ 312. 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 $ 1.000 Total Cost $ 2.2 Sub-component 1.000 $ $ 360.000 $ 4. As Viet Nam moves towards middle income country status and beyond.436. inspection. 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.592.80. The proposed system is a pilot that could be institutionalized over time. The need of policies and regulations.000 Sub-component 1. The pilot will allow to understand what services could be delivered for a fee and which services will still require public funding. information and communication about food safety will increase and will require an adequately funded public sector.000 $ 1. PROJECT DESIGN OF THE POLICY AND INSTITUTIONAL COMPONENT 81.

and laboratories involved in the implementation of quality and safe food production. including Provincial Food Safety Index 6. Reports of the monitoring unit under MARD. Rationalization of laboratory system may involve making use of analytical services of agencies outside of MARD 4. information. Resistance to separate monitoring agency from implementation agency Assumptions 1. Reports of the monitoring unit under MARD. vegetables. Coordination with other projects involved in capacity strengthening activities for food quality and safety Output 2 Strengthened capacity of state agencies. and tea including regulations on SAZ. Standing Committee on Food Safety headed by Vice Minister of MARD for food quality and safety established with Secretariat provided by NaFIQAD 3. A consistent and readily available set of good practices (VIETGAP) and standards in production and postharvest operations (TCVN) related to fruit. and 1. planning. Phasing out of subsidies to certified bodies over the course of the Project Risks 1. A review of existing regulations submitted to MARD decision makers 2. Staff from 100 certified/certifying bodies trained 3. CPMU reports and document records 2. and monitoring. and communication system for fruit. Staff from 20 laboratories trained 1. MARD decrees. Sustained commitment of MARD to capacity strengthening of state organizations. A comprehensive and readily accessible set of regulations for the implementation of food safety and quality of fruit. Area of SZA . certification bodies. vegetables. vegetables. communication. STAMEQapproved TCVN related to fruit. CPMU reports and document records 2. 10 different types of fruit. 4. Reports of the information and communication units at MARD Assumptions and Risks Assumptions 1. processing.Table 2 Design and Monitoring Framework for the Policy and Institutional Component of the QSIAP Output Output 1 Improved regulatory framework and coordination for state management of safety and quality of fruit. Standing Committee on Food Safety minutes and list of meeting attendance 3. and information. Number of certified bodies by DCP 4. information system. and tea established Data Sources and Monitorin g 1. Rent seeking behavior might result from an empowered inspection system 3. laboratories. inspection. including Provincial Food Safety Index 3. decisions on food safety and quality 4. standards. monitoring. vegetables. vegetables. certification. and certified bodies 2. and tea Targets 1. About 130 staff from MARD and 140 staff from DARD trained in regulations and policy formulation. including organic production) 5. Food safety monitoring system. High global food prices might retard the emphasis on food safety and quality 2. and tea. and risk analysis 2. GAP and other standards reviewed annually and revised to meet user concerns and any changes in market requirements 5. Incentive policy. and tea (standards for at least 10 different types of vegetables. and tea 5. communication. Cooperation among departments to transfer responsibilities and assets as necessary 3. Sustained commitment of MARD to improving policy and regulatory framework 2. GAP.

Pilot units for Food Safety established at DCP and DARDs in 16 provinces by second half of 2009 4. Pilot units for Food Safety Monitoring established by second half of 2009 at NAFIQAD 3. Quality of service surveys conducted by independent organization Assumptions and Risks 3. and tea. Standing Committee for Food Safety established by first half of 2009 2. Food safety reflected in new degree programs at education institutions and research programs at research organizations Risks 1.Output trading of fruit. The piloted system does not lead to replicable outcome in other provinces. Targets 4. reassignment of staff. Risks 1. Quality of service surveys conducted by independent organization Assumptions 1. Staff from 16 DARD provinces trained in planning SAZ Data Sources and Monitorin g established by DARD 5. Sustained commitment of MARD to pilot the crop food safety management system. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. CPMU reports and document records 2. and tea. Minutes of Standing Committee for Food Safety and attendance lists 3. Scheduling of training activities might conflict with other activities 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. vegetables. 1. Records of staff fully devoted to food safety activities in the project 4. Job descriptions. 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. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 25 . 1.

Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. 5. 2. and tea. Working Paper. namely vegetables. provide an analysis of the key institutional issues. and Nguyen Thi Minh Hai. NIRAS in association with Agrifood Consulting International and VICA. and costs necessary to achieve the outputs. ADB TA 4972-VIE. activities. September 2008. Francesco. and the risks Chapter 9 contains various Annexes including: 1. The objective of the Working Paper for the Institutional component of the QSIAP is to review the current legislation related to food safety. and make recommendations for the design monitoring framework (DMF) of the project. 3. 83. 7. the monitoring methods. outputs. The scope of work includes an assessment of food safety regulations and institutional capacity related to food safety for three commodity groups. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 26 .2 Introduction 82. including the outcomes. Hanoi. the expected benefits. 4. assess capacity of institutions related to food safety. 84. inputs. fruit. the indicators of outputs. 6. Institutional Analysis and Capacity Building. 85. 1 • Codex Alimentarius Commission Introduction to SPS and TBT Agreements The SPS Agreement The TBT Agreement Risk Analysis Standards and Trade Development Facility Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) To be cited as Goletti. This Working Paper1 is the joint output of the Institutional Consultants Francesco Goletti and Nguyen Thi Minh Hai. Quality and Safety Improvement in Agricultural Products Project. 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. Viet Nam.

Max Residue Limits. Implications of Food Safety Regulations for Different Actors along the Value Chain 12. Thailand Food Safety System Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Design and Monitoring Framework 14. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 27 . Examples of some Vietnamese Standards related to VIETGAP 11. Code of Practice. Viet Nam Standards (TCVN) for Food and Agriculture 10. Preliminary Estimation of Costs for the Project Component: Policy and Institutional Development for Food Safety at the central level 13. Codex Standards.8. Guidelines 9.

94. processing. various regulations introduced by the Government.11. It could however also apply to entire communities and areas (for example SAZ or safe agricultural zones. trade. To ensure that good practices (at the production. the emphasis of regulations and institutions was on reactive measures to control food quality and safety. integration with the world economy and the WTO Agreements on SPS and TBT.3 Approach and Methodology 3. Food Safety: Protection from chemical or biological substances that lead to illness or death 88. 3. Regular monitoring and reporting about food quality and safety provides the basis to assess the current situation. 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. GMP. In order to establish a food quality and safety system able to assure quality and safety of food. and increasing concerns for health in a population that is moving rapidly towards mid-income status. standards and practices have to be developed and adhered to ensure the standards are achieved in production. Certification usually refers to individual organizations. Improving food quality and safety depends on actions taken all along the value chain2.2 Institutional Dimensions of Food Quality and Safety 89.1 Definition of Food Safety and Quality 86. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. there are institutional issues that need to be addressed. HACCP. distribution. 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. certification involves regional planning 93. currently the emphasis is on preventive measures. and service delivery. 90. marketing. 92. and PFZ or pest free zones) or to market places. and Risk Analysis have become common words in the regulatory body that is rapidly development in Viet Nam. 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. At each stage of the value chain. and zoonotic diseases have been reported in the media. and distribution levels) are followed. In the latter case. systems of certification have arisen. identify problems. 91. and take decisions to improve the system. processing. from supply of inputs to final consumption. Quality: Compliance with predefined standards 87. While in the past. GHP. The awareness of food quality and safety in Viet Nam is rapidly increasing as the outcome of more information available through the media. GAP. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 28 . 2 See Annex 9.

Based on the overview of the key institutions involved and the analysis of the institutional dimensions. while at the same time mentioning other commodities. The role of laboratories in providing analysis and diagnostics services is supporting inspection and monitoring. It will focus the analysis on safety of vegetables. The working paper will not analyze private institutions such as farmer organizations (groups.95. The analysis in the following chapters provides a review of the current situation for the issues mentioned above and illustrated in Figure 1. 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). Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Education of producers. Inspection and monitoring are increasingly based on science. activities. and consumers is another critical institutional dimension of a well functioning food quality and safety system. policies. The recommendations will be presented as part of the Design Monitoring Framework (DMF) of the Project and outcomes. food service providers. strategies. 104. The improvement of the quality and safety system is increasing dependent on the development and application of science-based methods. and strategies. 103. Institutions are effective as long as the human resources engaged in those institutions have adequate capacity. 97. fruits. processors. An effective institutional framework for the development of food quality and safety will require appropriate regulations. and policies to improve the system. and consumers associations. 102. 100. mass organizations. extension services are expected to improve capacity to produce quality and safe food. enterprises. 96. the consultants will provide a general set of recommendations. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 29 . cooperatives). and inputs will be indicated. 101. trade and industry associations. traders. In the specific case of producers. outputs. but only provide a general overview of these institutions and their role in the ensuring food safety and quality. 98. Monitoring and reporting provides a basis for information to be disseminated to the larger public. 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. Scientific and socioeconomic research can provide the basis to develop technologies. farmers. and tea and on the public institutions involved. and consumers. 99.

Overview of Institutions Review of Regulations Institutional Issues Strategic Analysis Recommend ations MARD MOH MOST Ordinances Directives Decrees Circulars Laws Standards Practices Certification Inspection Labs Monitoring Information Education Extension Communication Regulation Policies Strategies Research Capacity SWOT Problem Tree Framework DMF Outcomes Outputs Activities Inputs Indicators Monitoring Risks Figure 1: Approach and Methodology of Report Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 30 .

including ministries. 107. the private sector. 106. associations. and mass organizations.4 The Institutions Involved in Food Quality and Safety 4. international agencies. The key institutional issues and ministries involved along the value chain are illustrated in Table 3. The key players are illustrated in Table 4. 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. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 31 .standards Figure 2: Ministries Responsible Along the Food Chain Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. research organizations. Agro-input providers Producers Processors Traders Municipal markets Retailers Consumers MARD MOH MOIT MARD MOH MARD MOIT MOH MOIT MARD MOH MOIT MOH MOST . Several institutional players are involved in food quality and safety.1 Introduction 105. The key ministries involved in the improvement of quality and safety of agricultural products are illustrated in Figure 2. government agencies at the central and local levels.

packaging. handling. packaging. labeling. labeling. handling Agricultural practices Extension Farmer organization Safe production zones Certification Manufacturing practices Certification Storage Packaging Storage.Table 3 Institutional Issues and Ministries along the Value Chain of Food and Agricultural products Stage in the Value Chain Pre-production Main Institutional Issues Quarantine Inspection Storage. preparing Main Ministries MARD MOH MOIT MOST MARD Standards Information Communication Education Capacity Coordination Cross Cutting Issues Production Processing Marketing and Trade MARD MOIT MOH MOST MARD MOH MOIT MOH Service Consumption Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. handling and Storage. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 32 .

and Village Levels • → → • • • • • • Agricultural Cooperatives Water Users’ Associations IPM Groups Extension Clubs Credit Clubs • • • • Agroprocessing companies Retailers Input suppliers Consumers Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 33 .Table 4: Key Players in Food Quality and Safety Improvement Level International Government Agency Non-government Organization • World Trade Organization (WTO) • FAO/WHO: Codex Alimentarius Commission for food • FAO’s Secretariat of the International Plant Protection for Plant Health • GlobalGAP (EurepGAP) • JAS-ANZ • Vietnam Tea Association (VITAS) • Vietnam Fruit Association (VINAFRUIT) • Food and Foodstuff Association (FFA) • Consumers’ Assn. District. Commune. • Farmers’ Association Private Sector • Multinational Export and Import Companies National • → → → → → → → • → → • → • → Region (covering several provinces) • • • • • • Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD) International Cooperation Department (Enquiry Point and Notification Authority) Department of Crop Production (DCP) Department of Plant Protection (DPP) National Agro-Forestry and Fisheries 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 Northern Pesticide Control Center Southern Pesticide Control Center Northern Mountainous Agricultural and Forestry Science Institute Southern Coastal Central Agricultural Science Institute Southern Fruit Research Institute (SOFRI) Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (DARD) Provincial Agriculture and Fisheries Extension Center Plant Protection Sub-Department Agricultural universities • • • • • Exporters Processors Wholesale Traders Importers of Farm Inputs Service providers Provincial.

and standards within the Ministry’s mandated areas. ICD is responsible for coordination. National Agro-Forestry and Fisheries Quality Assurance Department (NAFIQAD). fishery and salt production. and Carry out international cooperation in the domain of its mandated areas. Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. ordinances.1 Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development 108. livestock. fisheries production. 112. and legal documents in the crops sector. Guide. Issue decisions. Within MARD.2. Its main function is to receive and respond to requests for information regarding domestic sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures. fertilizers. strategies. The new agency is responsible for the preparation of laws. technologies for crops and fertilizers. and management and utilization of fertilizers. and private companies. Design and implements projects in the areas of crop production. Submit to the Government and Prime Minister development master plans and annual strategies. Department of Crop Production (DCP). including crops. and to request WTO members to provide information on measures. DCP is responsible for developing policies. techniques. schemes. forestry. MARD is the main government ministry responsible for agriculture and rural development for the whole country. fishery and salt products in the whole country. five-year and long-term plants and key programs and projects within the Ministry’s mandated areas. international NGOs.4. salt production. NAFIQAD is a new department created by MARD in January 2008 to carry out the state governing of quality and safety improvement of crops. irrigation development and services. programs and Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. and gene stock. ordinances and other legal documents within the Ministry’s mandate areas. framework and management system for the production of safe crops by small farmers. International Cooperation Department (ICD). forestry and rural development. 111. Coordinate policies and strategies for market development for agricultural products in cooperation with the Ministry of Trade. and circulars within the Ministry’s mandated areas. strategies. five-year and annual plans. master plans. plans. 109. ICD has been designated as Enquiry Point and Notification Authority in which ICD takes the lead on SPS regulations related to WTO agreements. Thus. and examination relevant to SPS matters. procedures. Its tasks and authorities include the following: • • • • • • • Submit to the Government and Prime Minister legal drafts. forestry. plans. ICD should notify Vietnam’s SPS contents and regulations to WTO and its members. supervision and monitoring of all the projects and programs funded by bilateral and multilateral funding agencies. and management of state-owned enterprises in the agriculture sector. ordinances. animal production. water resources. state-owned companies. DCP is responsible for the submission of proposed laws. long-term master plans. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 34 . rural development. inspection.2 Ministries and Related Agencies 4. procedures for risk assessment. directives. preparation of export and import lists of crops species. and foreign direct investment in the agriculture sector. With respect to quality and safety issue. the agencies which are closely involved in the quality and safety improvement of agricultural products include the following: 110. formulation and implementation of strategies. supervise and implement legal documents. including new or existing regulations and decisions based on risk assessment.

113. standards. programs and projects. It appears that some of these responsibilities are currently being carried out by the Department of Crop Production and Vietnam Food Administration. DPP’s organization structure comprises of national-level department. Managers and technical staff who work in SPS network. and (v) revoke licenses and certification. its functions are to (i) investigate. export. safe and hygienic agricultural products. including insecticides. two Regional Pesticide Control Centers in Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City. It supervises the extension service activities undertaken by Provincial Agriculture and Fisheries Extension Center (PAFEC) under DARD in 64 provinces. Ministry of Health (Vietnam Food Administration). 116. commune and village levels. issuance of specific documents and relevant professional guidance. herbicides. DPP is responsible for the governance and inspection of plant protection and quarantine activities and use of plant protection chemicals. commune and village levels. technical regulations and procedures. 99/2005/QĐ-TTg. forecast and prevent harmful pests. Plant Protection. supervision of the implementation of approved legal documents. master plans. 114. (iii) manage plant quarantine efforts related to import. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 35 . field testing and utilization of plant protection chemicals. 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. The establishment of Vietnam Sanitary and Phytosanitary Notification Authority and Enquiry Point is a compulsory requirement of joining WTO. NAFIQAD. conduct inspection and execute sanctions on infringement of regulations related to plant protection chemicals. Department of Plant Protection (DPP). strategy. and Inter-ministerial Task Force (Ministry of Health. This duplication of effort may have to be resolved before NAFIQAD has become well established. 115. Department for Fishery Exploitation and Protection). supervision and monitoring of extension services nation wide. Ministry of Science & Technology. National Agriculture and Fisheries Extension Center (NAFEC). Deputy Directors and a General Secretariat constituted of enquiry points from MARD (Departments for Veterinary. 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. and plant growth hormones. and certification of quality. The Office has a Director. Information on transparency of SPS measures can be searched from website of Vietnam SPS Office.projects related to product quality and safety. synthesis and propagation of Vietnam and international regulations on quality. detect. fungicides. It is responsible for formulation of policies and plans for agricultural extension. and port transit of plants and disinfection activities. and Plant Protection Sub-departments in 64 provinces. (ii) announce outbreaks of harmful pests. 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. Office of SPS. and a network of plant protection staff at the district. The Prime Minister decided to establish the SPS Office and locate it at Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development according to Decision No. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. have been trained by experience trainers to continue strengthening their capacity in state management of SPS. rodenticides. (iv) manage registration. dated 9 May 2005. food safety and animal-plant quarantine. As such. explanation and information on standards. safety and hygiene of agricultural products. Ministry of Science & Technology (Directorate for Standards and Quality –STAMEQ) and Ministry of Industry and Commerce with responsibilities for information provision. It has a network of extension staff extending from the provincial level to district.

and recommends solutions to complaints and denunciations. the extension staff dual functions as plant protection staff. Plant Protection Subdepartment. concludes. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 36 . metrology. and accreditation of laboratories in the country for ISO 170253. It covers testing and calibration performed using standard methods. Systemizes normal legal documents and policies. there are sections. first-. and is responsible for setting up food safety standards. Ministerial Inspection Office (MIO). The Information Center for Agriculture and Rural Development maintains the www. 119. 2. and laboratory-developed methods. In some provinces. The office inspects. It is headed by a Director who is assisted by 1 to 5 Vice Directors. administrative units. and international cooperation in the fields of standardization. cashes.117. (iv) to establish. consultancy. disseminates and supports education on policies and laws. Steers and guides the organization and professional processes of administrative and specialized inspections conducted by inspectorates at the Department level. 3 ISO/IEC 17025:2005 specifies the general requirements for the competence to carry out tests and/or calibrations. and trade promotion. district. supervises the enactment of policies and laws in the entire sector. Three most important sub-departments relevant to the proposed Project are Crop Production Subdepartment. DARD is the implementing arm of MARD at the provincial level.agroviet. The office is directly under the control of the Ministry and assists the Minister in governing the inspection service. and commercial and production units which correspond to the major crops/livestock/fisheries grown in the provinces. sugarcane. rubber.vn website both in Vietnamese and English and provides information about news in agriculture and rural development. and wood). instructs on and checks normative legal documents. while in other provinces the two sub-departments are completely separated. It is responsible for the implementation of laws. (ii) to guide and supervise the standardization. It is applicable to all organizations performing tests and/or calibrations.2 Ministry of Science and Technology 120. second. master plans. the Directorate hosts the Codex Contact Point. These include. news about 10 commodities (rice. Department of Legislation. sub-departments. strategies and plans on standardization and quality management for submission to the Government for approval. including sampling. and (vi) to carry out scientific research.and third-party Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. coffee. STAMEQ under the Ministry of Science and Technology has the following functions: (i) to prepare legal documents. ICARD. policies. maintain and improve national measurement of standards. 118. 4. meat. monitors and supervises the enactment of post-inspection decisions. Both Plant Protection and PAFEC have staff at provincial. strategies. Imposes sanctions for infringement of administrative regulations and publicizes the conclusions of inspection. quality management. vegetables. (v) to guide in settling disputes regarding quality of products. programs and projects approved by MARD. and Provincial Agriculture and Fisheries Extension Center (PAFEC).2. (iii) to unify the state management on national standards system. and productivity. regulations. non-standard methods. a market information and trade promotion. information. verifies. commune and village levels. tea. makes decisions for addressing complaints and denunciations issued by the Minister and authorized state agencies. Department of Agriculture and Rural Development. Under Vice Directors. pepper. for example. Submits to the Minister plans for preparation of normative legal documents for annual and long-term enforcement.gov. and quality carried out by the ministries and their branches. training. With regard to safety and quality issue. Directorate for Standards and Quality (STAMEQ). directives.

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. regional standards (EN. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. administrative and technical operations. and the organization of food safety research 4. the requirements of those clauses do not apply. • 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. Quacert is the Certification Body of Vietnam established by the Ministry of Sciences and Technology (Decision No. DMTP under the Ministry of Industry and Trade is responsible for the formulation of international policy trade policy.. ISO/IEC 17025:2005 is not intended to be used as the basis for certification of laboratories. ASTM.121. • 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. coordination of risk management concerning food contamination.4 Ministry of Industry and Trade 123. World Trade Organization.). and laboratories where testing and/or calibration forms part of inspection and product certification.1003/QDD-BKHCN-MT) as a subsidiary of the Directorate for Standards and Quality (STAMEQ). It is responsible for the preparation of a food safety policy. VFA under the Ministry of Health was established in 1999 under the Ministry of Health.3 Ministry of Health 122. Petrochemical and Natural gas industries... ISO/IEC 17025:2005 is for use by laboratories in developing their management system for quality. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 37 . regulatory authorities and accreditation bodies may also use it in confirming or recognizing the competence of laboratories. established by the Uruguay Round negotiations in 1995. WTO. IEC.. 4. foreign standards (JIS. CEN) and international standards (ISO. is the only global international organization dealing with the rules of trade between laboratories. carrying out food safety inspection.. such as sampling and the design/development of new methods. Department of Multilateral Trade Policy (DMTP). and certification of export and import companies and other companies involved in trade. Vietnam Food Administration (VFA).2. When a laboratory does not undertake one or more of the activities covered by ISO/IEC 17025:2005. Compliance with regulatory and safety requirements on the operation of laboratories is not covered by ISO/IEC 17025:2005. 4.3 International Organizations and Agencies 124. QUACERT services include: • Product certification to Vietnamese standards (TCVN). GB). the compilation of food safety legislation and related communications. GOST.2. Laboratory customers.

9. The Commission developed food standards. ISO. The convention has been deposited with the Director General of FAO at its Sixth Session in 1951. (iv) monitor national trade policies. In the case of Viet Nam. For additional information on the Agreements SPS and TAB see Annexes 9. exporters. For additional information see Annex 9. 125. ISO's work programme ranges from standards for traditional activities. The main purposes of this Program are protecting health of the consumers and ensuring fair trade practices in the food trade. there are two specific WTO agreements dealing with food safety and animal and plant health and safety and with product standards in general.3. Members can also set higher standards based on appropriate assessment of risks so long as the approach is consistent. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 38 .nations. provided they do not discriminate or use this as a disguised protectionism. The agreement includes provisions on control. USA. They should not arbitrarily or unjustifiably discriminate between countries where identical or similar conditions prevail. In addition. medical devices. guidelines and recommendations where they exist. ISO is made up of 157 members which are divided Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. (iii) handle trade disputes.2. Republic of Chile. They should be applied only to the extent necessary to protect human. and establish a national enquiry point to provide information. The International Organizations for Standards has more than 16 500 International Standards and other types of normative documents in its current portfolio. These are the Codex Amimentarius Commission (CAC) and the International Plant Protection Commission (IPPC) 126. The agreement still allows countries to use different standards and different methods of inspecting products. (ii) provide forum for trade negotiations. Article 20 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) allows governments to act on trade in order to protect human. guidelines and related texts such as codes of practice under the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Program. The International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) is an international treaty relating to international trade. When they do. the national enquiry point resides at the MARD’s Office of SPS. such as Republic of Korea. and to standards for good management practice and for services. 128. animal or plant life or health. 9. Vietnam also have bilateral trade agreements with some countries. and importers to conduct their business. Member countries are encouraged to use international standards. Its goal is to assist producers of goods and services. 9. through mechanical engineering.6. such as agriculture and construction. animal or plant life or health. and Romania. and promoting coordination of all food standards work undertaken by international governmental and non-governmental organizations. 127. to transport. not arbitrary. manufacturing and distribution. 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. and (v) provide technical assistance and training to developing countries. 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. It has encouraged countries to ensure through phytosanitary certification that their exports are not the means for introducing new pests to their trading partners. the importing countries strive to ensure that measures they have in place for their plant and animal protection are technically justified. 130. inspection and approval procedures. information and communication technologies. Food standards and guidelines developed by the Codex Alimentarius Commission which was created in 1963 by FAO and WHO.1. Mongolia. It allows countries to set their standards provided they are based on science. Likewise. they are unlikely to be challenged legally in a WTO dispute. Governments must provide advance notice of new or changed sanitary and phytosanitary regulations. In addition to the international agreement with WTO. 129.4.

trade promotion. Collectively. Long Dinh Fruit Research Center (LDFRC) was founded on 26 March 1994 by the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. FAVRI is responsible for the development of improved varieties and technologies for fruit and vegetables. Then LDFRC was reorganized and upgraded to be the Southern Fruit Research Institute (SOFRI) under the decision No. 132. Chau Thanh district in the province of Tien Giang. 1056/1997/QD TTg on December 9 th 1997. and Can Tho University in the Mekong River Delta. Hue Agricultural University. Only one such body for each country is accepted for membership of ISO. market trends. fruits and tea. and tea. Vitas has 102 members comprising growers and processors located in 10 union branches and 21 tea-growing provinces. including integrated pest management and proper use of bio-pesticides. 135. private enterprises. In addition to FAVRI. and Northern Central Vietnam Agricultural Science Institute (NCVASI). and to disseminate information about technologies. including production. Member bodies are entitled to participate and exercise full voting rights on any technical committee and policy committee of ISO. 133. A number of agricultural universities. research institutes.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.4 Research Institutes and Universities 131. Southern Coastal Central Agricultural Science Institute (SOCASI).into three categories: Member bodies. and cooperatives operating in all stages of the fruit industry value chain. exist in Viet Nam including the Ha Noi Agricultural University. Correspondent members. preservation and processing. Vietnam Tea Association (Vitas). vegetables. A member body of ISO is the national body "most representative of standardization in its country". Fruit and Vegetable Research Institute (FAVRI). The Department of Standards and Quality of Viet nam is a member body of ISO and participates in 71 technical committees. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 39 . SOFRI. material services. processing technology and improved seeds. SOFRI has 67. Its roles are to promote food safety and industrial hygiene among its members. The present staff of SOFRI numbers 130. It is located at Long Dinh commune. STAMEQ is responsible for accreditation of ISO certifying bodies. Other universities have Agriculture Faculty at Thai Nguyen University in the Northern Mountains. 15 MSc). Vietnam Fruit Association (Vinafruit). Of the total. These include the Southern Fruit Research Institute (SOFRI). and capacity building.5 Associations and Cooperatives 134. these universities offer various programs in fruit. Vinafruit has 71 members comprising stateowned enterprises. Northern Mountainous Agricultural and Forestry Science Institute (NOMAFSI). Vinafruit was established in 2001. Agricultural Universities. and disseminate results from research centers on markets. there are 59 researchers and 18 post graduates (3 PhD. 4. 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. and HCMC Agriculture and Forestry Univerity. 4. fruit purchasing. Subscriber members. 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. there are other research institutes involved in the development of improved varieties and technologies for vegetables. Tay Nguyen University in the Central Highlands.

and to act as a forum through which companies can discuss their problems and propose suggestions and recommendations to concerned government agencies. 4 Statistical Yearbook of Vietnam. food processing companies. while other cooperatives provide services in input supply and marketing to their members. foodstuff and beverages. FFA represents public and private enterprises in food. Food and Foodstuff Association (FFA). Unfortunately. new technology. Bac Giang Food Export Joint Stock company has been accredited with IS0 9001 and HACCP and process 5. Germany. 139. The company has its own brand label and currently employs more than 1. input suppliers. markets. to relay members’ difficulties to relevant government offices. Switzerland.136. Agricultural cooperatives. 137. HADICO (Hanoi Agricultural Development And Investment Co) is one of the first companies to be accredited with the food safe quality mark. the back of motor scooters. and creating demand for vegetables. domestic exporters and importers. 140. 2004 Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Wholesale markets such as the major market of Long Bien in Ha Noi are a critical link in the food safety chain. and agricultural extension.7 Markets and Supermarkets 141. and has arranged 20 contracts with farmers and cooperatives within the region. provision of farm inputs (fertilizers and pesticides) to farmers. Vendors are selling from open air stalls. Private sector companies and individuals involved in the quality and improvement of agricultural products include multinational export and import companies. the sanitary conditions of these markets leave much to be desire. 4. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 40 . fruits and tea in the domestic and international markets. currently exports to South Korea and Taiwan. They were small (about 30 to 200 members) and some of them deliver services related to food safety and agricultural health. The company is currently trying to export produce to Japan. There is no running water for maintaining personal hygiene or for washing the produce. There were a total of 8. Japan and China and employ more than 200 staff. baskets on the ground and any other means available to display their produce. retailers.000 employees. Russia.6 Private Sector and NGOs 138. Only rarely is any of the product packaged. and consumers. They currently export all their products to USA.500 tons of frozen products. service providers.000 square metres of excellent greenhouse facilities. They play an important role in the promotion of exports. 4. Motor scooters and pedestrians mix freely among the displays on muddy paths and poorly maintained asphalt pathways.000 tins on their canning line and more than 2. Private Sector Companies and Individuals. Some examples of innovative companies are presented in the following paragraphs. wholesalers. and also has 8. and management practices. The company also owns a cold storage facility which stores frozen fruit and vegetables at a temperature as low as -20C. Its roles are to disseminate information on business and legal environments. and produces more than 30 vegetable products.694 agricultural cooperatives and 376 fisheries cooperatives4. but needs to improve the quality of produce to comply with Japan import requirements. The company owns more than 500 hectares of land.090 cooperatives in 2004 comprising 7.

Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 41 . Carrefour. Big C. Fivimart) distribute about 5%. The situation is aggravated by a marketing system in which about 70% of fresh fruit and vegetables is distributed by street vendors. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Supermarkets (such as Metro. but their share is increasingly considerably particularly in large urban areas.142.

It focuses on the regulations affecting agricultural products. namely fruit. the increasing integration with world markets. inspect. as the result of more awareness on food safety. Food safety regulations became the focus of intense regulatory activities starting in 2003 with the Food Hygiene and Safety Ordinance. 145. and primarily the three commodities of interest to this project. Other relevant laws under preparation include the Law on Plant Quarantine. In the past. In the following sections a review of the main regulations about food safety and quality are presented. directives. The Law is expected to be prepared in 2008 and approved in 2009. the Law on Animal Health. 144. 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. vegetables. and tea. a series of regulations started to be issued by various agencies. 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. The Ministry of Health is in the process of preparing a Food Law which will introduce consistency among previous food safety regulations. weakly defined responsibilities. In the absence of a Law on Food Hygiene and Safety. Overlapping of functions. and implement the regulations. 147. 146. 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 review is primarily based on the regulations issues after year 2000.5 Key Legislation 5. improve the health and life expectancy of the population by providing high quality health care services (objective 2. The preparation of access of Viet Nam to WTO was probably the main motivating factor behind the formulation of regulations. In the early 2003. and the preparation for entry into WTO.2. In the following paragraphs. and the amendment of the Law on Inspection. Viet Nam does not yet have a unified Law on Food Hygiene and Safety.1) and indicates the associated input/activity as follows: ensuring chemical and disease-free food to comply with WHO requirements. there is a plethora of decrees. 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. 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. 18/1999/PLUBTVQH10 issued by the Standing Committee of the National Assembly dated 24 September 1999). decisions. The plethora of regulations makes it difficult also for regulatory agencies to monitor. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 42 . Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. 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.1 Introduction 143.

4. 5. 9. Processing. 6. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 43 . 8. 19. 13. and Certification Management Decision on Safe Vegetable Production and Trading Management Decision on Food Safety Directive on Declaring 2008 to be the Year of Quality and Safety Decision on Good Practices for the Production of Fresh Fruit and Vegetables Decision on Good Practices for the Production of Tea Decision on Establishing the National Agriforestry and Fisheries Quality Assurance Department (NAFIQAD) Decree on Labeling of Goods Law on Standards and Technical Specifications Decree on Detailed Implementation of several Articles of Law on Standards and Technical Specifications Decree on administrative fine in plant protection and quarantine Law on Inspection Decree on Organization and Operation of Inspection in Agriculture and Rural Issuing Body National Assembly Standing Committee Government No 36/2001/PLUBTVQH10 58/2002/NDCP Date 25 July 2001 3 June 2002 3. 20. 16. Government Standing Committee of the National Assembly Government Prime Minister Prime Minister MARD MARD Ministry of Health MARD MARD MARD Ministry of Fisheries 02/2007/NDCP 12/2003/PLUBTVQH11 163/2004/NDCP 43/2006/QDTTg 06/2007/CTTTg 43/2007/QDBNN 106/2007/QDBNN 57/QD-BYT 56/CT-BNNKHCN 379/QĐ-BNNKHCN 1121/QĐ-BNNKHCN 29/2008/QDBTS 89/2006/NDCP 68/2006/QH11 127/2007/NĐCP 26/2003/NĐCP 22/2004/QH11 153/2005/NĐCP 5 January 2007 26 July 2003 7 September 2004 20 February 2006 28 March 2007 16 May 2007 28 December 2007 9 January 2008 8 January 2008 28 January 2008 14 April 2008 28 January 2008 30 August 2006 29 June 2006 1 August 2007 19 March 2003 15 June 2004 15 December 2005 15. 7.Table 5 Summary of relevant Legislation related to Food Safety and Quality # 1. 11. and the Regulation on Management of Plant Protection Drugs Decree on Plant Quarantine Ordinance on Food Hygiene and Safety Decree on the Implementation of Ordinance on Food Hygiene and Safety Decision on the Approval of National Action Plan on the Assurance of Food Safety to 2010 Directive on the Implementation of Urgent Methods to Assure Food Hygiene and Safety Decision on Regulations on Safe Tea Production. 14. 17. Title Ordinance on the Plant Protection and Quarantine Decree on the Regulation on Plant Protection. 2. 10. the Regulation on Plant Quarantine and the Regulation on Plant Quarantine. 12. Government National Assembly Government 18. Government National Assembly Government Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.

packing. processing and consuming development of safe vegetable. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 44 . The Ordinance gives responsibility to MARD to implement the Ordinance. fruit and tea Issuing Body MARD No 73/2006/TTBNN Date 18 September 2006 19 March 2003 21 December 1999 18 July 2008 30 July 2008 22. packing. bottling. bottling. a combination of short and long-term benefits to the entire society. It explains the various processes involved in Plant Quarantine and the management of plant protection drugs. Article 32 mentions quality standards for plant protection drugs. and application of scientific and technological advantages. The principles of plant protection and quarantine are based on prevention.2 National Assembly Standing Committee Ordinance on the Plant Protection and Quarantine No. 25. prevention and elimination of damaged microorganism or discovery and prevention of law violation and stipulates penalties for violation. MARD 84/2008/QĐBNN 28 July 2008 5. preservation. transportation. Article 30 indicates that the production. fruit and tea up to year of 2015 Decision on issuing regulations on VietGap certification for vegetable. plants. and the environment. trading. Article 42 stipulates administrative fines and penalties according to Criminal Code for power abuse in issuing. The ordinance indicates the responsibilities of individuals and organizations involved in the prevention and elimination of organisms harmful to plant resources. Title Development Circular on guiding mandate duties. The Plant Protection and Quarantine Inspectorate is a specialized inspectorate whose organization and operation shall be stipulated by the Government. 24. processing. inspection and testing Decision on several policies to support production. processing. livestock.# 21. Article 41 indicates that production and use of fake licenses. Government National Assembly Government Prime Minister 26/2003/NĐCP 79/2008/NĐCP 107/2008/QĐTTg 26. and trading of plant protection drugs must have practicing certificates. storage. organization and personnel of inspection in agricultural and rural development and inspection of agencies under MARD Decree on administrative fine in plant protection and quarantine Criminal Code Decree on stipulating systems of food safety management. 5. the Regulation on Plant Quarantine and the Regulation on Plant Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Personnel involved in production. withdrawing of certificates or licenses in plant protection and quarantine. and in implementation of the related regulations. certificates in plant protection and quarantine will be punished according to the law. Article 40 stipulates rewards for protection of plant.3 Government Decree on the Regulation on Plant Protection. use and destruction of protection drugs must ensure safety for human beings. 23. The state encourages the investment and research in the production and trading of plant protection drugs of biological origin and less toxicity. 36/2001/PL-UBTVQH10 of 25 July 2001 148.

quarantine. use of objects are specified. 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. in researches. The Regulation stipulates plant quarantine in import. exported plants. its procedures and criteria for organizations and individuals when performing their duties. Mandate and duties of agencies for plant quarantine and owners of objects which are under control of plant quarantine. criteria for organizations. 58/2002/ND-CP dated 3 June 2002 149. storage. registration. storage. procedures for plant quarantine. and treatment. The decree contains sections on plant quarantine of imported plants. business. have adopted the IPPC. preservation. owner of plant resources are specified. The state encourages organizations. Criteria for the service providers. Information flow and reporting requirement within state competent agencies responsible for plant protection and quarantine. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 45 . coordination in plant quarantine among responsible agencies are clearly stipulated. and coordination of technical assistance between member nations. rights to declare and abrogate epidemics is stipulated. among which Viet Nam. domestic.Quarantine. individuals who work in fumigation for decontamination area are clearly defined. 155. 151. export. export. preservation. storage. 156. process. timely manner. packaging. 152. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. settlement of objects through fumigation for decontamination. experiments. 153. elimination of harmful microorganism to plant resources. 5 The International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) is an international treaty organization that works to prevent the international spread of pests and plant diseases. import-export and other activities related to plant resources. transit. bottling. Criteria for organizations. export. individuals responsible for fumigation for decontamination. The prevention and elimination of harmful microorganism should be implemented on a regular. The decree provides details about the implementation of plant quarantine organization and procedures. 150. 154. transit plants. Responsibilities of state competent agencies on plant protection and quarantine. and the Regulation on Management of Plant Protection Drugs No. exported from Vietnam. transportation. individuals who participate in production. The IPPC was created in 1952 by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. use. use. The Regulation stipulates production. Domestic and foreign organizations. transit. transportation. 163 governments. As of 2007. Criteria for objects imported to. and domestic plant. exploitation. their rights and obligation in providing services in plant protection and quarantine are clearly provided. individuals to provide services in plant protection and quarantine. outwork. business. tracking of pest outbreaks. experiment and destruction of plant protection drugs in Vietnam 157. Among its functions are the maintenance of lists of plant pests. synchronous. The Regulation stipulates prevention. storage. domestic and settlement of those objects which are under control of plant quarantine through fumigation for decontamination. import. responsibilities of plant quarantine agencies and object owners during transportation.

the procedures to check hygiene and safety of imported and exported products. transportation. Incentives and penalties for violation. The decree stipulates development and harmonization of standards on Pest Free Zones and stipulates development and harmonization of standards on Pest Free Zones. The decree also mentions the establishment and maintaining of pest free areas according to the related National Standard.6 Government Decree on the Implementation of Ordinance on Food Hygiene and Safety No. 161. The specific responsibilities of each ministry or agency are not clarified. the Ordinance makes an important step forward in addressing the issues of food hygiene and safety and initiating a body of regulation. No agency seems to be assigned responsibility for regular monitoring of food hygiene and safety. The Ordinance stipulates general conditions for establishing food safety in production. Overall. processing. 5. It indicates consumers’ rights and responsibilities. 5. The MOH is assigned responsibility for coordination of food hygiene and safety. import and exports. The main innovation consists in explicitly mentioning (Article 5) harmonization of phytosanitary measures with IPPC (International Plant Protection Convention).4 Government Decree on Plant Quarantine No. storage. Some of these arrangements are included in the subsequent implementation Decree. yet it covers the same topics. and communication. monitoring. The decree replaces the previous regulation No.5. The Ordinance includes provisions for inspection. Incentives for engaging in practices for food quality and safety are given only a cursory reference in terms of commendations. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 46 . The Ordinance does not clarify implementation arrangements.5 National Assembly Standing Committee Ordinance on Food Hygiene and Safety No. and addressing issues of incentives.12/2003/PL-UBTVQH11 dated 26 July 2003 159. The Decree clarifies more specific conditions to establish food hygiene and standards.163/2004/ND-CP dated 7 September 2004 162. 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. 160. marketing. information. 02/2007/ND-CP dated 5 January 2007 158. standards. and the procedures to establish basic conditions for assuring safety in production and marketing of foods with high risk of Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. and clear definition of responsibilities of state agencies. and the responsibilities of the key state agencies in the management of food safety. preventive measures to overcome food-born diseases are also specified. 58/2002/ND-CP. The Ordinance is short of specifying implementation details and procedures.

the Ministry of Science and Technology. the Ministry of Trade. and mineral water. and the certified organization are still an insignificant number. 164. 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). provincial. The Decree does not clarify the actions and penalties for violation of the law. tubers and fruits for instant consumption. and feasible regulatory framework for food hygiene and safety. supplementary food. (ix) soya milk and products processed with soya.contamination6 (10 groups are identified). and unified food contamination control system. 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. With regard to monitoring. food additives. The Decree clarifies some of the articles of the Ordinance of Food Hygiene and Safety. 6 Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. the Decree (Articles 37-40) mentions both regular and irregular examinations to monitor observance of the law provisions on food hygiene and safety. district. the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. and (x) assorted fresh and raw vegetables. the Ministry of Culture and Information. the establishment of the programme of risk analysis and food contamination management. In addition to indicating the responsibilities in the prevention and overcoming of food-born diseases. These foods include 10 groups: (i) meat and meat products. but still far from providing a comprehensive. ISO/IEC 17025. it does not clarify the content. the People’s Committees at all level (central.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 Decree on Implementation of the Ordinance on Food Hygiene and Safety is a stepping stone in the right direction. the establishment of a management system based on HACCP. frequency. and documentation for food products are also indicated. 5. The responsibility for implementation of the action plan is assigned to key ministries. the Ministry of Industry. (vi) functional food. food complemented with micronutrients. the recorded violations are relatively few. commune). Some of the targets seem ambitious. Requirements for registration. It does not however prescribe clear implementation rules and procedures for the implementation of the law. clear. (vii) processed food and drinks for instant consumption. (iv) fresh and raw and processed aquatic products. (iii) eggs and products processed from egg. the Ministry of Finance. Specific responsibilities are assigned to different agencies including the Ministry of Health. provincial and municipal peoples’ committee. It is not surprising that in spite of increasing concerns for food-borne diseases. the Fisheries Ministry (currently under MARD). (ii) milk and milk products. and format of monitoring. penalties are lenient or inexistent. For example. labeling. the decree clarifies the monitoring and inspection functions. 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 establishes targets for awareness and capacity related to food hygiene and health. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 47 . 163. (v) ice creams and icy water of all kinds. (viii) frozen food. 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. Similar to the Ordinance on Food Hygiene and Safety.

trading. A large number of Ministries are mentioned and responsibilities for each agency are indicated. inspection and testing. The overall coordination is still assigned to the Ministry of Health. but other ministries are also indicated: MARD. to strengthen capacity in food hygiene and safety management. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 48 . 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 8 For more information on Risk Analysis see Annex 9. 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. Ministry of Interior. MOT. 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. To remedy these weaknesses. restaurants. 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. Ministry of Defence and Ministry of Police. inspections. • • • • • • Some important new aspects mentioned in this Directive are: Implement Risk Analysis7 Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP). and inadequate attention to food safety issues paid by authorities at all levels. MPI. It clearly mentions several problems that are occurring in Viet Nam which are not adequately addressed by the current regulations or implementation system. The indicated reasons for the current situation are low awareness. the Prime Ministry directs ministries and all agencies to intensify information. sub-standard. MOI. 170. MET. to implement regulations strictly. and to increase investment budgets. Good Hygiene Practices (GHP). Ministry of Culture-Information. 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. 169. MOST. The Directive recognizes that food safety is an urgent matter. tourist areas • Food poisoning in canteens and industrial zones • Fake. human resources. 168. incomplete organization and management system. sub-standard production practices. and illegal imported foods • Violations not being timely and strictly addressed 167.8 Prime Minister Directive on the Implementation of Urgent Methods to Assure Food Hygiene and Safety No 06/2007/CT-TTg dated 28 March 2007 166.5.7 Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. and equipment. schools. MOF. limited capacity. This directive is a crucial turning point in the development of food safety regulations. For more information on HACCP see Annex 9.5. education and communication (IEC).

pest control. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. conduct training workshops on safe tea production and certification nationwide. 175. 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. covering human resources. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 49 . the Certifying Body makes the necessary testing and issue safe tea certificates if the requirements are satisfied. 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. 173. Processing. 176. and for being accredited as a certifying body. 867/1998/QD-BYT dated 4 April 1998). Some of the specific responsibilities include accreditation of Safe Tea Certifying Bodies. processors. fertilizer. 43/2007/QD-BNN dated 16 May 2007 171. 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. permitted heavy metal content in tea (according to decision No. and business. processing. and distributed in Viet Nam and exported. 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. for conditions for processing safe tea. permitted residue limit for some chemicals in irrigation water (TCVN 6773:2000). After submitting an application for safe tea. This is the first comprehensive and detailed regulation related to one commodity (tea) for safe production. processed. It seems that a certified body should be already be able to produce certified tea. and Business Management No. Tea batches are certified as safe tea by Certifying Bodies. soil. It is not clear why a certified body should also certify each individual batch that it produces. and traders to improve the safety of tea produced. The Decision includes Vietnamese Standards for permitted residue limit for some heavy metals in soil (TCVN 7209:2000). 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.9 MARD Decision on Regulations on Safe Tea Production. It provides clear instructions related to the conditions for production and processing of safe tea. It also contains application forms for a certificate of conditions for production of safe tea. inspection of production of safe tea. irrigation water. processing and storage. The Decision is a good example of the way to implement the establishment of a system for safe food in Viet Nam. 177. certification. The certificate of safe tea is valid only for the tested batch. and types of production and processing units. Different departments and centers are assigned responsibilities.• Periodic reports (annually and every 6 months) on the effective implementation of this directive (the MOH to report to the PM) 5. 172. cultivation techniques. The top agency in charge of state management of safe tea is the Department of Crop Production. permitted residue limit for pesticides in soil (TCVN 5941:1995). packaging and labeling.

Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 50 . 183. but little on incentives. flower. it is not clear what are the incentives and penalties for farmers. GAP are developed and approved by MARD and competent authorities at the provincial and centrally-controlled cities. Certificate of GAP safe vegetables production remain valid for one year. root. irrigation water. Also. and transportation means (Article 10). Workers should not have contagious diseases (but it is not specified how this could be monitored). and quality assurance (NAFIQAD). 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. Given that food safety is a relatively new issue in Viet Nam. after three consecutive violations their certificates can be suspended. stem. fruit and seed types. it might be useful to give more thought to the system of incentives. extension (NAFEQ). equipment. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Supervising and handling of violations are discussed in Article 11.10 MARD Decision on Safe Vegetable Production and Trading Management No 106/2007/QD-BNN dated 28 December 2007 181. and GAP promulgated by MARD. Finally. but the regulation remains a little vague as to how this will be operationalized. The process of certification including the conditions for applying and approval are specified in Article 4 and related appendices. “Safe” means vegetables which are produced. Administrative fines are also envisaged. Handling should be conducted in safe facilities. and traders to adhere to safe tea requirements. there are perhaps too many agencies involved: for example several of the functions currently under NAFIQAD. Condition for safe vegetable production and handling (Article 3) clarifies the human resources. As it is now. there is no mention about the capacity of the agencies involved in accreditation (namely the DCP). 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. 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. Organizations found non-compliant are given the opportunities to improve their processes. PPD. and tools specified by GAP. the soils. and processed according to Good Agricultural Practices (GAP). Planning for continuous capacity strengthening of these agencies is needed if the overall management system aims to improve its performance. The regulation covers all vegetables including leafy vegetables. The inspection and monitoring system for safe tea are not clearly detailed. The Department of Crop Production at MARD is the accreditation body (Article 5). 179. This regulation on the production and trading of safe vegetables is similar to the Decision No. 5.178. and food fungus. processors. 180. the Decision seems to put a heavy emphasis on standards and requirements (as it should). 182. The presence of too many institutions implies difficulties in coordination and sometimes not clear boundaries of responsibilities. 184. labeling. and NAFEC could be streamlined and put under one agency only. An accreditation decision remains valid for a period of 3 years. 43/2007/QD-BNN on safe tea. More importantly. seedlings. harvested.

such as the need of improving the monitoring and inspection functions. including the formulation of a Food Safety Law. 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. 186. 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. and the resolution of the 4th Conference of the 10th Session of the Executive Central Party Committee on WTO. 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. 189. 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. Developing management system on food hygiene and safety from the central to the local levels. Food hygiene and safety standards. Training and capacity building of all relevant government staff involved in food safety. Some of the comments made on Decision No.185. The key agencies within MARD responsible to ensure safe vegetables production include the DCP. and the need of capacity building of the state agencies involved in safe vegetable production and trading. 57/QD-BYT dated 9 January 2008 188. 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). implementation of TBT agreement and SPS agreement should be completed by 2012. • • • 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. DST. and technical regulations meeting international regulations. the need for introducing incentives. 187. 16/2007/NQ-CP dated 27 February 2007 on the Action Plan for Food Safety. Some of the key features of the Decision include: • • The Food Safety Law should be prepared in 2008 and approved in 2009. the DPP. the National Extension Center. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 51 . 43/2007/QD-BNN on safe tea could be repeated here. 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. 9 Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.

As in the case of fruit and vegetables. VIETGAP for other products is not yet available. 379/QĐ-BNN-KHCN dated 28 January 2008 193. and FRESHCARE. Less clear in the decision is how coordination with other relevant ministries. 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. fertilizers. records keeping allowing traceability. 5. VIETGAP can be used by domestic and foreign organizations and individuals who wish to participate in production. workers’ welfare. The Department of Crop Production is the lead body in drafting the procedures. 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. for example MARD will actually occur. business. auditing and complaints. use of planting material. 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. and storage. 1121/QĐ-BNN-KHCN dated 14 April 200811 194. and export promotion.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 VIETGAP procedures are based on ASEAN GAP.190. produce quality. 5. chemicals. consumption. agricultural production materials and foodstuffs for the sake of production. the environment. soils. safety and welfare of workers. 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. harvesting and post harvest handling. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. and FRESHCARE. The hazards covered in VietGAP include food safety. Application of these procedures help preventing and reducing risks that have a negative impact on the quality and safety of fresh vegetables and fruit. preservation. 191. 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. harvesting. and human health. 5. water. testing. forestry products.14 MARD Decision on Good Practices for the Production of Tea No. waste management and treatment. and certification for safe vegetables and fruit products in Viet Nam. environmental impacts and health.13 MARD Decision on Good Practices for the Production of Fresh Fruit and Vegetables No. VIETGAP is based on ASEAN GAP. EUREPGAP/GLOBALCAP. The decision provides clear guidelines and rules about site selection for production tea. 11 This section will be completed after the translation of the regulation into English. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 52 . EUREPGAP/GLOBALCAP.

and tea sold in Viet Nam do not require labeling. The idea of having one Department taking the lead on food quality and safety is a most welcome one. summarize monitoring reports. disseminate standards. Penalties for violations are also stipulated. This law stipulates development. warnings. 5. supervise implementation plans. The decree provides detailed regulation on labeling of goods. 196. Local standards are developed and declared by heads of organizations and applied for operation of their organizations. instruction on use and preservation. goods and services in a province area.15 Ministry of Fisheries Decision on Establishing the National Agriforestry and Fisheries Quality Assurance Department (NAFIQAD) No.5. strategies and actions plans for food and agricultural products quality and safety within MARD. The system of technical specifications in Vietnam consists of national specifications (QCVN) and local specifications (QCĐP).16 Government Decree on Labeling of Goods No. the responsibilities of NAFIQAD seem to overlap to a large extent with similar responsibilities of other departments of MARD. 5. declaration and application of standards and technical specification. 29/2008/QD-BTS dated 28 January 2008 195. The Decision does not seem to clarify the relation between NAFIQAD and other MARD departments and the issue of overlapping responsibilities. hygiene and safety information. The responsibility for good labels is the Ministry of Science and Technology and STAMEQ provides technical support to MOST. Labels on foodstuffs. Technical specifications are developed and issued by ministries and ministerial agencies. QCĐP are developed and issued by Provincial People’s Committees. agencies in the government system and approved and declared by Ministry of Science & Technology.17 Law on Standards and Technical 68/2006/QH11 dated 29 June 2006 Specifications No. Local standards are in conformity with related technical specifications and legal regulations. examination and testing. ingredients quantities. food additives requires information written in Vienamese on quantity. It indicates the good that require labels and those that do not require labels. assess the compliance of standards and technical specifications. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. National standards developed by ministries. Among the latter are raw and fresh foodstuffs. and building the network of laboratories. However. Ministry of Science & Technology verifies the technical specifications submitted by ministries and ministerial agencies. This implies that most fruit. certification of food quality and safety for agricultural products. The law applies to Vietnamese and foreign organizations. individuals and oversea Vietnamese who are involved in standards and technical specifications operations in Vietnam. The system of standards and technical specifications in Vietnam consists of: National standards (TCVN) and local standards (TCCS). QCĐP are applied to products. vegetables. unpacked processed foodstuffs for sale directly to consumers. expiry date. 199. 198. 200. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 53 . and animal products. 89/2006/ND-CP dated 30 August 2006 197. date of manufacture. This regulation seems to give to NAFIQAD the leading role in formulating policies. fishery products.

22/2004/QH11 dated 15 June 2004 206. In the Letter No. Province Inspectorate and District Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. 127/2007/NĐ-CP dated 1 August 2007 202. and indicates the needed amendments when change into national standards and national technical specifications or canceling occurs. 203. 2970/TTr-BNN-BVTV to Prime Minister on settlement of difficulties faced by inspection in plant protection and quarantine. types and levels of fines in plant protection and quarantine and plant protection medicine management. 26/2003/NĐ-CP dated 19 March 2003 204. 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). 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. MARD has requested Office of the Government to allow it to continue implementing Article 19 of Decree No. animal health. and provision of services in agricultural products. storage. However. 5.20 Law on Inspection No. agricultural materials. processing. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 54 . individuals. operating in the area as well as inspection and penalty for violation are indicated. and of those certified are also stipulated.19 Government Decree on administrative fine in plant protection and quarantine No. 5. 5. rights and obligations of certification bodies. dated 26/10/2007. 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. animal slaughtering. As a result the implementation of the Article 19 was suspended and has generated a higher number of violation cases in this area.18 Government Decree on Detailed Implementation of several Articles of Law on Standards and Technical Specifications No. Responsibility of various ministries in development and issuance of technical specifications is included in the decree. variety selection. harvesting. The Law stipulates structure of inspection which is organized according to administrative level (Government Inspectorate. criteria for certifying bodies. plant quarantine. 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. Assessment of compliance with standards and technical specifications. the ensuing 2004 Law on Inspection (see next section) does not stipulate title and responsibilities of Chief Inspectors at department and sub-department levels. transportation of agro-forest products. The Decree stipulates administrative fines for organizations.201. Responsibilities of organizations. individuals who purposefully or carelessly violate regulations on plant protection and quarantine. MARD is responsible for development and issuance of technical specifications in production. aggravating and extenuating circumstances of violation. certification of compliance with standards and technical specifications.

as a whole and roles and jurisdiction of Chief Inspectors in animal health and plant protection at local level. This seems to be inconsistent with the Law on Inspection of 2004. 5. Violations of food safety regulations can be punished with imprisonnement of between 1 and 10 years depending on the gravity of the consequence for Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. 73/2006/TT-BNN dated 18 September 2006 208. Articles 157 and 244 of the Criminal Code stipulate crimes for false products such as food. foodstuffs. treatment and prevention medicines are considered as crimes and can lead to prison terms from 2 to 7 years. 26/2003/NĐ-CP dated 19 March 2003 209. Production and trading of fake foods.24 Criminal Code 210. 153/2005/NĐCP dated 15 December 2005 207. The decree stipulates the establishment of inspection at department and subdepartment levels under management of ministerial inspectorate (Article 4). it has satisfied a need of setting up a specialized inspection system to cover technical issues. 5. At the same time.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. organization and personnel of inspection in agricultural and rural development and inspection of agencies under MARD No.22 MARD Circular on guiding mandate duties. The power of giving fines is however limited. in particular. 5. The decree stipulates the right of Chief Inspectors of Department and SubDepartment levels to give administrative fines. Health. The Circular stipulates organization and operation of inspection in plant protection and quarantine at sub-department level (province level). For example.23 Government Decree on administrative fine in plant protection and quarantine No. Technical departments and subdepartments at central and provincial levels such as the department for plant protection (and sub-departments for plant protection). The decree appears to be a move in empowering the role of specialized inspection. The law does not contain any provision for the establishment of inspections at department and sub-department levels. department for animal health (and sub-departments for animal health) have their own inspection. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 55 . medicines and crimes against violations against hygiene and food safety regulations. 5. etc). Prison punishment of up 20 years for more serious crimes is also indicated by the law. the shortage of specialized inspectors and quality of inspection has been reduced. The Circular empowers roles and mandate of inspection system in animal health and plant protection at local level.21 Government Decree on Organization and Operation of Inspection in Agriculture and Rural Development No. Industry.Inspectorate) and by sectors (Agriculture. The punishment is strong including imprisonment. 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. administrative fines over 200. However. foodstuff.

train and settle related disputes. District. The decision states that by 2010. further clarifications on penalty violation need to be implemented. It clarifies the functions and responsibilities related to food safety of various ministries. The objective of the decree is to describe the system for management. 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. 5. the penalty framework requires further clarification. DCP has the right to issue. 5.26 Prime Minister Decision No. inspection and testing 211. and inspection within the cope of state management for MARD. monitor. law management. fruit and tea up to year of 2015 212. 213. 5.25 Government Decree No. at least 20% of the area of vegetable production. The decision stipulates checks and monitoring of producers and certifying bodies and indicates penalties for violation. check. The Department for Crop Production (DCP) is re-confirmed as VietGap Accreditation Body to assess. 25% of the area for tea production should meet safe production requirements according to VIETGAP. 215. however. By 2015. dated 28 July 2008. Duties and responsibilities of producers and certifying bodies are described. law implementation. The targets appear quite ambitious and it is not clear what the budget implications of these plans are. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 56 . and include a suspension of operations from 1 to 5 years. NAFIQAD is clearly indicated as the key department of MARD to assit the Minister of Agriculture in state management. maintain. Violation of the law is also punished with fines ranging from 5 to 50 million VND (this is not particularly high fine).27 MARD Decision No. these objectives should be fully achieved (100%). 20% of the area for fruit production. however. 79/2008/NĐ-CP dated 18 July 2008 stipulating systems of food safety management. 84/2008/QĐ-BNN. 107/2008/QĐ-TTg dated 30 July 2008 on several policies to support production. and Commune People Committee. warn or withdraw accreditation decision to certifying bodies. processing and consuming development of safe vegetable. According to the decision. By the same year. and government bodies including the Provincial. fruit and tea 214. on issuing regulations on VietGap certification for vegetable. state and local budgets should be invested to facilitate the achievement of these plans.consumers. inspection and testing for food safety from central to local level. departments. The decision indicates clearly that the VietGap certification fee should be agreed between requesters and certifying bodies.

28 Summary 217. At the same time. 219. 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 about Information and Communication Systems at MARD and other agencies 4. and tea 6. Since the early 2000s. Issue regulations related to planning and certification of Safe Agricultural Zones 9.216. In terms of the current Project. 218. transporting. marketing. VIETGAP for fruits. Animal Health Law and amendment to Inspection Law 2. This additional work is planned to occur over the 5-year period 2008-2012 of the Action Plan. vegetables and tea were issued during the first 4 months of 2008. Revision and amendment on Law on Inspection. Complete preparation of Food Safety Law. 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. Laws on Standards. Clarify roles and responsibilities for food safety monitoring and inspection of the farm to market segments of the value chain (grading. Issue standards for specific products within the commodity groups vegetables.5). The VIETGAP regulations are based on ASEAN GAP and GLOBALGAP. NAFIQAD participates in training provision on VietGap check. there has been an intense regulatory activity related to food safety and quality in Viet Nam. and the approval of the National Action Plan for Food Safety in 2006. checking and certifying VietGap which are implemented by certifyed bodies. handling. regulations on good agricultural practices were issued. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 57 . 220. Plant Protection Law. storing) 10. The defining moment was the issue of the National Assembly Standing Committee Ordinance of Food Hygiene and Safety in 2003 (see section 5. which was followed by several decrees and directives. Issue regulations about Monitoring System at MARD and other agencies 3. packaging. and Inspection were produced. monitoring operation. Issue policies on incentives for adoption of good practices Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. 5. There is still considerable work to be done on establishing a comprehensive regulatory framework for food safety. Good Labels. certification to Certifying Bodies and Producers. the most important tasks to establish a comprehensive regulatory framework for food quality and safety are the following: 1. and on Food Safety are currently under preparation. Clarify the leading agency at MARD responsible for coordination of food safety and quality 5. fruit. and new Laws on Plant Protection. NAFIQAD cooperates with DCP in accreditation.

Consistently with the approach and methodology described in Chapter 3 and with reference to the review of regulations in Chapter 5. Inspection 7. Information 9. Ministry of Science & Technology verifies the technical regulations submitted by ministries. there are also local standard (TCCS) which are developed and declared by heads of organizations and applied for operation of their organizations.10).2. Communication 12. 224. Certification 4. Previous sectoral standards (TCN) will be faded over the period 2008-2010 or become part of the TCVN standards system. quality. and Regulations 13. in addition to national standards. Strategies. Capacity 6. 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.1 Current Situation in Standards 222. among which 94 standards for fruit and vegetables and 28 for tea (see Annex 9. The law regulating standards is the Law on Standards and Technical Specifications No. water are specified in Annex 9. and industrial waste water quality. According to the law.1 Introduction 221. Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones 5.6 Key Issues 6. soils. Various sections describe the current situation and the key issues for the following dimensions of the food quality and safety system: 1. The standards related to safe production of vegetables and tea have been developed by MARD (standards on chemical maximum level permitted. Policies.8). Standards for production. In addition to standards there are technical regulations at the national level (QCVN) developed by ministries and ministerial agencies. this chapter analyzes the key issues related to improving food safety and quality in Viet Nam. processing. Standards 2. Education 10. Extension 11. The national organization for establishing standards is STAMEQ under MOST. The local technical Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Practices 3. ministerial agencies. Monitoring 8. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 58 . 223. and trading of food and agricultural products are now established as National Standards (TCVN). 68/2006/QH11. Labs 6.2 Standards 6.

The objective is to harmonize 50% of all standards in Viet Nam with international ones by 2010. Agriculture fares a little better than the average of all sectors in the process of harmonization (having already harmonized 48% of the standards). 227. Currently. Information about the progress of consolidation and development of standards and technical specifications should be available and easily accessible to the public. herbs need to be developed as TCVN. These standards and technical specifications need however to be reviewed and made available under one organization (STAMEQ) both in Vietnamese and English language. for the country as a whole. To establish a standard that most people cannot reasonably meet is a Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. 5.8). All the 10 critical foods (specified in Decree No. The establishment of a standard should also be accompanied by an evaluation of the process to adopt the standards. 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. Several standards need to be developed. Standards and technical specifications need to be communicated to all relevant organizations and made available over Internet for easy access. the rationale of the standard.163/2004/ND-CP. 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. MARD does not have an Internet site which contains all the standards and technical regulations issued in the past. the constraints in adoption. source STAMEQ). Standards for organic food need to be developed. 6.2. see footnote 6) should have standards in place. It is estimated that about 48% of Vietnam’s food and agricultural standards is harmonized with Codex standards (as of May 2008. goods and services in a province area. While it is the intention of the Government to conform to international standards in the longer term. 225. the inspection procedures. 226. the current state of hygiene in Vietnam prevents this from being achieved. and the monitoring of compliance with the standard. 2. If conformity is not possible or if Vietnamese standards are established which are new or different from international standards.2 Issues in Standards 1. Additional standards for other foods of large consumption such as peanuts and cashews. 4. Currently. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 59 . 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. medicinal plants. 3. essential oils. 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. the website of STAMEQ is not updated. Updating and harmonization of legislation is still ongoing. only about 30% of standards are harmonized. a clear documentation should be produced.regulations (QCDP) are developed and issued by Provincial People’s Committees and are applied for products. Viet Nam has already a large body of standards and technical specifications established in the past by various organizations.

3 Good Practices 6. The present VIETGAP is closely inspired by similar procedures for ASEANGAP. Limited access to available standards and technical requirements Harmonization of national standards with international standards not yet complete Standards are usually not available in English thus limiting the access of foreign investors Limited research on standards Opportunities Assistance from WTO and FAO for harmonization of standards consistent with Codex. Based on conversation with DCP. 5. and FRESHCARE. The process of establishing standards is well documented by STAMEQ and follows the principles of the Agreement on TBT. and regulations will not result in an effective system. Table 6 SWOT Analysis of Standards Weaknesses • Consolidation of all the standards and technical specifications into national standards (TCVN) and national technical specifications (QCVN) is not yet completed. There are organizations who are already certified for EUREPGAP. Viet Nam has developed good agricultural practices called VIETGAP for fresh vegetables and fruit (see Decision No. Priority is being currently given to VIETGAP for fruits. inspection. vegetables and tea partly because these are items of large consumption with food safety issues. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. with easy access over the Internet • Strengths Clear regulations about the action plan and responsibility for establishing a well functioning standards and technical specifications system Adherence of Viet Nam to the principles of TBT Availability of technical expertise in Viet Nam • • • • • • • • Threats • Establishing a comprehensive system of standards without accompanying measures such as practices. EUREPGAP/GLOBALGAP. 229. SPS and TBT agreements Training and information available with CAC on all international standards related to food and agriculture. and 5.9.3. the development of additional VIETGAP will be halted for some time. such as Ham Minh Dragon Fruit Cooperatives located in Binh Thuan Province.10. 379/QĐ-BNN-KHCN) and tea.1 Current Situation in Good Practices 228. 230. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 60 . 6.13. and partly because the implementation of the existing VIETGAP will require some adjustment period. monitoring.14. 5. certification. The relevant decisions have been reviewed in sections 5.recipe for making the standard irrelevant. 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. VIETGAP regulations for additional commodities have not been issued yet.

6. setting up of demonstration sites. cooperatives) and enterprises need to be piloted. However.2 Issues in Good Practices 1. 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. but their number is still limited.5). 6. development of manuals. The growth of supermarkets in Viet Nam is an opportunity for establishing safer production.6) 5. It is not clear if VIETGMP or VIETGHP will be developed and by whom. Alternative dissemination mechanisms should be considered in addition to the usual extension mechanisms (training. 2. 10. Some of the constraints go beyond the control of the individual farmers and might have to do with zone planning (see section 6. giving priority to the 10 critical food items mentioned in the Decree No. Research on VIETGAP and monitoring of VIETGAP should be planned. and field visits to pilot projects. adoption of VIETGAP for domestic markets might be more problematic. 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). Perhaps different levels of compliance with VIETGAP requirements need to be developed. It is likely that supermarkets and enterprises engaged in exporting food products will be the earliest adopters of VIETGAP. leaflets. workshops. and Advanced. Constraints to the adoption of VIETGAP by smallholder farmers and SME need to be assessed. Intermediate. it is not clear which farmers and enterprises will benefit from the adoption of VIETGAP. Incentives for the adoption of VIETGAP should be established. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 61 . particularly if the VIETGAP are perceived as procedures increasing the cost of production without a corresponding increase in the price paid by consumers. 8. handling. etc) and include formation of producer marketing groups. and distribution of food products and supermarkets are already engaging in VIETGAP-like procedures. ICARD. In addition to GAP. training course development. 7. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.3. The adoption of VIETGAP will require several activities including testing of VIETGAP. Models and demonstrations of VIETGAP involving farmer organizations (groups. As of now. farmer field schools. television and radio programs. handling and hygiene (GHP). 11. New VIETGAPs have to be developed. 163/2004/ND-CP (see section 5. there are additional good practices in manufacturing (GMP). A web site with a blog on VIETGAP and interaction with users of VIETGAP could be established and managed by DCP. Some companies are already adopting these practices. demonstrations. The dissemination of VIETGAP will require considerable effort to enable a larger number of farmers to adopt them. 3. or other relevant organization. 4. 9. the levels could be Basic. and dissemination.

it could be also be certified at the provincial level by a certification body accredited by the local DARD.4 Certification 6. 1121/2008/QD-BNN-KHCN. and research.4. 233. harvested. and monitoring of good practices is not effective thus lowering the incentives of consumers to pay a higher prices for safe food. disseminating. A certification system consists of both standardization of specifications and conformity assessment by a certification body. there are already standardized practices (VIETGAP for fruits. demonstrating. In the case of fruits and vegetables. vegetables. storage. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 62 . • • • Strengths The adoption of GAP allows to strengthen the food safety system. Safe vegetables or safe tea is interpreted as produced. and appropriately processed according to VIETGAP. 232. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Weak linkages between farmer organizations. considerable work remains to be done in testing. 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.Table 7 SWOT Analysis of Practices Weaknesses • • • • Most farmers are not aware of any type of GAP Adoption of GAP could be perceived as not cost effective by smallholders and unorganized farmers Few GAPs produced so far Early period of establishment of VIETGAP. enterprises. monitoring. grading facilities) make more difficult the adoption of good practices Opportunities • • • • Strong commitment of GOV to an improved food safety system Improved health through lower number of foodborne diseases Greater access to international markets Growth of supermarkets will facilitate adoption of good practices. 6. inspection. and markets make more difficult the adoption of GAP Poor infrastructure (water. cold chain. Some organizations are VIETGAP and EUREPGAP already using • • • • Most farmers in Viet Nam have a basic education to learn about good practices and are ready to make innovations if the expected benefits justify the effort Threats High food prices might put more focus on volumes and yields than on quality and safety Certification.1 Current Situation in Certification 231. by controlling hazards at the production and postproduction level. and tea) developed by the Government through Decisions No 379/2008/QD-BNN-KHCN No. Certification bodies are accredited by agencies which are authorized by the Government or recognized for their expertise by the industry.

public hearings. funded by USAID and AUSAID and implemented by Southern Fruit Research Institute (SOFRI) uses EUREPGAP standards for monitoring production of dragon fruit. It requires a multi-dimensional process of capacity strengthening. Norway) has 14 percent. there are only 5 certified organizations in VIETGAP for safe vegetables located in Hanoi. 2. all of which are foreign with the exception of QUACERT. QUACERT is planning to become a GAP Certifying Body. certification must be renewed after a period of 3 years. fruit. dissemination of information. Det Norske Veritas (DNV. However. The project on Dragon Fruit in Binh Thuan and Tien Giang. awareness. As the number of organization requiring certification increases. accreditation is obtained free of charge. the demand for accreditation will grow. and tea must pay the certification bodies. Bureau Veritas Quality International (BVQI. Quacert has 34 percent market share. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. the availability of a code of conduct that is respected by the industry. In the ISO 9000 certification market. The current capacity (both in terms of number and skills of staff) will have to increase over time. Accreditation is currently obtained free of cost. This is even more the case at the provincial level. 236. and the availability of reliable diagnostics and testing centers. whereas certification of “safe” vegetable. SGS has 7 percent and QMS Certification Services (Australia) and AFAQ (France) each have 4 percent. Reputation and trust are probably the two most important elements of a good certification system. publications. Reputation and trust could not be established overnight and by decree only. Vietnam has nineteen other certification bodies. 5. Most of the officials involved in accreditation do not have a sufficient background in food safety and accreditation and certification procedures. That requires frequent monitoring (including un-announced visits) by the accreditation and the certification agencies. reputation and trust have to be kept. UK) has 31 percent.4. etc). Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 63 . QUACERT is accredited by JAS-ANZ (Australia and New Zealand Joint accreditation system) to provide certification for HACCP and ISO 9000 and 14000. These are elements that need to be promoted by both regulation measures and initiatives of the industry (workshops.234. Currently. and transparency. This situation might also need to change over time in order to ensure sustainability of the accreditation system. Currently USAID in the process of introducing EUREPGAP for durian. Currently. For certification to be effective and ensure consumers that the promise of “safe food” or “good practices” is maintained. 3. field visits. 235. the monitoring system for food safety and certification bodies has not been yet established. some farmers in Viet Nam are EUREPGAP certified. 2 organizations will be certified in HCMC and one will be certified in Dalat (accredited by DARD). Capacity of the accreditation organizations (DCP and DARDs) is still weak. The certification follows procedures explained in the related regulations. 4. websites. As of May 2008.2 Issues in Certification 1. 6. Apart from the VIETGAP certification bodies.

240. Almost 100% of vegetable production is not tested and about 12% of vegetable production occurs near industrial zones. it is reported that local farmers producing vegetables.000 per year. Table 8 SWOT Analysis of Certification Weaknesses • • • • Weak capacity of accreditation agencies and limited number of staff High costs of certification for the majority of smallholder farmers Lack of a monitoring system Weak inspection system Opportunities • • Increased access to high-value exports Improved system of traceability with positive effects on trust of consumers • • • Strengths Increasing number of certification bodies QUACERT reputed for a number of certification activities and accredited internationally Threats 6. Certification in Australia with FRESHCARE costs about $1. 238.1 Current Situation in Planning for Safe Agricultural Zones 237. wells (29%). Programs for safe production of vegetables in Viet Nam started in 1999.agronet. 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. BIOVEGI a company growing various kind of sprouts for main hotels and restaurants in Hanoi. lakes. For example. safe production zones have occupied just a small proportion of total cultivated area. 239. Certification is generally expensive. in the Red River Delta only 6. main roads and hospitals. and waste water (11%) are not adequately controlled for safety.vn). Major components of the program included: vegetables distributed through specific “safe vegetables shops” and control mechanism on pesticide residues established (see www. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 64 . and pools (60% of the total). In 1995 the GOV launched a safe vegetable program in response to public concerns of vegetable safety.5 Planning for Safe Agricultural Zones 6. pays12 a flat certification of 60 million VND per year (about $2. The planned safe vegetable production areas are 13. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Infrastructure for safe production zones is often poor. In Hanoi’s Dong Anh District where there are a number of large farms that provides vegetables for the city everyday.500). In spite of these and other initiatives. Statistics by the Vietnam Food Administration (VFA) show that 70% of all cholera cases have been caused by careless-washed salad.5. As of April 2008.320 ha of safe production area have been declared safe by DARD(s). up to the present.216 ha 12 See working paper by Food Safety Specialist. Unsafe water for irrigating vegetables is common and sources from river.6. The threat of Cholera and Diarrhea outbreak from this type of activity is alarming. 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.

000 ha). 241.which represents only 13% of the total vegetable cultivated area in the region (almost 100. 243. 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. another contiguous plot is affected even though the contiguous plot might follow good practices. However. there are no PFZ and the Inspectorate Division of the Department Plant Production is in the process of formulating the relevant standards. To establish contiguous land plots of land which could be declared safe production area requires coordination and the establishment of specific rules. 242. the content of some toxic chemicals does not exceed the permitted limit 5.4) envisages Pest Free Zones (PFZ). consumers have difficulty in trusting the claim of traders selling “safe” vegetables”. 02/2007/ND-CP (see section 5.5. breeding farms. slaughter houses. 6. hospitals. Both types of zones are mentioned in the regulations. Planning of safe production zone is a complex task. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 65 . Physical and chemical features suitable for the growing and development of tea and vegetables Not directly affected by industrial waste. There are not yet regulations on how to plan and declare an agricultural zone safe for agricultural production. utility waste from residential areas. This suggests the need of including a communication strategy that involves the local communities. if excessive pesticide or chemical application is carried out in one plot. 3. fresh night-soil water. slaughter houses. In the absence of certified practices and certified agricultural zones. Agricultural land has been allocated to farmers who are mostly smallholders and usually have fragmented landholdings. However. 4. Soils and water are regularly tested 244.2 Issues on Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones 1. residential areas. raw sewage water from hospitals. Irrigation water: a. Technical determinations could be made and clear rules on monitoring established. For example. The heavy metal content in the soil and substrates does not exceed the permitted limits. There are no clear regulations on safe agricultural zones or pest free zones. 2. b. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Industrial effluents. but there is no specific regulation on how a SAZ or a PFZ should be planned and implemented. up to now. 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. urine and water from stagnant ponds is not used to water vegetables directly. cemeteries and heavy traffic roads. Currently the DARDs are responsible for declaring a zone safe for agricultural production. Irrigation water for vegetables is not contaminated with harmful organisms or toxic chemicals. ultimately. The regulation No. 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. The problems of declaring a pest free zone are similar to the ones declaring a safe agricultural zone.

Water and soil quality. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 66 . the People’s Committee at all local level (provincial. and commune) and the involvement of farmers organizations and trade associations. chemical residues.2. Perhaps different levels of safety could be considered. 3. Table 9 SWOT Analysis of Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones Weaknesses • • • • No specific regulations on SAZ and PFZ Standards yet to be developed Weak participatory planning capacity Limited infrastructure for clean water. grading and packing facilities. 5. Capacity for this type of participatory planning still needs to be developed. and cold chains Opportunities Introduction of VIETGAP and increasing number of certification agencies facilitate the establishment of SAZ and PFZ Development of Geographical Indications • Strengths Intention of the Government to establish these areas Threats • Pests. Some code of conduct needs to be developed and adhered to by the communities. 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. geographical indications are covered as an element of IPRs. district. 6. 4. controlled atmosphere storage facilities. diseases. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Under Articles 1 (2) and 10 of the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property. and water infiltration from neighboring zones could affecting the safety or integrity of a SAZ or PFZ. 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. Typically. which was part of the Agreements concluding the Uruguay Round of GATT negotiations. They are also covered under Articles 22 to 24 of the Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement. 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. run-offs. and location (away from major roads. At a more advanced level. epidemics. industrial zones. region or country. • • 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. etc) are among the most important criteria for the identification of a safe production zone. 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. garbage dump sites. At the minimum level samples of water and soils collected and analyzed periodically should show that certain criteria (permitted limits) are satisfied. Effective planning for a SAZ and PFZ will require the participation of local communities. hospitals.

There are relatively few inspectors both at the central and at the local level. for example. The inspection system for agricultural products consists of the Ministerial Inspectorate Office (MIO) at MARD and inspectorate divisions at different departments of MARD. Each Inspectorate Division at MARD reports to the head of the respective department and also to the MIO. At the local level. 249.20). and inspection upon request of complaints and denunciations. however. More important seem to be the issues of regulations and capacity of inspectors. and veterinary and animal health. Little flexibility exists to appoint external inspectors and there is no system of certifying inspectors. the Inspectorate at the Department of Veterinary Services. but they perform various functions besides the inspection function. traders who have been found trading in fake or faulty products are easily ready to pay the fines. and Inspectorate at the Department of Crop Production. 251. 247. When a violation is discovered. While coordination between inspectorates and MOI at MARD is relatively frequent and smooth. inspectors can recommend application of the Criminal Code. In the case of the Inspectorate Division of the Department of Plant Protection. 248. The appointment of inspectors is based on programs and plans approved by the Minister of MARD of the Director of DARD. This situation does not seem to be perceived by the Inspectorate Division as a major constraint to the development of a good inspection system.21) did remedy to this deficient of the 2004 Law. 246. 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. 250. pesticide trading. The Inspectorate of the Department of Plant Protection. There are no inspectors at the commune level. For serious violations against food hygiene and safety the Criminal Code could be applied with penalties including imprisonment. there are DARD(s) Inspectorates and Inspectorates at the Sub-Departments specialized in plant protection and quarantine.6. The Decree on Inspection No 153/2005/NĐ-CP (see section 5. Inspection takes place several times during the year (usually quarterly) and different types of inspections are carried out. such as the Inspectorate at the Department of Plant Protection. there is less coordination between MARD and MOH in term of inspection activities. Administrative and financial penalties are common. carries out Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. For example. quarantine inspection. testing in markets for different residues. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 67 . In practice imprisonment occurs rarely (if ever). inspections occur for pesticide use. inspectors have the right of penalize administratively and to suspend the violating organization. most of the inspectors are not full time specialized inspectors. however they do not seem to be too heavy. In the case of plant protection.1 Current Situation in Inspection 245.6 Inspection 6. 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). provided they can continue their business.6. As the previous paragraph shows. The 2004 Law on Inspection did not provide clear instruction about the roles and responsibilities of the Inspectorate Divisions (see section 5.

6. Professionalism of inspectors needs to be increased through training and specialization of functions. As of now there are inconsistency between the 2004 Law on Inspection and subsequent decrees. 5. All inspectors must be government staff which might constrain future capacity of doing comprehensive and regular inspection all over the country. This function would seem to be under the responsibility of MOH. or suspension of violators. 2.monthly testing of chemical residues from sample collected at major markets. there seems to be overlapping of functions.8) Inspectorate Divisions seem to be well equipped with testing laboratories (see section 6. confiscating products. Roles and responsibilities of Inspectorate Divisions should be clearly defined. Power of inspectorates appears to be limited either in terms of applying fines. 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. Power of inspectors is limited Opportunities A new Law on Inspection is under preparation Increasing number of certified organizations requiring the services of inspection • • Strengths A competent technical staff at the central level Good laboratories for testing and analysis Threats • • Rent seeking behavior External interference inspection in carrying out Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 68 . 252.2 Issues in Inspection 1. The new Law on Inspection currently under preparation provides an opportunity to remedy to this regulatory weakness. Coordination of inspectorates at MARD and MOH needs to be improved. At the same time. In the specific case of inspection of markets. 6. any additional power given to the inspectors should be checked against increased incentives for rent seeking behavior. Table 10 SWOT Analysis of Inspection Weaknesses • • • • • • The current regulations (law and decree) seem inconsistent about roles and responsibilities of the Inspectorate Divisions 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. 3. 4. There is no certification for becoming an inspector.

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 15

Report of MOH in the “Second Meeting of the Food Safety Assurance Program” on April 8, 2008 See report of Food Safety Specialist.

Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper

69

activities and initiatives. Participatory monitoring activities could reduce some of the negative perception of monitoring. Table 11 SWOT Analysis of Monitoring
Weaknesses • • Absence of a monitoring system Irregular and limited reporting Opportunities • • Development of new Food Law could provide the basis for the establishment of a food 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 • • Strengths Monitoring mentioned in all the regulations Threats Lack of separation between monitoring agency and implementation agency

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
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
16

Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper

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
Weaknesses • • • Water and soil testing are limited in coverage High cost of food sample testing Limited use of effective rapid testing methods Opportunities • • • • • CIDA project on improvement of food safety Greater emphasis on HACCP and Risk Analysis Planning of SAZ and PFZ Implementation of VIETGAP Development of private laboratories • • • • Strengths Existing laboratories with ISO 17015 standard Competent human resources An already existing network of laboratories Threats Operations and maintenance investments are not commensurate to capital investments (eg facilities and equipment) and human resource development

Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper

71

VFA seems to be in the position of being the lead agency for providing information about food safety.1 Current Situation in Education 263. practices.9. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 72 . There are no well organized databases on food safety dimensions such as regulations.vn to make this information available. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. There is however no food safety curriculum at the primary and secondary level. however. standards.6.gov.9. For an organized information system on food safety to arise. Within Viet Nam.2 Issues on Information 1. there are courses and programs at different institutions. and adequate resources have to be ensured. 6.9 Information 6. laboratories. The most important ones include: 18 This section will be completed in the Final Report of the Institutional Specialists.10.agroviet. The Information Center of MARD could initially take up this role and using its website www. information about food safety in Viet Nam is scattered among different agencies. a clear mandate needs to be provided to an agency. At the tertiary level. but a only a very limited part of this literature is available in Vietnamese. Within MARD. In spite of an intense regulatory activity related to food safety. 3. 2. there is no such agency.10 Education18 6.1 Current Situation on Information 262. The education system provides principles of food hygiene. Table 13 SWOT Analysis of Information Weaknesses • • No organized information system on food safety at MARD No lead agency at MARD for establishing and maintaining an information system on food safety Opportunities Use of Information Center at MARD to establish and maintain an information system on food safety with inputs from all the relevant agencies at MARD • Strengths VFA is the lead agency on food safety and is in the process of establishment an organized food safety information system Threats • Poor coordination with VFA might imply duplications of efforts • 6. A large body of literature on food safety is available in English. responsibilities and authorities have to be defined. and inspection.

and tertiary) does not benefit from linkages with research. Table 14 SWOT Analysis of Education Weaknesses • Food hygiene and safety does not receive its due importance in curriculum development of 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 selfstanding Opportunities • • • • Establish programs on food hygiene and safety at the primary. Institute of Food Technology and Food. A research thesis on marketing of safe vegetable is currently carried out by a PhD candidate in Trade University. 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. secondary. Hanoi University of Technology.2 Issues in Education 1. Storage and Processing are taught in different universities including Public Health University (Ministry of Health). secondary. namely Sai Gon Technology University. Food technology and Biological Food. 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 • • Strengths A dense network of schools and universities that reaches all the nation • Threats Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Curriculum of primary and secondary schools should include food hygiene and safety principles and practices 2. 6. Hanoi Agricultural University. Hanoi University of Technology offers education programs from college to PhD levels.• • • • • • • Courses in Nutrition and Food Safety. Food Storage and Processing are taught in universities in other cities and provinces such as Hai Phong and An Giang.10. Educational programs at all levels (primary. Universities of Medicine in Hanoi and Thai Binh province. and the opportunities of involving the private sector and associations. Food processing. Food Chemistry and Food Toxicity. vocational. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 73 . Post graduate programs on these subjects are available. Vocational schools do not seem to offer specialized courses in food hygiene and safety 3. 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 Technology and Food Safety and post graduate program is also taught by a private university in HCMC.

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. and study tour activities need to be developed 3. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 74 . 267. partly motivated by the incentives of capturing new export markets and higher value consumers in the domestic market. establishment of models. Dissemination of cost/benefit analysis of practices.6. 270. 265. There are however leading farmers and organizations who have already adopted good practices. 269. and planning of focused extension activities. 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. 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. The recently developed VIETGAP for fruit. VIETGAP (and other GAPs) require considerable changes by farmers and enterprises. and tea will require a considerable effort to ensure that good practices are disseminated and adopted by farmers and enterprises. 268. training of trainers. Clear evidence that adoption of safe practices will benefit farmers should be provided. Food safety issues are new to most farmers and extension workers in Viet Nam. farmer field schools. the food safety practices will remain limited to very few farmers. participation in study tours (eg to certified farmers in dragon fruit). 6. Capacity for extension of safe production practices (VIETGAP) is not yet established. Certified organizations for safe food production and trading are increasing. 266. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Unless the incentives for adoption are understood and worthwhile to undertake. vegetables. elaboration of training manuals and dissemination material 2. there are no much incentives for adoption and adoption will not take place.11. including EUREPGAP and HACCP. Unless there are demonstrable benefits of adopting safe practices.1 Current Situation on Extension 264. Technical and socioeconomic research should support the production of such evidence. development of manuals and guidelines. and facilitating access to markets (through contracts with enterprises and supermarkets). This will require training of trainers.11.11 Extension 6.2 Issues in Extension 1. Demonstrations.

Workshops and conferences dedicated to food safety are increasing. Promote and support formation of producer marketing groups Table 15 SWOT Analysis of Extension Weaknesses • • • • • • • Food safety is a new concept for most farmers and extension worker Considerable effort will be required to ensure large number of farmers adopt the innovations of VIETGAPs and other GAPs Upland isolated. but their number is still limited.4. Publications and websites dedicated to food safety are still limited. however they seem still insufficient to inform the public in a professional and regular manner. Establish reward systems for adoption of safe vegetables (eg best farmers given monetary price of 30 million VND) 7. Youth Union. Programs to inform children at school could be strengthened. and isolated (problem of infrastructure). Mass organizations (Women Union. The latest issue of Outlook Magazine (26 May 2008) is entirely dedicated to food safety. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.1 Current situation on Communication 271. ethnic communities involved in tea production present special challenge Extension system does not reach the village level Few producer marketing groups Opportunities Collaboration with research organizations and private sector. These efforts are laudable. The VFA launches awareness campaign about food hygiene and 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. In the most recent years. there has been a considerable attention of the media on food safety.12.12 Communication 6. Need of close collaboration with research and private sector organizations should be facilitated 6. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 75 . 272. Several of these farmers are often from ethnic communities (problem of language). and Farmer Union) have a critical role to play in communication and have the organization that could enable them to communicate effectively. poorly educated (problem of adoption). 5. particularly processors and supermarkets Increased access to export markets • • Strengths The extension system reaches the commune level Threats • 6. One of the main challenges will be to reach upland farmers involved in tea production.

workshops and conferences. Table 16 SWOT Analysis of Communication Weaknesses • • Limited efforts at communicating professionally to a large public Little involvement of mass organizations and departments of MARD in communication activities Opportunities Use of Mass Organization in food safety awareness programs Promotion of school programs. 2. Some research on standards is done mostly at STAMEQ. research programs on risk analysis are limited. 4. Underfunding of research on food safety 2. school programs. workshops and conferences.12.1 Current Situation on Research 273.agroviet. For example. Similarly. media programs. promotion activities.6. mass organizations programs on food safety could be effectively strengthened.13.gov. Limited linkages of research with food enterprises interested in improving food safety Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.2 Issues on Communication 1. rapid testing methods are still at an infancy level. there is no organized effort at communicating professional to the larger public about food safety issues. 6.13. the adoption of Risk Analysis in the Food Safety Action Plan would seem to indicate a considerable scope for expanding food safety research. and publications devoted to food safety issues Role of Information Center at MARD could be expanded to include communication activities • • Strengths A network of Mass Organizations that could reach the commune level Increasing interest of the media Threats • Misinformation and irresponsible communication could lead to scares in the market • • • 6.13 Research 6. However. Subjects related to food safety are mostly taught rather than researched. 3.2 Issues on Research 1.vn platform with a special section on food safety to inform the public. but not much in the research community at large. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 76 . There does not appear to be research programs on food safety. Socioeconomic research related to good practices. The Information Center at MARD could use its website www. Extension activities to farmers and communication activities to the larger public need to be coordinated. In spite of an increasing attention of the media to food safety. Awareness campaigns.

While production seems to be under the responsibility of MARD and retail outlets seem to be under the responsibility of MOH. and Strategies 275. 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. washing. and Strategies 274. it is not clear under whose responsibility is the monitoring and inspection of the marketing chains from the farm to the market. to monitor and inspect grading. 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 5.14. However. there is a need of issuing clear policies related to the following dimensions: 1.14. sorting.1 Current Situation in Regulations. and markets and retail outlets. and strategies are effective. Establishment of an effective and regular information and monitoring system 2.Table 17 SWOT Analysis of Research Weaknesses • • • Limited research on food safety Marginal public funding of research on food safety Limited linkages of research with food enterprises Opportunities Establishment of a program on food safety well funded and linking to food industry • Strengths A number of courses on food safety are already taught at various universities and institutes Threats • 6.7 and section 5. 6. Policies.11). Planning and budgeting for safe agricultural zones and pest free zones Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. packaging facilities. Currently the new Law on Inspection and a new Law on Food Safety are under preparation. Policies. For ensuring the existing and under preparation of regulations. storage. Planning and budgeting of capacity strengthening activities and extension 6. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 77 . Policies. Providing incentives to the adoption of good practices 3. and Strategies 6. Since the early 2000 there has been an intense regulatory activity on food hygiene and safety (see Chapter 5).14 Regulations. 5. policies.2 Issues in Regulations. The Laws on Standards and Good Labels have already been approved.

with only 2 full time. and Strategies Weaknesses • • Incomplete regulatory framework Missing policies on information and monitoring. the situation is similar. Policies. In the livestock production and animal health department. from standards. and in the fishery department.15. 277. Farmers lack knowledge and capacity for safe food production and basic postharvest operations such as grading. handling.15 Capacity 6. practices. capacity strengthening. Good sorting. with a larger number of specialists involved in food safety issues. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 78 . lead agency within MARD. to regulations. 19 This information needs to be checked. There appears to be a limited number of staff within MARD and related research organizations who are specialists in food safety issues. incentives. and labeling practices in the marketing chains from farm to consumers are also largely lacking. There are capacity needs at all levels of the food safety institutional dimensions examined in this chapter. In the research organizations.Table 18 SWOT Analysis of Regulations. packaging. and strategies. handling. In the DCP there are only 4 staff involved in food safety. At the province level. packaging. and capacity strengthening Opportunities Food safety increasingly important as Viet Nam moves to mid-income status Growing role of the private sector and supermarkets • • • Strengths An existing Food Safety Action Plan Laws on Inspection and on Food Safety under preparation Food safety mentioned in the SEDP • • • Threats • More stringent regulations might provide more scope for rent seeking behavior and corruption in the absence of a transparent monitoring and inspection system • • 6. the situation seems to be better. inspection. 278. monitoring. as food safety research programs are just starting to be established19. policies. 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. of which only 7 are full time.1 Current Situation in Capacity 276. At the DPP there are 37 inspectors. and safe agricultural zones Weak coordination within MARD and between MARD and other agencies. on average there are less than 7 staff who have responsibilities related to food safety and most of them are not specialists. washing.

As the regulatory framework becomes better defined. and strategies. education Opportunities Formulation of new laws on Inspection and Food Safety Ongoing projects on Science and Technology (ADB funded). support to SPS and TBT agreements.15. Carry out an inventory of staff and staff capacity involved in food safety issues at MARD. monitoring. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 79 . Food Quality and Safety (CIDA). 6. inspection.2 Issues in Capacity 1. The immediate gaps seem to be those related to improving capacity for formulating regulations. Design capacity strengthening programs and plan for implementation 4. ASEAN programme on food safety • Strengths Competent professional and technical staff at MARD and DARD level Threats • Lack of planning and budgeting for adequate capacity strengthening activities • • Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. extension. inspection. extension. communication Priority gaps in the medium term: research. monitoring. DARD. Identify capacity needs and prioritize gaps 3.279. and information. information. policies. Monitor capacity development Table 19 SWOT Analysis of Capacity Weaknesses • • • • • Relative few food safety specialists Lack of capacity needs assessments and prioritization of gaps Priority gap in the immediate term: capacity for formulation of regulations. policies. and related agencies 2. and strategies Priority gaps in the short term: certification. the subsequent priorities for capacity strengthening are in certification.

rubber. the Malaysia Standard for Crop Commodity Good Agricultural Practices. Malaysia has developed the MS-GAP. In the initial stage. 286.7 Relevant Experiences of Other Countries in Food Safety 7. 283. 285. The Department of Agriculture has extension officers in every state to assist farmers in the implementation of the programme. including costs of sampling and testing of the soil. and flowers and ornamentals. Based on the framework of the generic standard. Apart from SALM. water and produce for pesticide residue and heavy metals. pepper. 281. fruit and vegetables.1 Malaysia20 280. both SALM and MS-GAP coexist. 76 “minor must”. 288. The Department of Agriculture provides free service to farmers for the implementation of the programme. SALM-certified farms are also eligible for the Malaysia Best Logo. food and non-food. administered by FAMA. The farmers are assisted with specific pre-formatted checklists to manage record keeping on the farm. and 57 “encouraged criteria”. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 80 . The MS-GAP is administered and managed by SIRIM-QAS. based on farm visits to evaluate compliance with certain criteria grouped into “major must”. SALM-registered farms tend to be given preference as suppliers in local market but price premium are usually not obtained. “minor must”. 282. SALM was revised in 2005. the year that MS-GAP was issued. eventually it may adopt MS-GAP to supplement SALM. In order to gain market acceptance and recognition. Both SALM and MS-GAP make reference to EurepGAP and could be benchmarked against EurepGAP. and “encouraged” categories”. The revised SALM has 29 “major must”. Farms conforming with 100% of “major must” and 95% of “minor must” receive a certificate of official recognition. technical subcommittees have been drafting specific GAP standards on behalf of the Department of Standards Malaysia (DSM) for seven major crops: oil palm. Thailand and Viet Nam Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. which is accredited by the Department of Standards Malaysia. The scheme is implemented by the Department of Agriculture. This is a generic standard applicable to all crops. the Federal Agricultural Marketing Authority. cocoa. The standard for fruit and vegetables contains several references to the EurepGAP. SALM will need to be upgraded. though it will continue to conduct internal 20 Drawn from UNCTAD 2007. herbs. SALM certification is provided by auditors trained by the Department of Agriculture. The revised SALM takes into account of SALM. 287. In 2002. 284. in order to allow the MS-GAP certification and auditing procedures to be put in place. Challenges and Opportunities Arising from Private Standards on Food Safety and Environment for Exporters of Fresh Fruit and Vegetables in Asia: Experiences of Malaysia. the National Certification body. Malaysia developed the SALM (Farm Accreditation Scheme of Malaysia) for quality assurance of fruit and vegetables. The Department of Agriculture is pursuing an agreement with SIRIM-QAS to outsource third-party auditing and certification.

However. As of now. Different types of incentives (training. Viet Nam might need to develop National Standards for good agricultural practices. The logo is not recognized outside of Malaysia. the entire Q-GAP certification process is carried out by the Government. not too aware of food safety. The Best Malaysia logo provides a market entry preference within Malaysia. Challenges and Opportunities Arising from Private Standards on Food Safety and Environment for Exporters of Fresh Fruit and Vegetables in Asia: Experiences of Malaysia. 3. which pays special attention to food safety. Malaysia is paying all the costs of testing for farms wishing to be certified. which was developed using a bottom-up approach. it should not be forgotten that the majority of farmers are small. from setting the standards and serving as the national regulatory body. and. but not a price premium.2 Thailand21 290. particularly those 21 Drawn from UNCTAD 2007. 292. The experience of Malaysia suggests that certification by auditors of Department of Agriculture is not sustainable. Such an approach creates doubts as to the independence and credibility of the system and the certification. Thailand has responded proactively to such challenges through the development of GAP programme (the Q-GAP). infrastructure. 7. Even though this provides incentives to farmers. Farmers who fulfill the national GAP programme can label their products using the GAP logo: the “Q” quality mark.auditing. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 81 . 6. For exports and commercial farmers. at least they do not see price premium on being certified with SALM. Third party auditors will enhance the credibility and also effectiveness of the system. and not convinced that GAP pays off. issuing the certification. Lessons for Vietnam 1. Thailand is the largest ASEAN FFV exporters and its exports face increasingly stringent food safety requirements in external markets. the more demanding requirements make more sense. which is driven by the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives (MOAC). but is not a national standard (TCVN) approved by the National Standards Authority. Currently. 291. So. not well educated. 2. 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 system is not sustainable and not applicable to a country like Viet Nam with a much larger population of smallholders. partial cost subsidization of testing) and gradual reduction of subsidies might be more appropriate. In addition to the national GAP scheme. Benchmarking of national standards to EurepGAP is a useful practice to upgrade standards to international standards 4. Thailand and Viet Nam Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. to providing advisory services. finally. VIETGAP is the equivalent of SALM. carrying out farm inspection. This will reduce the burden on the Department and will also increase the credibility of SALM. 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. 5. 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. 289. a regional GAP programme in the western part of Thailand (known as the “Western GAP cluster”) exists.

296. the entire certification process is carried out by the Government. the Department of Agriculture requires that additional chemical and pest control regulations be met. “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). finally. and. are in accordance with the requirements of national or equivalent GAP protocols. 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). “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. Farmers who fulfill the GAP requirements can label their products with the GAP logo. Q-GAP still falls short of the requirements of EurepGAP. issuing the certification (Department of Agriculture). Banned chemicals must not be used. 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. 297. Thailand has only one GAP logo. which is a third-party certification system owned by the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives. 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. since the staff Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. The Ministry of Agriculture and Co-operatives has authorized the National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food Standards (NBACFS). “Q” Fumigation (for sulphur dioxide).58 the national regulatory body for food safety established in 2002. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 82 . are more interested in certification against the EurepGAP standard or other schemes with broad buyer recognition. which involves setting the standards and serving as a national regulatory body (National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food Standards). Further. “Q” GMP (for packhouses). such an approach causes doubts as to the independence and credibility of the system and the certification. 294.g. “Q” HACCP (for processing establishments). The GAP scheme originally covered 29 crops. among other things. of which 12 are main export crops. Currently. it takes a long time to get the certification. The modern retail sector may increasingly start to demand higher level third-party certification for the domestic market. 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. at present. providing advisory services and farm inspection. 295. As a result. Moreover. and that its production process and postharvest activities (e. The GAP standard requires that instructions on labels and/or instructions/recommendations of the Department of Agriculture must be followed. In some cases. and for export-oriented production. 293.exporting to the EU. 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. only chemicals allowed by trading partners may be used. It indicates that a product is of high quality and safe for consumers. the Q quality mark. The records of GAP certification makes it easier for growers/exporters to meet the Department of Agriculture’s requirements for FFV exports. GAP certification indicates. the latter based on the Q Good Manufacturing Practice programme. and thus avoid multiple certification requirements. However. that agrochemicals are properly recorded and used. packhouses). 298. provided that their products are found to have conformed with food safety requirements for three months).

this responsibility is often transferred to the Department of Agriculture. and • Coordinate food inspection activities across ministries. as well as quality and GAP issues specific to each crop. Laurian Unnevehr and Nancy Hirschhorn.3 Other Countries 301. The Bureau is within the Ministry of Agriculture and is separate from other technical departments. 300. Lessons for Viet Nam 1. 4. • Establish standards for advisers and inspectors. A progressive food safety regulatory system includes22: • • • • • 22 Consolidated authority with ability to address the food system from farm to table and to move resources towards the most important sources of risk. The Department of Agriculture needs to provide internal training to its staff to prepare them to work as GAP advisers and inspectors. Make VIETGAP part of a supply chain certification system. 7. establish common inspection checklists 6. and retailers. In particular there is a need to: • Outsource advisory and inspection services to independent government agencies or nongovernmental entities. both in the Department of Crop Production and in the Agricultural Extension Center. Designing Effective Food Safety Interventions in Developing Countries. exporters. • Set up a monitoring system for private/independent advisers and inspectors. To this end basic curricula should be developed for them as well as for independent advisers and inspectors. as the experience of the “Western GAP region” in Thailand has shown. Establish regional GAP using a bottom-up approach with the participation of private sector and universities. Recently Thailand has started a training programme in EurepGAP for staff from the Ministry of Agriculture. 2. • Establish common inspection checklists. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 83 . including those in the private sector. 5. Most industrialized countries have a unified Food Law and developing countries can learn from their experiences. Need of training the trainers. This allows a more specialized role for food safety and a better coordination function. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Cooperation with industry and consumers to provide information and education. Use of comparative risk assessment as one criterion for prioritizing public action. An open decision making process that allows stakeholder participation. 3. packhouses. but processors. Use of HACCP (Hazard Analysis of Critical Control Points) principles to promote prevention and industry responsibility in place of prescription and inspection. They should understand the concepts of a quality management system. 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. Establish standards for advisers and inspectors. • Prepare and implement annual work plans for inspection. 299. Appropriate regulations and procedures should complement GAP training. including those in the private sector. while inspectors need to be trained in risk assessment. to improve awareness of VIETGAP and other standards. Outsource advisory and inspection services to independent government and nongovernment entities. including not only farmers.of the Department of Agricultural Extension is insufficiently trained on GAP.

there are still considerable problems regarding food safety (see the recent crisis related to the chemical melamine in milk). is of less guidance to Viet Nam.• Evaluation of public health outcomes from regulation. 302.th/English/index.htm Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.go. Even though China is making progress. As such the China experience. China has recently drafted a national Food Law which is expected to harmonize a plethora of previous regulations. Shaghai however as a unified Food Law which is regarded as very effective. aggravated by the complexities of inter-provincial trade. a situation similar to the one in Viet Nam.doae. http://www. even though in some respect similar to Viet Nam. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 84 .

Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 85 .

8 Recommendations 8.2 Policy and Institutional Development for Food Safety 303.1 Lead Agency at MARD for food safety 307. The area that need to be addressed are: 1.2. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 86 . Inspection. supervising implementation plans. 5. 3. good practices. Important legislation has been introduced related to standards. 306. several departments are playing a role on different aspects of food safety and contribute with their specific technical expertise. Laws on Food Safety. Currently. 8. A National Action Plan for Food Safety has been approved by the Prime Minister in 2006. policies. disseminating standards. Lead Agency at MARD for food safety Establishment of a Food Safety Monitoring System at MARD Establishment of a Food Safety Information and Communication System at MARD Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones Development and Harmonization of Standards Development of Good Practices Incentive Policy for Adoption of Good Practices Institutional Capacity of Key Agencies at MARD and Certification Bodies The following sections analyze and make recommendations in each of these 8 areas. issuing regulations. inspection.1 Options for the leading agency Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.1.2. and action plans. 8. 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). As a result. Considerable regulatory activity pertained to food safety and quality has occurred since the early 2000s. In spite of all these positive developments. 7. 305. monitoring does not happen systematically. and Plant Protection are under preparation. 6. There is a need for clarification of which agency at MARD will be the leading agency for coordinating. policy and regulations are formulated in relative isolation. The main conclusions of the review and analysis could be summarized as follows: 304. 4. communicating and informing about food safety issues. information is scattered. There is however no entry or enquiry point which is responsible for coordinating the efforts of different agencies at MARD involved in food safety. The year 2008 has been declared the Year of Food Safety by the Minister of Agriculture.1 General Framework 8. monitoring. and certification. there are still several issues that need to be addressed both in terms of regulations and institutional capacity. 8. and little efforts at informing and communicating about food safety occurs. 2.

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. and programs related to food safety and implemented by various departments. NAFIQAD on quality monitoring and inspection. NAFIQAD not involved in production. and coordination • Does not have • Creation of new • Limited capacity on resources for institutional structure in an food safety implementation. the Department of Crop Production (DCP) had played a key role on policy formulation (eg VIETGAP).2 Recommendations regarding Lead Agency for Food Safety at MARD Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. so that roles and responsibilities of other departments already involved in various dimensions of food safety will be clearly indicated. planning. already large ministry will • No department has full take time and additional mandate on food safety. 309. • Difficult to coordinate Pros Cons 8. the department is already the lead implementation agency for the CIDA-funded projects on food agricultural products quality development control (FAPQDCP). the leading role of NAFIQAD in food safety still needs to be better defined. 311. standards and VIETGAP and practices. An alternative option would be to create a new department within MARD fully responsible for food safety and quality assurance. accreditation. For example. 312. exports) communication.2. Such a leading role could be either taken up by an existing organization within MARD or by a new organization. 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. similarly to what is the experience of countries like Thailand and Malysia. is the accreditation agency for certification bodies in VIETGAP. Moreover. assurance for fishery information. implementation. 310. and has technical expertise from the central to the provincial level. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 87 . 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 • 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.1. in the case of crops. However.308. resources For example DCP not involved in quality assurance of exports.

Table 21 Elements for the design of a Provincial Food Safety Index Component Sub-component Weight Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. vegetables. soil quality.313. Occasional reports are produced. However. and a monitoring system (however still limited in scope) exists.. The monitoring of the PFSI should be conducted by a research organization independent of implementation organizations. and consumer groups. number of violations of food regulations and gravity of the violations. 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. water quality. 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. The index could be piloted for fruit. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 88 . the VFA under the Ministry of Health is responsible for monitoring food borne diseases and outbreaks. this is not the case at MARD. but regular monitoring activities are seldom occurring. percentage of cases of food-born diseases in total province population. and tea at the provincial level. The reports need also to be interpreted and constitute the basis for an evaluation of current programs and policy implementation. The objective of establishing an index of food safety at the provincial level is to monitor progress in improving food safety for fruit.3 Establishment of a Food Safety Monitoring System at MARD 314. they are not widely publicized.2. 317. Over time. and microbiological testing in a reliable. vegetables. 316. and other departments and agencies within MARD who are involved in food safety. Members of the Standing Committee will be NAFIQAD. regulatory agencies. so that the lessons that could be learnt and the needed actions that could be undertaken are very limited. The index could be built using several indicators of food safety including the area of SAZ. 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. and publicly available monitoring reports. While at the national level.7. 315. the number of certified bodies operating in the province. In order for a monitoring system to be effective. metal content. and timely manner. practically all the regulations reviewed indicate monitoring as a key role and responsibility of agencies involved in food safety. soil analysis.3. As mentioned in section 6. either NAFIQAD or other new department will be fully involved in food safety. 8. chemical residues.1. The recommendation of the consultant is to establish the Food Safety Standing Committee headed by a Vice Minister of MARD. enterprises. When they do occur. the fact is that no system of monitoring for food safety exists at MARD. reliable.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. it needs to be supported by a system of certified laboratories that could undertake key tests for water content. 8. percentage of samples exceeding MRL in samples collected from market places. accurate. DCP. The methodology of building and measuring the index should be developed with the participation of the provinces and stakeholders including farmers. and tea and later expanded to other commodities.

The unit could be the food safety agency recommended in section 8.12. and the news related to food safety. 321.2 Recommendations regarding Establishing Food Monitoring System at MARD 319. and the activities ongoing. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. This information system could be undertaken by ICARD using the www. In case a leading agency for food safety is established at MARD (see section 8. however.4 Establishment of Food Safety Information and Communication Systems at MARD 320.gov. 322.2. the monitoring reports. Develop a methodology and pilot the construction and monitoring of a Provincial Food Safety Index.1).1.2. Regulations establishing an information and communication system at MARD need to be issues. Similarly to the case of a monitoring system. A unit at MARD should be solely responsible for communications pertaining to food safety. so far this has not happen. there is not a unique repository for the regulations related to food safety. the practices. 8.agroviet. the agency could be responsible for a communication system.vn platform. the standards. these efforts remain fragmented and isolated. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 89 .1. Every department has roles and responsibilities to provide information and communication. the projects.Infrastructure Certification Testing Violations Food-borne diseases Consumer confidence Number of packhouses Water treatment units Cold storage capacity Number of certified bodies in good practices Number of farmers following good practices Number of enterprises following good practices Water quality Soil quality MRL Heavy metals Microbiological contamination Number of violation of food safety regulations Gravity of violation of food safety regulations Reported cases of food-borne diseases Outbreaks of food-borne diseases Number of enterprises following GAP Perception of consumers about food safety improvement Price premium on certified safe food 8. Issue a regulation to establish a food safety monitoring system under the responsibility of a unit at MARD. The ensuing budget allocations for the maintenance of these systems need to be planned and allocated. For example.9 and 6. there are not yet at MARD systems for informing and communicating about food safety.2. however.3. the situation is similar. The issues related to information and communication were reviewed in sections 6. the publications. For communication.

1 Recommendations regarding Establishing Food Safety Information and Communication Systems at MARD 323. fruit. that the communities are ultimately responsible for keeping a zone safe.8. In order to be effective.17) provides clear guidelines about the process of developing standards (both national standards TCVN and local standards or TCCS). Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 90 . organic. 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. and tea). 8. 8. 328. There are however.5). 325. 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.4. Issue a new regulation on planning of Safe Agricultural Zones including the participation of communities in developing code of conducts. and the establishment of a monitoring system.1. there are 1718 ha of declared SAZ in the Red River Delat out of 13216 ha.6 Development and Harmonization of Standards 327. the planning of infrastructure.1 Recommendations regarding Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones 326. Criteria for the establishment of SAZ and guidelines to the DARD for establishing these zones have not yet been developed. several new standards that need to be issued. their approval. About 30% of total standards have been harmonized and in the case of agriculture 47% have been harmonized. and issuance. According to data from DCP (see section 6. 330. The process of development of new standards is constrained by a weak capacity. There has been considerable activity related to the planning of safe agricultural zones. The planning of establishment of new standards is assisted by STAMEQ. Regulations on planning of SAZ need to be issued. the regulations will have to be accompanied by a parallel investment in SAZ through the provision of appropriate infrastructure and monitoring systems. The target is to harmonize 50% of the standards in all the Viet Nam sectors by 2010. 329.5. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. The process of harmonization with international standards as part of the TBT Agreement is also ongoing. The involvement of communities in establishing a SAZ should be part of the planning practices.5 Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones 324. 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. However. etc). Similar clear guidelines are for Technical Regulations (QCVN and QCDP). processing. The Law on Standards approved in 2206 (see section 5. either for specific products (for example each of the specific vegetables. there is not a clear definition of a safe agricultural zone. 8. processes (postharvest.1.

demonstrations. Food safety and quality assurance methods are still relatively new concepts for the majority of farmers and enterprises in Viet Nam. Yet.1.6.7. A Standing Committee on Good Practices should be established to review existing VIETGAP and recommend changes. Establish an action plan for the development of standards to ensure food quality and safety and improve capacity to carry out the action plan. 334. In the future.1 Recommendations regarding Development of Good Practices 335. 8. etc.8 Incentive Policy for Adoption of Good Practices 336. 8. training of trainers. 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).1 Recommendations regarding Development and Harmonization of Standards 331. Comparable estimates for domestic market opportunities still need to be estimated. 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. new VIETGAP will need to be developed for additional commodities group and specific products. testing of practices. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. The legislation about good practices needs to be accompanied by implementation arrangements to ensure that the good practices are disseminated and adopted. Issue regulations to develop existing VIETGAP and formalize a Standing Committee for the Development of VIETGAP. dissemination activities. food safety and quality improvements will be crucial. 8. Critical to the development of good practice is a well functioning system of accreditation and certification. particularly in training and auditing skills. The national accreditation agency and certification bodies need support to improve their capacity. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 91 . In terms of food-born diseases only. Establish a road map to ensure a gradual convergence of national good practices with internationally recognized good practices. long-term health problems. Focus on the development of standards for the specific products in fruit.1. There are other accreditation systems and certification bodies for good practices under EUREPGAP. These implementation arrangements include development of manuals and guidelines. North America. the costs to society in terms of foodborn diseases.8.7 Development of Good Practices 332. FRESHCARE. For these plans to be realized. The DCP is the only accreditation agency for VIETGAP. and tea that contribute to improve safety and quality. Issue regulations for developing new VIETGAP.14). training of farmers. and East Asia are quite high. but are likely to be high as well.13) and tea (see 5. 333. GLOBAL GAP. 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. Foregone income opportunities to access high-value markets in Europe. 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. vegetables. etc.

policies. technical assistance. and the related capacity in planning. Capacity of monitoring and inspecting food safety from pre-production to postproduction levels Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. 339. some incentives could be provided to accelerate the 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. access to credit. and agricultural diversification.8. the lack of knowledge. testing. Capacity of developing. These incentives can be grouped into two sets: direct incentives to operators (farmers and enterprises) and indirect incentives. Capacity of developing standards and harmonizing those with international standards (within the framework of Agreement of TBT) 5. Traditionally. and access to credit. 8.337. and audit certified bodies 3. demonstrating. A thorough capacity needs assessment has yet to be conducted.9 Institutional Capacity of Key Agencies at MARD. provide training. Currently. capacity building and strengthening activities are proceeding in an uncoordinated manner and without a clear plan of action. and indirect incentives through improvement of infrastructure (eg for building safe agricultural zones. and regulations. and Certification Bodies 342. Labs. Indirect incentives include improved infrastructure. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 92 . Given the novelty of the concepts and several constraints to the adoption of good practices such as the high costs of investment. 344. GHP. MARD and DARDs have focused their activities on food security. 338. The new concepts of food safety and quality are gradually becoming part of the institutional vocabulary of the ministry. and information. 340. rewards to best performers. an inadequate infrastructure.1. yield improvement. These areas include: 1. 343. Capacity of planning for Safe Agricultural Zones 6. and information. technical assistance. and regulations 2. safe stalls in fruits and vegetable markets). monitoring.1 Recommendations regarding Incentives Policies for Adoption of Good Practices 341. and disseminating good practices (GAPs. Direct incentives include reduced costs of certification. Capacity of staff and institutional capacity of agencies to formulate strategies. and a relatively low awareness of the concepts of food safety and quality. tax holidays. GMP) 7. matching grants. policies. and implementation are still limited. Capacity of certification bodies (both public and private) to train and audit 4. 8. etc. Capacity of accreditation agency (DCP) to certify. A rough estimate by the MOH indicates that 70% of total food-born diseases are attributable to microbiological factors and 30% to chemical factors. It is however possible already to indicate the general areas that needs improvement. matching grants for investment in good practices. 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. Capacity of formulating strategies.

8. management.9. Capacity of informing and communicating effectively about food safety issues 9. communication. the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST). monitoring. Assess scope and plans of ongoing capacity building projects.1 RATIONALE 347.1. namely (i) who will take the lead in coordinating the efforts of various departments. and (iii) how the food safety management system will be managed. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 93 . Most notable among this projects is the CIDA-funded Food and Agricultural Products Quality Development Control Project (FAPQDCP) implemented by the Université de Montréal. etc .8. inspection.10 PILOT CROP FOOD SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (CFSMS) 8. various departments are mandated with monitoring (for example DCP and NAFIQAD) and all departments are mandated with communication and policy formulation. Conduct an in-depth capacity needs assessment for food safety and quality improvement of MARD agencies and DARDS. but requires considerable input from MARD. Other projects. (ii) who will take the lead in monitoring. For example. and degree programs. The issue of coordination is both internal and external to MARD. It is not clear however who will take the lead in coordination and how various efforts will be harmonized. study tours. MARD needs to coordinate its activities on food safety with other key ministries. the development of national food standards is managed by STAMEQ. Externally. zoonotic diseases (SDC).1 Recommendations regarding Institutional Capacity for Food Safety 346. 23 See chapter 5. SPS (EU). 349. Internally at MARD. A number of regulations23 indicate functions and responsibilities of various departments of MARD related to policy formulation. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. and development of standards and practices related to food safety. accreditation. Another example is the communication campaigns of VFA and MOH on food safety and hygiene. FAO (regional program). Formulate a 5year plan for capacity building. certification programs.10. Moreover. the Ministry of Industry and Trade (MOIT). 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. JICA. 8. Capacity in Risk Analysis 345. and with various key organizations such as the Viet Nam Food Administration (VFA) and STAMEQ. the Ministry of Planning and Investment (MPI). 8. much smaller in terms of scope and funding include the capacity building program on phytosanitary factors (ASEAN/AUSAID).1. Different projects already exist that contribute to improving capacity in food safety and quality. Establish a coordination body for capacity building activities. The existing regulations however do not provide sufficient clarity on three key institutional issues.1 Coordination 348. mostly notably the Ministry of Health (MOH).10. Conduct capacity building activities including training.

division of responsibility related to monitoring is unclearly defined between DCP.2 Monitoring 351. no food safety units exist. with NAFIQAD in charge of supervising specialized monitoring activities by other departments. as such inspection has a policing function. As such it does not have a policing function.10. and tools to carry out a monitoring system for food safety are not in place. However. Even though the department has qualified staff for quality control. there are only 3 staff at DCP involved in these activities.1. however. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 94 . there is the need of having external monitoring. 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. operational structures have to be established. Staff engaged in food safety are usually involved in other activities and not fully specialized in food safety. For example. both internal and external coordination will be limited. Specific resources. monitoring should be undertaken to assess progress towards policy objectives. monitoring and inspections of markets is unclearly defined. For an effective management of food safety system to emerge. However. while the Department itself is charged with numerous functions and responsibilities including policy formulation. 8. between DARD and Department of Health. At MARD.1. either at the central (MARD) or at the provincial level (DARD). accreditation of certification bodies. 8. DPP. The situation at NAFIQAD is no better. the objectives of monitoring and inspection are different. particularly at the provincial level. communication. promotion of safe agricultural zones.10. Monitoring is usually conducted as internal monitoring (each department monitoring itself). monitoring and inspection.unless these campaigns reach the farmers and are translated into good practices to assure a safe food supply. where for example one external unit independent of implementation is responsible for monitoring. 350. In the absence of a body responsible for coordination at MARD. This indication of responsibility however does not translate into an actual system of monitoring. Inspection reports provide an input into the monitoring system. and tea have been established and a body of related regulations has been developed. Existing regulations indicate monitoring as a responsibility of all departments at MARD. the effectiveness of these efforts will remain limited. policies. Often monitoring is confounded with inspection. 354. but provides an information basis for introducing adjustments in current programs. and regulations. there is still a dearth of staff with expertise in VIETGAP and crop food safety. On one hand. vegetables. for example. particularly in the fishery sector. On the other hand. the monitoring system should include assessment of other variables other than those related to violations of norms. 353. 352. budgets. One example of indicators relevant to a monitoring system is illustrated in Table 21. standards and practices for safe production of fruit. and training. similarly.3 Management of Food Safety 355. Currently. While internal monitoring is essential. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. inspection is undertaken to assess compliance with existing regulations and enforcing those regulations through administrative and legal measures against violations. and NAFIQAD.

3 VISION 359.10. The proposed solutions address the problem of coordination. Creation of new staff positions for Food Safety Specialists (at DCP/MARD and DARD) and Food Safety Facilitators at district and commune level 11. and operationalization of food safety management. monitoring. (ii) legislation to give authority and enforceability of the system. retailers. Establishment of a Food Safety Monitoring Division at NAFIQAD for overall crop food safety monitoring 10. and importers are able to provide buyers an independent verification that a recognized program of safe agricultural products production.10. (ii) assigning leadership to NAFIQAD in establishing a monitoring system for the Ministry. 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. processing. 8. exporters. The food safety monitoring division for crops will be based at NAFIQAD. The system involves (i) a set of essential elements which are common to all internationally compatible food safety systems. and tea) the piloted system for food safety discussed here is only related to crops. processed. including WTO.8. not for the complexity of overall food safety issues. 358. wholesalers. respectively. The system will meet food safety requirements of domestic consumers and international trading partners. and the food safety divisions and sub-divisions mentioned above refer to units within DCP and DARD.2 PROPOSED SOLUTIONS 356. Capacity building of staff involved in the crop food safety management system 12. The proposed solutions include: 7. and distribution practices has been followed. handling. The CFSMS provides assurance of the safety of agro-products. which eventually might lead to a specialized department at MARD or the strengthening of functions and responsibilities of NAFIQAD. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. The system benefits both consumers and producers. Establishment of a Standing Committee on Food Safety headed by a Vice Minister of MARD with Secretariat at NAFIQAD 8. and management by (i) establishing a standing committee on food safety to coordinate the work of the departments. The vision for the crop food safety management system (CFSMS) is a regulatory and management system that assures that safe agricultural products are produced. Producers. The project investments will allow piloting a system that could eventually be institutionalized within MARD and DARDs. The QSEAP offers the opportunity to contribute to the establishment of an effective food safety system at MARD by addressing the issues of coordination.4 COMPONENTS OF THE CFSMS 360. Given the scope of the QSEAP (focused on fruit. through certification to mutually agreed and recognized standards. vegetables. processors. Review and formulation of policy and regulations for food safety 357. and (iii) using the comparative advantage and experience of DCP by giving to DCP the leadership in several functions related to crop food safety.10. The proposed solutions is specific for the crop food safety management system. and distributed. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 95 . and (ii) a management structure of agencies with clearly defined responsibilities. monitoring.

Within MARD different departments have functions and responsibilities for various elements of the CFSMS. The QSEAP will provide funding and investments that address the 7 elements above. Key to the development of legislation is a comprehensive Food Safety Law that completes and harmonizes the existing large body of regulations.2 Legislation 363. 9. coordination is provided by the proposed Standing Committee on Food Safety (SCFS). 14.1 Elements 361. 362.10.3 Management Structure 365. 13. 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. 10.4. Education. Standards Authority – It has overall responsibility for issuing standards (eg STAMEQ). 11. 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. 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. cooperatives. There are 7 essential elements in a food safety system: 8. 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. Monitoring of: (i) Certification Bodies to verify they are meeting the legal requirements. Standards and Codes of Practices which prevent or minimize potential food safety hazards. Certification that entities have met the Standards or follow the Codes of Practices. Food Administration Authority – It has overall responsibility for food safety (eg Viet Nam Food Administration) 10.8. 8.10. Information. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Inspection and Auditing of entities to verify they continue to meet the Standards. Policies and regulations are clearly defined to provide authority to the management agencies and protect the rights and integrity of consumers and commercial entities. In particular. Inspection and Auditing – It includes laboratories certified ISO 17025 and professionals or companies trained and competent to ISO 9000. based on the food safety hazard analysis critical control point (HACCP) method.4. 8. 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. Quacert) 12. The following is typical of many countries in the world: 9. (ii) the food safety products in the open market place. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 96 .4.10. 364. The management structure is defined in the legislation. Certification – It includes Accreditation Bodies (eg DCP for crops) and Certification Bodies (eg Enasa. 12. Research to identify the most suitable technologies and socioeconomic mechanisms to promote food safety. and enterprises) comply with food safety Standards and Codes of Practices. Internal Control Systems to ensure that certified business units (including farmer groups.

Education. 4. development of standards. MOIT. 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. (iv) accreditation. Figure 4 provides a graphical illustration. and accreditation of certification bodies (the Department of Crop Production). and Communication Bodies – Public or private organizations that disseminate information and provide access to knowledge to improve food safety 15. NAFIQAD. A Food Safety Division is established at DCP with staff responsible in the five areas of (i) policy. 8. and any other laboratory authorized by DCP. and (v) information and communication. and STAMEQ. 5. DCP has lead responsibility for policy formulation related to crop food safety. (iv) operations. Information. Figure 4 provides a graphical illustration. district.1 Central Level . 8. 7.MARD 1. and testing carried out by national and regional laboratories under DCP.10. information. Research Organizations – Public or private organizations that provide research on socioeconomic and technological aspects of food safety. (ii) standards. and commune level responsible for the management of the food safety system and facilitation of safe food production. The next section provides a model for the management structure at MARD that is expected to address the issues of coordination. MPI. and specialized positions at the central. VFA. visits. monitoring. Information. and (v) communication. The proposed Crop Food Safety Management System includes a coordination body at MARD (the Standing Committee on Food Safety). accreditation and monitoring of VIETGAP certification bodies. and management discussed at the beginning of this note. (ii) statistics. monitoring and inspection. The committee is headed by a Vice Minister of MARD and NAFIQAD provides the Secretariat for the Standing Committee. 3. Monitoring Body to manage and coordinate monitoring conducted by different units 14. 6. Indicative components and subcomponents of this Index are indicated in Table 21. communication and information among different departments of MARD and ensures coordination with other agencies outside of MARD including MOH.5 MODEL OF MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE AT MARD 367. 2. Monitoring of food crop safety is based on surveys. Figure 3 provides a graphical illustration. training of other departments and DARDs staff in VIETGAP and other standards. a department leading in policy formulation. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 97 . and Communication Division is established at NAFIQAD with staff responsible in the five areas of (i) methodologies. NAFIQAD has overall responsibility for managing the monitoring system including the development of a Provincial Food Safety Index. (iii) evaluation and reporting. development of standards and codes of practices.13. (iii) monitoring and inspection. NAFIQAD has lead responsibility in establishing and managing the monitoring system for food safety and an information and communication system. and communication (NAFIQAD). Other relevant department such as Department of Plant Protection (DPP) and Department of Science and Technology (DST) carry out activities in policy Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. a department leading in monitoring. 366. provincial. MOST. development of standards and manuals for VIETGAP and other standards.5. DPP. A Food Safety Monitoring.10. Standing Committee on Food Safety (SCFS) coordinates policy formulation.

This involve ensuring that individual farmers maintain records required by the standards. Some of the staff will be trained and certified as VIETGAP inspectors. 8. and communication. The QSIAP will provide capacity building for the Food Safety Specialists at the province level.5. Services will include training. training. The QSEAP will build capacity of facilitators to provide services to farmers groups and cooperatives engaged in safe food production of fruit. and facilitating the production of all certification compliance. standards development. maintaining a register of farmer records. As the demand for certification increases and knowledge about safe food production becomes more widespread. Positions for Food Safety Specialists will be established. promotion of safe agricultural zones (SAZ). conducting an internal audit of the certified entity. ensuring all Corrective Action Requests by the Certification Body are complied in a timely fashion. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 98 .2 Province Level – DARD 1.10. outputs and certified sales for auditing purposes. 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.2) 8. NAFEC carries out extension programs for food safety.4 Sustainability of the System 368. The sustainability and replicability of the system beyond the project life depend on the following: 1. liaising with certification bodies and buyers. and guiding them on any corrective actions. (ii) have the Agricultural Extension Worker to take the additional function of Food Safety Facilitator. The proposed system is a pilot that could be institutionalized over time. 5. and facilitation of the establishment of internal control systems at business units (farmer groups and cooperatives) engaged in safe food production. 8. Positions for Food Safety Facilitators will be created at the district and at the commune level. A comprehensive program of capacity building of staff will be undertaken by the QSIAP (see sub=component 1. accreditation of certification bodies.5.3 District and Commune Level 1. several services of facilitators will be provided by the private sector. quality assurance and traceability documents. including monthly consolidated records of all farm inputs. 8. monitoring. prior to each audit by the Certification Body. and (iii) use Facilitators from the district or province level.5. 2. All these activities will be coordinated through the SCFS. 2. Figure 6 provides a graphical illustration). conducting regular monitoring and spot checks of member farmers. and at least once per year. At the commune level different options could be considered: (i) create a new position. alternatively the services could be provided by the public sector based Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. and tea. vegetables. 4.10. 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. ( 3. monitoring. 6.formulation. and facilitating the establishing Internal Control Systems for food safety.10.

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). This is the practice in most countries. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 99 . inspection. There is a strong rationale for them to continue to be publicly funded. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. The pilot will allow to understand what services could be delivered for a fee and which services will still require public funding. 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. monitoring. as they provide public goods. information and communication about food safety will increase and will require an adequately sourced public sector. 2. The need of policies and regulations.on a fee. certification. As Viet Nam moves towards middle income country status and beyond.

Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 100 . DST. Information and Communication Division 1 Division … Methodologies Statistics Evaluation and Reporting Operations Informationand Communication Figure 4 The Division of Food Safety Monitoring. Information and Communication Sub-Division of Food Safety SubDivision … District Food Safety Facilitators Other Specialists Commune Food Safety Facilitators Other Facilitators Figure 3 The Crop Food Safety Management System NAFIQAD Division Food Safety Monitoring. Information and Commnication at NAFIQAD Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. ICD.MARD Standing Committee on Food Safety Head: Vice Minister Members: DCP. DPP. NAFEC Department of Crop Production NAFIQAD Division of Food Safety Division … DARD Division of Food Safety Monitoring. NAFIQAD.

and regulatory framework to assure that safe agricultural products are produced.Department of Crop Production Division of Food Safety Division 1 Division … Policy Standards Accreditation and Certification Monitoring and Inspection Information and Communication Figure 5 The Division of Food Safety at DCP Safe Food Business Units Farmer groups. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 101 . quality assurance. and distribution practices has been followed. and traders are better able to provide buyers an independent verification that a recognized program of safe agricultural production. and traceability documents • Help gain certification • Train farmers • Help maintaining ICS • Liaise with CB and buyers • Maintain register of farmer records Contractual relation Facilitation relation Figure 6 Food Safety Facilitators at District and Commune Level 8. processed. Activities. handling. management. and distributed.13. Targets. The objective of this component is to improve the institutional. As an outcome. Cooperatives Food Safety Facilitators (FSS) Certification Bodies Buyers Internal Control System (ICS) • Farmer Records • Internal auditing • Certification compliance.Outputs.11 Policy and Institutional Development for Food Safety at the central level . and Monitoring 369. producers. Keeping in line with the Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Inputs. 370. processing. The design and monitoring framework of the Policy and Institutional Component is presented in Annex 9. processors.

2: Capacity building 372. (ix) improve planning and management of safe agricultural zones (SAZ). and certification. processors. accreditation. This will include an assessment of the consistency of regulations with policies and strategies. Sub-component 1. (v) design and test the establishment of a Province Food Safety Index (PFSI) and an agro-product safety information and communication system. and strategies for ensuring agro-product safety and quality in Viet Nam will be undertaken. review and development of standards. (iii) strengthen the capacity of supporting staff to the lead body for food safety coordination within MARD (the proposed Standing Committee on Food Safety). inspection. and (3) Pilot a Crop Food Safety Management System (CFSMS) in order to facilitate the coordination. and harmonized to facilitate certification. 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. (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.scope of the project. and communication. district and commune 24 See Appendix on Regulations Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. and strategies will form the basis for the formulation of new regulations. (ii) identification of lead agencies for different aspects of food safety and establishment of a food safety system from central to local level. 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. and strategies for improving safety and quality of fruit. MARD has traditionally being focused on improving productivity and accelerating agricultural diversification. and disseminate good agricultural practices. and monitoring by concerned agencies as well as allow producers. monitoring. and tea. and (x) improve capacity of laboratories in testing and risk analysis. and communication systems. food safety refers to fruit. Current capacity at MARD and DARD to meet these more complex standards is low and the capacity needs are high. and management of food safety from the central (MARD) to the commune level. (iv) strengthen the lead agencies for monitoring and certification for agro-product quality and safety (NAFIQAD and DCP).1: Review and formulation of policies and regulations. policies. and traders to easily conform with these regulations and with international food quality and safety standards. The review and formulation of policies and regulations will address the following issues: (i) coordination within MARD for food safety. (x) improve capacity to test. This implies a considerable effort in capacity building of agencies at MARD. and (vi) incentives policies for certification. (viii) improve inspection. (iv) planning of safe agricultural zones (SAZ). The role of MARD in food safety has been limited in the past to pesticides control. monitoring. laboratory analysis. 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. (iii) establishment of monitoring. (2) Capacity building and strengthening of agencies and institutions responsible for policy formulation. 371. Activities under this subcomponent will (i) facilitate the development and completion of policies and regulations on food safety and quality. (vii) further develop VIETGAP and other standards for agro-product safety and quality. vegetables. and tea. policies. accreditation and certification. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 102 . A detailed review of existing decrees. these will be reviewed. policies. demonstrate. vegetables. inspection. and identification of requirements for further regulations. The review and assessment of existing regulations. A Fund for Promotion of Certification Bodies will be established and managed by DCP on a competitive basis. Sub-component 1. enforcement. With over 200 food safety regulations over the past years24. (v) development of standards. These staff will in turn conduct training of trainers at the province. information. consolidated. (ii) strengthen the lead agency for crop food safety within MARD (the Department of Crop Production).

3. 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. 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. processing. Establishment of a pilot Crop Food Safety Management System (CFSMS) from the central level of MARD to the commune level for fruit.11. and trading of fruit. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. district. vegetables. monitoring. and (4) identification of staff to reassign or recruit for the positions of Food Safety Specialists and Food Safety Facilitators. A Crop Food Safety Management System (CFSMS) will be piloted in order to facilitate the coordination. and tea. accreditation of certification bodies.2. Sub-component 1. certification bodies. and management of food safety from the central level (MARD) to the commune level25. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 103 .2 Output 1: Improved regulatory framework and coordination for state management of safety and quality of fruit.level. This output aims at improving the regulatory framework and coordination for state management of safety and quality of fruit. 1. The sets of activities under this output consist of 1.1 Activities for Output 1 374. and tea 8. vegetables. 1. The activities in this component include: (1) establishment of Standing Committee on Food Safety headed by Vice Ministry and Secretariat provided by NAFIQAD.2. and tea 2.11.1 List of outputs 1. provincial.2. (iii) a lead department for policy formulation.2.2. development of standards. 25 Review of existing regulations Regulation of the piloting of a CFSMC Planning of SAZ Establishment of monitoring system unit See Appendix on CFSMS. In addition staff from 100 certified organizations and 20 laboratories will also be trained. and (iv) specialized positions at the central.4. 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. and communication about crop food safety (DCP). Improved regulatory framework and coordination of state agencies involved in the management of food quality and safety of fruit. 8. and laboratories involved in the implementation of quality and safe food production. vegetables. Strengthened capacity of state agencies. (ii) a lead department for monitoring (NAFIQAD).2. vegetables. (3) establishment of units within DCP for food safety.1. (2) establishment of units within NAFIQAD for Food Safety Monitoring. 8.11. and tea. vegetables. 1. and tea.3: Management of Crop Food Safety System 373. 3.

1. Every agency is responsible for providing information. Activity 1. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 104 . 377.7. and make recommendations about the time sequence in which various regulations should be formulated. 1. The objective of this review is to assess the consistency of regulations. Activitiy 1. Technical assistance and advisory services will be needed to facilitate the planning of SAZ.6 . test.Develop policies and regulations for the establishment of information system.Develop policies and regulations for planning of SAZ. Development of standards 1. Activity 1.1. Activity 1. 379. but no single agency coordinates and ensures that Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. and strategy to ensure food safety and quality in Viet Nam. Technical assistance and advisory services will ensure that a true information system for food safety and quality emerges at MARD. which may be explicitly or implicitly stated.Design and Implementation of Provincial Food Safety Index. Technical assistance and advisory services will be required to support the formulation of the regulations. While there are procedures and expertise for land use planning. 381.2. This activity consists in a detailed review of the existing regulations.2. 1.2. 378. Technical assistance will facilitate the establishment of such a unit at NAFIQAD. policies.3 . Incentive policy 375. Activity 1. including roles and responsibilities for the coordination body and the lead agencies at MARD on different aspects of food safety.1 Review of existing regulations. its roles and responsibility. Activity 1. The piloting of the proposed crop food safety management system (see sub-component 1.2.10.2.1. Similar situation as in the monitoring system.1. While all the agencies at MARD are responsible for monitoring. Regulations to ensure that the pilot phase of a PFSI becomes institutionalized will need to accompany the design and implementation of the PFSI. Activity 1.6. The document will be the basis for planning the formulation of regulations. 376. and regulations about safe agricultural zones. 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.5 .1.3) will require the formulation of appropriate regulations. standards.1. including agricultural land.9. Piloting of Provincial Food Safety Index Establishment of information system Establishment of communication system Development of VIETGAPs and establishment of Standing Committee on Good Practices 1.2. there are not yet procedures. 1. 380. policies.5. Every agency is responsible for communication.7 . no specific agency or unit is responsible for monitoring food safety and quality regularly and effectively.1. Similar situation as in the monitoring system. The review and its recommendation will then be submitted to MARD for approval. and formulate implementation arrangements for the establishment of a PFSI.1.Develop policies and regulations for the Establishment of communication system.Develop policies and regulations for the establishment of monitoring system. Technical assistance will be needed to design.8. but no single agency coordinates and ensures that information is systematically organized and provided.2 – Regulation for the piloting of crop food safety management system at MARD. identify the needs for further regulations. Regulations are the outcome of policies and strategies.4 . and strategies related to food safety. and the institutional framework to accompany a monitoring system for food quality and safety.

10 . profit and losses) for the past 2 years or since they have become Certification Bodies or Certified Organizations Having a business plan on how to utilize the grant Selection criteria For each of the following criteria. or for specific products within each of the three groups of commodities (fruit. 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.1. Box 1. MARD is in the process of implementing the existing VIETGAP. organizations have to provide evidence about: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) (viii) Having being accredited as national Certification Bodies for VIETGAP or having been certified for VIETGAP Being in good legal standing and compliance with their tax obligations In the case of certification bodies: having certified at least 5 different business units (including farmer groups and cooperatives) in VIETGAP In the case of certified organizations: having at least 100 members in the certified organizations Having human resource capacity to undertake certification and a human resources development plan Having a business plan to expand their operations Financial statements (assets and liabilities. An incentive fund to promote emergence of Certification Bodies will be established and administered by DCP on a competitive basis (see Box 1).1. New VIETGAP might have to be formulated for either different groups of commodities. Technical assistance will facilitate the review and formulation of standards for specific products and processes within the fruit. A revision of the existing ones and a formulation of new ones might also be needed. and tea) for which VIETGAP have already been established. Activity 1. After the development of the first good practices for fruit. vegetables. vegetables. This is the area where considerable inputs in terms of technical and advisory services will be require to formulate incentive policies. Activity 1. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 105 .Incentive Policy.Development of standards. the selection committee will establish a weight and each candidate Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. 383.communication is systematically organized and provided. Eligibility criteria In order to apply to the grant. The experience of other countries and organizations involved in good practices should be considered. In the case of tea. Technical assistance and advisory services will ensure that a true communication system for food safety and quality emerges at MARD. and tea groups. including certification and lab testing subsidies that will facilitate the emergence of a large number of certifying bodies and certified organizations.8 . and tea. 382. Technical assistance and advisory services will be needed to ensure that VIETGAP is reviewed and improved over time. There are dozens of different fruit and vegetables that might require the establishment of standards. The implementation will pose new issues to consider and perhaps lead to revisions of the VIETGAP. 384. vegetables. there are already 28 TCVN.Development and review of VIETGAPs. Activity 1. A VIETGAP Standards Committee will review annually the progress on VIETGAP and make recommendations.1.9 .

A comprehensive and readily accessible set of regulations for the implementation of food safety and quality of fruit. Food safety monitoring system. regulations. Awarded candidates will be publicly announced. c.11.2 Targets for Output 1 7. price information. organizing yearly conference on food safety Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. communication. including organic production) 11. 8. Information system maintaining website with all the relevant information on food safety at MARD such as standards. and tea established a. vegetables. Standing Committee on Food Safety headed by Vice Minister of MARD for food quality and safety established with Secretariat provided by NaFIQAD 9. A minimum score of 700 will be required to be awarded a grant. and communication system for fruit. market news. Monitoring system producing regular quarterly reports based on survey and testing conducted by an adequate number of well functioning laboratories. information system. Decisions about allocation of funds will be taken on a semi-annual basis.will be scored. vegetables. trade data. GAPs. 10 different types of fruit. A consistent and readily available set of good practices (VIETGAP) and standards in production and postharvest operations (TCVN) related to fruit. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 106 . Incentive policy for the adoption of VIETGAP and other GAPs c.2. publications. Disbursements of the grant will occur through the CPMU. and tea. b. Communication system conducting regular awareness campaign. The Fund will be active until it is completely used up. training. publishing a food safety newsletter. 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. and tea including regulations on a. A review of existing regulations submitted to MARD decision makers 8. the system will include the establishment of a Provincial Food Safety Index. and information 10. SAZ b. Monitoring. Criteria Human resource capacity Business plan Past experience in certification Management and organization Weight (%) 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. and tea (standards for at least 10 different types of vegetables. vegetables.

11. Reports of the information and communication units at MARD 8.000 1. 387. and tea 26 The costs are preliminary indications of what will be in the COSTAB of the project. vegetables.000 Note.1 Activities for Output 2 386. STAMEQ-approved TCVN related to fruit. and communication 2.1. Equipment. Incentive Fund 8. and tea.1) that the project will establish. processing.11. development of standards and practices. Assessment of current capacity and capacity needs for food safety at MARD. certification.12). Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 107 . and laboratories involved in the implementation of quality and safe food production. surveys) 4.2. vegetables. certification bodies.3 Output 2: Strengthened capacity of state agencies.2. certification bodies.1. Recurrent costs are for 5 years 8. monitoring.3. and laboratories involved in food safety for fruit. The sets of activities under this output consist of: 1.2.668. Recurrent services (staff. 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 8.8.3.592. Table 22 Summary of Costs for Output 1 Item USD Investment costs Recurrent costs Total Costs $ $ $ 1.11. certification bodies. and laboratories for fruit. decisions on food safety and quality 10. MARD decrees. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Reports of the monitoring unit under MARD. and trading of fruit. The summary costs are reported in the following table. Technical assistance in the review and formulation of regulations. computer and software systems 3. 8. and tea.076. vegetables. CPMU reports and document records 8. The aim of this output is to strengthen capacity of state agencies.3 Inputs for Output 1 1.11.5 Data sources and reporting mechanisms for Output 1 7. vegetables. Details are provided in the Annex (see section 9.2.11.4 Costs for Output 126 385. including Provincial Food Safety Index 12. information.000 2. and tea 11. Standing Committee on Food Safety minutes and list of meeting attendance 9.

Activity 1.2. Capacity of formulating food safety regulations. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.2.2. provide training. and audit certification bodies Capacity of certification bodies to provide training and audit certified organizations Capacity of laboratories to provide testing and analytical services to monitoring and inspection agencies Capacity of testing. 1. The innovations in production and postharvest operations will require adequate training of trainers which is the content of this activity.2.2.2. 389.2. 392. and DARDs. Technical assistance will be required to assess capacity needs of state agencies. 391. Technical assistance to provide this training is required for this activity. 1. provide training. 1. 1.2.1 . Study tours will be organized in order to learn directly from other countries with more advanced food safety assurance systems.2. 393.2.1. identify needs.2. Training of certification bodies for VIETGAP is currently undertaken by DCP and DARDs but the training is insufficient.4 – Strengthen capacity of certification bodies to provide training and audit certified organizations. 1. policies.2. vegetables. and strategies. 1.2.7. demonstrating.2. Technical training in various methods of testing including rapid testing will be part of this activity.5.Assessment of current capacity and capacity needs for food safety at MARD. 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.3. 1. Both MARD staff and NAFEC training of trainers will be undertaken. Activity 1. 1. Both staff at DCP and DARDs in the 16 project provinces will be trained.12. The content of the capacity strengthening activities will include the items described in the following sections. and audit certification bodies.9. 1. Activity 1. and disseminating GAPs effectively.6.2. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 108 . There are still few certification bodies in Viet Nam in the field of agriculture and few certified organizations. and disseminating GAPs effectively Capacity of developing and harmonizing domestic standards with international standards Capacity of monitoring food safety from pre-production to postproduction level Capacity of inspecting food safety from pre-production to postproduction level Capacity of informing effectively about food safety issues Capacity of communicating effectively about food safety issues Capacity of planning for SAZ Capacity in Risk Analysis 388. and tea.3 – Strengthen capacity of accreditation agency (DCP) to certify. Activity 1. Activity 1. 1.6 – Strengthen capacity of testing.8.13. Accreditation and certification are new activities for MARD agencies. 390. Activity 1. and planning.2 – Strengthen capacity of formulating food safety regulations.10.5 – Strengthen capacity of laboratories to provide testing and analytical services to monitoring and inspection agencies. demonstrating.2.2.4. and laboratories for fruit. laboratories. Considerable training and technical assistance will be required to implement this activity. policies. and strategies Capacity of accreditation agency (DCP) to certify. certification bodies. 1.11.2.2. and establish an action plan for the implementation of a capacity strengthening plan.

vegetables. 397.2. Both staff at DCP and DARDs in the 16 project provinces will be trained.2.2. Both staff at DCP and DARDs in the 16 project provinces will be trained.2. Technical assistance 3. Both staff at DCP and DARDs in the 16 project provinces will be trained. standards. Training course in planning of safe agricultural zones will be undertaken by technical assistance using methods of regional planning and community participation.2. 399. Training staff and training of trainers 2. planning. This will include training to improve communication of MARD agencies in food safety. 400. 396. GAP. and publication material. Activity 1. Activity 1. workshops.2 Targets for Output 2 1. Staff from 100 certified/certifying bodies trained 3. 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.10 – Strengthen capacity of informing effectively about food safety issues. conferences. monitoring. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 109 . Study tours Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Activity 1. handling. communication. Activity 1.3 Inputs for Output 2 1. However.13 – Strengthen capacity in Risk Analysis.2. Training in inspection methods to ensure safety at the pre-production level (eg pesticides trade). website. packaging). Risk analysis has been included in the Action Plan for Food Safety (2007). 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. Staff from 16 DARD provinces trained in planning SAZ 8.8 – Strengthen capacity of monitoring food safety from preproduction to postproduction level.11 – Strengthen capacity of communicating effectively about food safety issues.12 – Strengthen capacity of planning for SAZ. postharvest operations (eg storage. About 130 staff from MARD and 140 staff from DARD trained in regulations and policy formulation. and risk analysis 2. Staff from 20 laboratories trained 4. Considerable technical assistance in this area will be provided through regular training courses. information. Activity 1. capacity for risk analysis is still quite low. inspection. and tea will ensure increase capacity and a smoother process of approval of standards by the competent authority. Training courses in developing and harmonizing standards for a variety of specific products in fruit.2.3. clean water).7 – Strengthen capacity of developing and harmonizing domestic standards with international standards. 398. 395. certification. particularly within MARD agencies.3. 8.394. Activity 1. Activity 1.9 – Strengthen capacity of inspecting food safety from preproduction to postproduction level. Food safety monitoring requires specific methods that could be effectively implemented.11.11. and delivery to the markets (eg trucks). production level (eg application of pesticides.

Activity 1. 3. the project will establish a Standing Committee to coordinate food safety on crops. Monitoring of targets will be through quarterly reports made available on the website of MARD.3 will be carried out by MARD and DARD.5 Data sources and reporting mechanisms for Output 2 402.3.4 Costs for Output 227 401.11. 405. 404. collection of information from other departments and agencies).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.1 . 2. and operations (organization and management of monitoring surveys and testing. Periodic (bi-annual) surveys of farmers and business enterprises will assess quality of service of relevant agencies of MARD and DARD.Establish a Pilot Unit of Food Safety Monitoring at NAFIQAD. 4. including Provincial Food Safety Index Number of certified bodies by DCP Area of SZA established by DARD Quality of service surveys conducted by independent organization 8. Recurrent costs are for 5 years 8. Part of this activity will include identifying. and AEC.140.11. Activities under sub-component 1. vegetables. 403. As a pilot of the Crop Food System Management system. Regularly quarterly meetings (or more often if needed) will be held.000 1.3. Table 23 Summary of Costs for Output 2 Item USD Investment costs Recurrent costs Total Costs $ $ $ 1.3.12). 5.).140.11. CPMU reports and document records Reports of the monitoring unit under MARD. statistical analysis.Establish the Standing Committee for Food Safety. The summary costs are reported in the following table.2 . 1. ICD. and tea. etc.8. reporting. 27 The costs are preliminary indications of what will be finalized in the COSTAB of the project. The committee is headed by a Vice Minister of MARD. keep minutes. The Secretariat of the Committee will be based at NAFIQAD and will be responsible for providing support services to the Committee (organize meetings. re-assigning or recruiting staff. DCP. The members of the committee include NAFIQAD.000 Note. DST.3. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 110 . The unit will include various units for methodology. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. DPP. Activity 1. Details are provided in the Annex (see section 9.

12. new staff will need to be recruited. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 111 .000 672. monitoring and inspection.11.11.1 Targets for Output 3 5.2 Inputs for Output 3 1. re-assign. or recruit staff for the positions of Food Safety Specialists (at MARD and DARD). Pilot units for Food Safety established at DCP and DARDs in 16 provinces by second half of 2009 8.406.4.000 Note. The policy and institutional framework for improving food safety and quality is gradually emerging since the early 2000s.4 .12 Justification. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. In some cases. Pilot units for Food Safety Monitoring established by second half of 2009 at NAFIQAD 7.11. Staff and specialists 8. 407.4. The unit at DCP will include staff for policy. Recurrent costs are for 5 years 8. Job descriptions.1 Justification 408.4.3 . Benefits.3.Establish Pilot Units of Food Safety at DCP and at DARD of 16 provinces.Identify. and communication and information. 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. and Food Safety Facilitators (at district or commune level). 7. standards. CPMU reports and document records Minutes of Standing Committee for Food Safety and attendance lists Records of staff fully devoted to food safety activities in the project Quality of service surveys conducted by independent organization 8.000 360. reassignment of staff.4 Data sources and reporting mechanisms for Output 3 5.3 Costs for Output 328 Table 24 Summary of Costs for Output 3 Item USD Investment costs Recurrent costs Total Costs $ $ $ 312. Provisions of salaries of new staff at MARD are included. and Risks 8. Standing Committee for Food Safety established by first half of 2009 6. 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. 8. accreditation and certification. Activity 1.11.4. Several of the positions for Food Safety Specialists and Food Safety Facilitators will be filled by reassigning responsibility of existing staff. Activity 1. 8. 8.3. 6.

GAP and other standards reviewed annually and revised to meet user concerns and any changes in market requirements 10. Rationalization of laboratory system may involve making use of analytical services of agencies outside of MARD 9. The novelty of the concepts implies that a large body of regulations has still to be issues. 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.3 Assumptions for Output 2 4.3.relatively new both to the key institutional players and to majority of farmers. processing.12.1 Assumptions for Output 1 6. increase the opportunity for exports.12.12. Cooperation among departments to transfer responsibilities and assets as necessary 8. Phasing out of subsidies to certified bodies over the course of the Project 8. and consumers. Coordination with other projects involved in capacity strengthening activities for food quality and safety 6.3. laboratories. Resistance to separate monitoring agency from implementation agency 8. Sustained commitment of MARD to capacity strengthening of state organizations. increase the trust of consumers in the food they eat and their readiness to pay a premium for safe food. and marketing. and the required capacity for institutions has to be build. Rent seeking behavior might result from an empowered inspection system 6.4 Risks for Output 2 1.3.12.2 Benefits 409. The improved legal and institutional environment will results in improved incentives for farmers and enterprises to engage in safe and quality production. Sustained commitment of MARD to improving policy and regulatory framework 7.12. Scheduling of training activities might conflict with other activities Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. High global food prices might retard the emphasis on food safety and quality 5.3 Assumptions and Risks 8. and certified bodies 5. 8. 8. enterprises.3.2 Risks for Output 1 4.12. Food safety reflected in new degree programs at education institutions and research programs at research organizations 8. policies and strategies have to be better formulated. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 112 .

5 Assumptions for Output 3 2.3. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 113 . The piloted system does not lead to replicable outcome in other provinces. 8.12. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.12.8.3. Sustained commitment of MARD to pilot the crop food safety management system.6 Risks for Output 3 2.

Preliminary Estimation of Costs for the Project Component: Policy and Institutional Development for Food Safety at the central level Annex 13. Annex 3. Annex 4. . Guidelines Viet Nam Standards (TCVN) for Food and Agriculture Examples of some Vietnamese Standards related to VIETGAP Implications of Food Safety Regulations for Different Actors along the Value Chain Annex 12.9 ANNEXES Codex Alimentarius Commission Introduction to SPS and TBT Agreements The SPS Agreement The TBT Agreement Risk Analysis Standards and Trade Development Facility Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) Codex Standards. Food Safety in Thailand Annex 1. Design and Monitoring Framework Annex 14. Annex 11. Annex 2. Max Residue Limits. Code of Practice. Annex 9. Annex 10. Annex 6. Annex 7. Annex 8. Annex 5.

ISO/TC 34. circulates and introduces the standards. Codex has embarked on a series of activities based on risk assessment to address microbiological hazards in foods. quality and consumer protection issues. guidelines and related texts such as codes of practice under the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme. More recently. Organizes collection. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 115 . The Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) is an intergovernmental body that coordinates food standards at the international level. 411. 3. is standing out organ of Vietnam Codex Alimentarius Commission. recommendations of CAC and ISO/ TC34 to relevant bodies and contact CAC and Technical Committee on Agricultural Products of ISO/ TC34. 4. comment and build up the Codex standards. program of planning and organizes meetings of VCAC. It has formulated international standards for a wide range of food products and specific requirements covering pesticide residues. 2. hygiene. an area previously unattended.VCAC) 412.1 Office of Vietnam food standardization commission (Abbreviated Vietnam Codex Contact Point . The CAC has proved to be most successful in achieving international harmonization in food quality and safety requirements. The tasks of VCAC are: 1. Its main objectives are to protect the health of consumers and ensure fair practices in food trade.1 Codex Alimentarius Commission 410. and has achieved international consensus on how to deal with them scientifically. systematize and distributes domestic and international documents concerned to activities of Vietnam Codex Alimentarius Commission. communication agency of Vietnam Codex Alimentarius Committee with regional and International Food Standardization Commission CAC. and promoting coordination of all food standards work undertaken by international governmental and non-governmental organizations.net/web/index_en. there has been a continuous appraisal of the principles of food safety and quality at the international level. food additives. For more information on CODEX see http://www. As a result.9. through a riskbased approach. makes analysis. veterinary drug residues.1. food contaminants. Codex work has created worldwide awareness of food safety. Organizes the research works. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. There is increasing pressure for the adoption of these principles at the national level.codexalimentarius. Vietnam Codex Contact Point which is established and operated by Directorate for Standards and Quality. Proposes methods to put the international standards in application in Vietnam. The Codex Alimentarius Commission was created in 1963 by FAO and WHO to develop food standards. Secretariat and the Technical Committees. These Codex recommendations are used by governments to determine and refine policies and programmes under their national food control system. Prepares the content. The main purposes of this Programme are protecting health of the consumers and ensuring fair trade practices in the food trade.jsp the official website at 9. Informs. 413. labeling etc.

1. 1. 11.2 Contact Address: Directorate for standards and quality (stameq) Vietnam food standardization committee Vietnam codex contact point 70 Tran Hung Dao. Technical Committee on General Principles on Foods. Technical Committee on Fats and Oils. 9.9. 12. Technical Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods.1. Technical Committee on Cereals. 2. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 116 .1. Technical Committee on Drinking Waters. 13. Hanoi. Technical Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses. 4. Technical Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling. 15. Vietnam Tel: (84-4) 9426605 Fax: (84-4) 8222520 Email: codex@tcvn. Technical Committee on Fresh Fruits and Vegetables. Technical Committee on Fish and Fishery Products. Technical Committee on Food Import Export Inspection and Certification Systems. 8. Technical Committee on Food Additives and Contaminants. 5. Legumes and Pulses.gov. Technical Committee on Pesticide Residues. 9. 7.1 Technical Committees of Vietnam Codex Alimentarius commission 414. 14. 10. Technical Committee on Milk and Milk Products. Technical Committee on Meat. 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.vn Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Technical Committee on Food Hygiene. 6. 3.1.

Lastly. During the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade negotiations. 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. In the case of particularly stringent measures. in other words. The national notification authorities report changes in trade policy to the WTO and receive and take comments on these measures. The SPS and TBT Agreements can be interpreted as an attempt to balance the first two uses of standards and to minimize the third. 418. At the same time. but must obtain additional information to objectively ground their assessment of risk within a reasonable period of time. (ii) they also advance domestic social goals like public health by establishing minimum standards or prescribing safety requirements. 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 agreements attempt to prevent standards from becoming a protectionist device. 417. In other words. 416. finally.9. The agreement encourages 'standard equivalence' between countries. Enquiry points compile all available information in that country on product standards and trade regulations and provide it to other members upon request. countries must present scientific justification. The Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement (SPS) allows members to take scientifically based measures to protect public health. STAMEQ is the coordinating agency for the Agreement on TBT in Viet Nam. The agreement commits members to base these measures on internationally established guidelines and risk assessment procedures. the formal acceptance of the standards of other countries through explicit agreements. Generally speaking. 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. When existing scientific evidence is insufficient to determine risk. It also promotes the use of international standards. 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. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 117 . Likewise. (iii) they can hide protectionist policies. 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. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. The TBT Agreement works toward this end in three ways.2 Introduction to SPS and TBT Agreements 415. members may adopt measures on the basis of available information. these Agreements balance the competing demands for domestic regulatory autonomy and the global harmonization of product standards.

or disease-causing organisms.9. contaminants. As defined here. These agreements are the legal ground rules for international commerce.ufl. the prevention or reduction of the risks of other damages within a territory from the entry. It is the only international body that sets and oversees the global rules of trade between nations. public service/good is something that provides a "free rider" benefit (it is available to everyone). 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.3 The SPS Agreement Source: http://edis.edu/FE492 9. 422. a Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Annex A).wto. the protection of human or animal life or health within a territory from risks arising from additives. 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. establishment. negotiated and signed by the bulk of the world's trading nations and ratified by their governments. 420. One example of a public service is the measures aimed at preventing or controlling the spread of invasive pests and diseases. disease.3. establishment. or spread of pests. the protection of human life or health within a territory from risks arising from diseases carried by animals. or from entry. the government assumes the responsibility of providing public services/goods (recouping costs by means such as taxation). Since no one can take ownership. At the heart of the WTO is a set of agreements.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/sps_e.org ). establishment.2 What Is the Economic Rationale for Governments to Become Involved? 421.1 What Is the Agreement? WTO Sanitary and Phytosanitary (WTO-SPS) 419. diseasecarrying organisms. Regulations (http://www. or spread of pests (Appendix A of WTO-SPS Agreement 1994.wto. plants. or feedstuffs. toxins. For example. or spread of pest. say.ifas. They encourage governments to keep their trade policies within agreed limits to everybody's benefit (http://www.3. or disease-causing organisms in foods. or products thereof.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. the threat of invasive pests and diseases. WTO is the acronym for World Trade Organization. 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. beverages. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 118 . 9. which replaced the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). 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.

a plurilateral agreement known as the Standards Code (http://www. which promotes increased trade among countries.3. when such trade encounters negative externalities or hidden costs (e. a country can increase its real national income by more efficiently utilizing its limited resources and engaging in mutual trade. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 119 . 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. [SPS measures were found in the original GATT Articles. 426.wto. However. Although the SPS measures were recognized as having the potential to impede trade and were considered important under previous GATT rounds. In the second scenario.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/fact4_e.] 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. for example. In general the global economy as a whole is expected to benefit. subsidies.. The main purpose of the WTO-SPS Agreement is to promote free trade.negative externality may arise when imported goods arrive accompanied by invasive pests or diseases. the following two scenarios: 424. Many Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. they were relegated to being included as parts of other agreements and as exceptions to the main provisions fostering increased trade. which may reduce domestic output and/or increase production costs. acceptance of the general premise becomes blurred. 425. Usually the exporting country is not made to stand the cost of damages to the importing country.4 What Is the Genesis of the WTO-SPS Agreement? 428. 423. 9. and licenses) in particular. government-imposed regulations to protect human and environmental resources from negative externalities (e.3 Why Does the WTO-SPS Agreement Promote Free Trade? 427.. 9. In such cases where the market mechanisms alone fail to prevent or correct such negative externalities. which means consumers can enjoy a higher level of satisfaction and producers can sell their products in an expanded market. 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.g. regulations imposed for the sole purpose of protecting domestic producers from international competition may harm a country. 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. 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). mainly Article XX "General Exceptions. then governments are justified in providing regulations (public services) that will prevent entry or reduce the risks of the threat.3.g. from importing harmful pests and diseases). In principle. The first scenario is acceptable to the WTO.htm )." and later in the 1979 Tokyo Round Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade. Take. The gains from trade are no longer a certainty. In the first scenario. the threat of harmful organisms) through trade barriers may benefit a country.

guidelines. • • • • • 431. The WTO-SPS Agreement creates a framework for border protection and eradication measures while facilitating freer trade. and not to unduly restrict market access for other countries (James and Anderson. The Agreement is based on the following five general principles: • Harmonization--encourages the adoption of measures that conform to international standards. animal. the intent of the Agreement was to ensure that when SPS measures were applied. 430. the importing country must scientifically investigate why the measures are needed and how they control risk.5 states that each member is also obligated to avoid arbitrary or unjustifiable distinctions in the levels of protection it considers to be • • Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. 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. Equivalence--mutual recognition of different but equivalent measures to achieve international standards. the WTO-SPS Agreement contains a set of substantive and procedural provisions. 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. and/or recommendations of international agencies. they were used only to the extent necessary to ensure food safety and animal and plant health. Roberts. 9.g.1. especially when the measures differ from international standards. 1998). Article 5. including the United States. when the measures do not conform to international standards. Regionalization--allows continued exports from clean (disease-free) areas of affected countries.5 What Are the Main Provisions of the WTO-SPS Agreements? 429. The Agreement reaffirms the freedom of countries to choose their appropriate level of protection against imported pests and pathogens. Consequently.countries.. Article 5.2 stipulates that countries should consider direct risk-related costs (e. The main substantive provisions can be found in Articles 5 and 6: • Article 5. with a reduction in the use and levels of these support measures. The procedural provisions create a framework to improve communication between members regarding proposed SPS changes and to provide a forum for dispute settlement. To achieve its objectives. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 120 . feared that.3. The substantive provisions are aimed at protecting human. 1998. Non-discriminatory--treating imports no differently than domestic produce. Transparency--notifying trading partners of changes in their SPS measures. However. and plant health and life while preventing unjustifiable barriers to trade. 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.

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 .

Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper

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, tariffrate 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

Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper

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

Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper

123

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. The Agreement deals with two broad categories of rules: so-called technical regulations and so-called standards. 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. unless the existing international standards would be ineffective or inappropriate for the achievement of the policy objectives the member has set for itself.7 The rules pertaining to standards 446. members shall use international standards (developed by international institutions) as a basis for their domestic regulation . When members intend to adopt technical regulations which are not based on an international standard. 9.440.i. rules. as they apply to a product. for common and repeated use. 447. not central) government bodies. The TBT Agreement defines a standard as a document approved by a recognized body that provides. Article 3 provides for a set of rules similar to those contained in Article 2. with which compliance is mandatory. The TBT Agreement defines a technical regulation as a document which spells out product characteristics or their related processes and production methods. they shall not have a trade-restrictive effect which is greater than that necessary to fulfill a legitimate objective. for instance national norming institutions. 9. Standards may also include or deal exclusively with terminology.e. 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. contained in one of the Annexes of the TBT Agreement. simply because an economic operator cannot meaningfully do business without adhering to these standards. as they apply to a product. such as national security requirements. binding rules. The TBT Agreement requires WTO members to ensure that central governmental standardizing bodies adopt the so-called Code of Good Practice.6 The rules pertaining to technical regulations 441. packaging. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 124 . process or production method. including the applicable administrative provisions. 445. adopted or applied with the effect of creating unnecessary barriers to trade. guidelines and characteristics for products or related processes or production methods. process or production method. but it relates to technical regulations prepared by local (i. or the environment. 444. Article 2 spells out the basic rules for technical regulations. These standards are not binding per se.4. A technical regulation may furthermore include or deal exclusively with terminology. Pursuant to Article 2. The first category contains mandatory. prevention of deceptive practices.4. packaging. but very often become dominant in a particular industry and thus rise to the level of being de facto binding. animal or plant life or health.e. symbols. with which compliance is not mandatory. marking or labelling requirements. while the latter category contains rules created by institutions other than the government. Furthermore.4. 443. 442. symbols. protection of human health or safety. This Code of Good Practice spells out certain mostly substantive and procedural requirements to be observed by the standardizing bodies in the Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. members shall strive to bring about harmonization between their differing national technical regulations. marking or labelling requirements.

Another case (EC . Obtaining such certifications may not be easy: it requires time and resources to obtain such official certification.Sardines) which dealt with the TBT Agreement more in detail. Article 6 encourages members to enter into so-called Mutual Recognition Agreements (MRAs). For instance. Other provisions of the TBT Agreement provide for technical assistance and special and differential treatment for developing country members.Asbestos).8 Conformity Assessment Procedures 448.e. The TBT Agreement. has recently been suspended according to Article 12. 9. i. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.4. in Article 5. Only one case so far has dealt with the TBT Agreement.preparation of standards. Article 6 then exhorts a member to accept.4. obliges each member to set up so-called enquiry points. requirements which mirror closely those contained in Article 2. but also the way in which conformity of products with these requirements is assessed. 449.4. only the issue whether a particular measure fell under the definition of a technical regulation was discussed (EC .12 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding and it is unclear whether and when it will be resumed. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 125 . such procedures shall not put foreign producers at a disadvantage. an importer will require a certification (confirmation) that the product he is about to import complies. wherever feasible. A very important aspect of the issue of technical barriers to trade is not only their substance. 9. the conformity assessment procedures of other members. for instance. with the toy safety requirements contained in the national regulations. under Article 10. 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). and in that case. also spells out certain fundamental rules about such conformity assessment procedures. 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. shall not create unnecessary barriers to trade and shall be transparent and expedient.9 Other provisions 450. The TBT Agreement has so far not been dealt with extensively in WTO dispute settlements. the TBT Agreement. 9. As a result. locations where information about technical regulations and other related issues can be obtained.10 Dispute settlement 451. but can do so right in his home country. Specifically.

of course. Carson. The actions of human beings have become a primary influence on the health of the earth. primarily focused on the effects of polychlorinated biphenyls on the environment. but that is was also causing a decline in the raptor population because it affected reproductive ability. Risk analysis got its start from the original model used to determine the source of anthropogenic pollution.1 What Is Risk Analysis? 452. Silent Spring. usually via animal testing. claiming that the book was based on feeling and not hard scientific evidence. Risk analysis encompasses three target areas: • • • Risk assessment . and implementing specific management measures to mitigate risk. mainly by making the egg shells too thin to survive incubation.washington. 454.5 Risk Analysis Source: http://depts. selecting. to determine the Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.a process that involves identifying. The environmental health and public health movements converged in the 1970s. Industry spoke out strongly against Carson's book. Most people were concerned about their risk of cancer from exposure to certain man-made pollutants. 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. a marine biologist. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 126 . found that not only was DDT bioaccumulative.2 What Is the Origin of Risk Analysis? 453.html 9. Risk communication . evaluating. The combination of this popular movement and politics resulted in the testing of chemicals. The initial study demonstrated no threat to human health.9. Carson's book made a powerful plea for less harmful methods of insect control. 9. A later study. Because it was difficult.5. The concept of "risk" arose from Rachel Carson's book.edu/foodrisk/analysis. and in some cases impossible in the short term.a process that includes the exchange of information about the risk. to determine if the chemical was carcinogenic.5. Risk management . 455.a process that involves identifying a potential hazard that can cause a negative impact. 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 first step in the risk assessment framework is to identify the potential microbiological hazard. Compiling a list of bacteria associated with the source of food or the method of production or processing. Feature Pollutant Concentration Chemical Assessment Risk Microbiological Assessment Risk Assumed to be lowered over Pathogen concentration may time through dilution. These health effects are evaluated through measures such as morbidity ratios. increase or decrease or change in virulence. 458. human infections because of and other factors. Microbiological hazard identification is accomplished by observing and defining the types of adverse health effects associated with exposure to foodborne agents. Food safety risk assessment involves the development of either quantitative or qualitative models. The goal of microbiological hazard identification is to identify the organism and determine its potential effect on people. Impact of Exposure Estimation of Risk Cumulative exposure. 457. 456. Hazard Identification Exposure Characterization Single-cell pathogen may be undetectable at slaughter but can reproduce to pose a later problem. disease severity as Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Risk assessment is the science of identifying and evaluating potential hazards and potential exposures. 460. the birth of the concept of risk assessment resulted. Requires experimental trials to determine and prove causal association. A model is basically a mathematical framework of components that are used to assess the risk for any given commodity or process. Pathogens may be introduced at any point. and The consequences if it occurs. Risk assessment provides an analytical framework to support decisions related to food safety. Risk may change at any point in food processing and distribution. The two basic factors associated with risk assessment are • • The likelihood of an event. The approach to assessing human health risk from chemical exposure differs substantially from the approach for assessing microbiological risks. 459. multiple factors involved in individual susceptibility. Risk based on pollutant Difficult to estimate risk of concentration.effect of exposure on humans of many chemicals. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 127 . Compiling a list of pollutants and potential sources which contribute to increased loading of the environment. for long-term May be acute or chronic. body weight.

is one of the most important steps. Quantitative exposure assessments often involve more elaborate mathematical or predictive models. they should identify and rank the microbes' entry potential and identify and rank the potential of the microbes to spread. because of the paucity of data. mortality ratio.or spores . Risk characterization takes information from microbiological hazard identification and uses qualitative or quantitative tools to assess and predict the exposure for people. 465. Dose-response risk assessment also may be either qualitative or quantitative. Qualitative dose-response risk assessments. In this case. 461. These models are used to: • • Predict the effect of changes in food processing or food storage on microbial growth. they are based on anecdotal information. Risk characterization. as well as its extensive underreporting by clinicians. 463.determined by the ratio of hospitalized cases to the total number of cases in an outbreak. Many qualitative exposure assessment models focus on identifying the point of entry of the pathogen. are limited by available data. who many times fail to identify either the agent of the disease. At a minimum. As any toxicologist knows. The acute nature of foodborne illness. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 128 . Exposure assessments may be either qualitative or quantitative. with the results being extrapolated to humans.determining the routes of exposure and the likelihood of being exposed Dose-response assessment . Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Some times.that will result in morbidity. Hazard identification may also involve statistical analyses and literature reviews for existing information/studies regarding the pathogen of concern. Hazard identification also involves specific routes of transmission. Risk characterization serves to bridge risk assessment and risk communication. Quantitative dose-response risk assessments attempt to determine the number of vegetative cells . the next step in risk analysis. 462. this method is not nearly as reliable as actually observing infection and resulting morbidity in humans. 464. allowing for the discussion of confidence and uncertainties in analysis. Qualitative exposure assessments are generally used when there is insufficient quantitative information about the bacteria. and attack rates. Animal studies are often employed.determining the variation in impact following exposures to differing levels of foodborne pathogens. militate against quantitative doseresponse risk assessments. it is difficult to determine the minimum exposure necessary to cause a negative effect the so-called Lowest Observed Effect Level (LOEL). The foundations of risk characterization are embodied in: • • Exposure assessment . and Model food handling procedures to obtain optimal reduction in microbial growth. in many cases.

Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 129 . [The EU has a moratorium on the approvals of new genetically modified organisms. 9. 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. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. This decision is aimed at helping developing nations prove that their products are as safe as those in developed nations. with applications pending for others. The decision aims to speed up recognition of equivalence of SPS measures for products previously traded or those for which information already exists.9. At the March 17-18 2004 meeting. since the prohibition of GMO imports is not legally or scientifically justified. 9.6. Few issues are raising as many concerns about food safety and environmental impact as that of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO). The US. Argentina and Canada complaint against the EU de facto moratorium on the approval of new GMO. 2004. the WTO Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures finalized their Decision on Equivalence.6. Equivalence is the mutual acceptances of another Member's standards that while different in process have the same effect. In August 2002. the WTO initiated a program to enhance the capacity of developing countries to participate in negotiations and implement standards. TBT and Agreement on Agriculture. Canada and Argentina argue that the moratorium violates provisions of the SPS.6 Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) 466. The EU responded that market authorization had been granted to numerous GMOs. and also had passed laws mandating labeling requirements.1 Principle of Equivalence 467. called the Standards and Trade Development Facility. joins the efforts of the WTO. the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). The program. On March 4th. the Codex Alimentarius. World Health Organization (WHO). and the World Bank. the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE).2 The GMO Debate 468. but the most progress to date has been on the needs of developing countries. The Doha Development Round is striving to address a myriad issues underlying the SPS and TBT Agreements. 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. the WTO Director-General appointed a panel in the US.

or is in effect 4. Verification . HACCP is a seven-step process of examining product flow in all meat and poultry slaughter and processing establishments. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.deciding how the criteria defining the critical control points will be overseen .simply put.plant management shall verify that the process is under control prior to allowing the establishment's product(s) to enter commerce .determining what criteria will indicate that process control has been achieved. The CCP will be under control after the corrective action is taken c.determining where. or physical hazards are potentiallypresent. 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. chemical. paperwork. Specification of Criteria .a formal examination of every step in the food slaughter/manufacturing process to determine if any biological. a re-verification must be completed by a Program employee at that time. how and how often must the process controls at the CCP's be checked 5.i.corrective actions is a four-step process: a. Hazard Analysis .e.paperwork. Determination of Critical Control Points (CCP's) . No product that is injurious to health or otherwise adulterated as a result of the deviation enters commerce 6. the critical point(s) for process control exist 3. Corrective Actions .9. 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.7 Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) 469. The seven steps are: 1. Documentation .. paperwork! 470. in each process. The cause of the deviation is identified and eliminated b. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 130 . The analysis conclusions must be supported by either scientific knowledge or historical data from the establishment's operations 2. Measures to prevent recurrence are established d. Implementation of a Monitoring System .

Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 131 . 1 Eviscerated or Uneviscerated Standard for Canned Shrimps or 1 Prawns 1999 1989 2 1995 1995 2003 1 2001 2 2 1991 4 1995 2001 2007 2005 Standard for Preserved Tomatoes 1 Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.do?lang=en Reference CODEX STAN A- Number 8 (a) Year of Title adoption 1978 General Standard for Named Variety Process(ed) Cheese and Spreadable Process(ed) Cheese Standard for Process(ed) Cheese and Spreadable Process(ed) Cheese Standard for Process(ed) Cheese Preparations Standard for Butter Standard for Milkfat Products Standard for Evaporated Milks Standard for Condensed Milks Standard for Cheese General Cheeses Standard for Whey Sweetened Revision Year Amendment Year CODEX STAN ACODEX STAN ACODEX STAN ACODEX STAN ACODEX STAN ACODEX STAN ACODEX STAN ACODEX STAN ACODEX STAN ACODEX STAN ACODEX STAN ACODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN 8 (b) 8 (c) 1 2 3 4 6 7 9 15 18 257-R 258-R 259-R 1 3 12 13 16 17 18 19 33 36 37 1978 1978 1971 1973 1971 1971 1978 1971 1976 1995 1995 2007 2007 2007 1985 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1 1 1 1 1 1 1999 2 1999 2 1999 1999 1999 2 1999 2 2003 2003 2 2001 2006 2006 2006 2006 Standard for Cream and Prepared 1 Creams Standard for Whey Powders Standard Products for Edible Casein 1 1 2006 Regional Standard for Canned Humus with Tehena Regional Standard for Canned Foul Medames Regional Standard for Tehena General Standard for the Labelling 1 of Prepackaged Foods Standard for Canned Salmon Standard for Honey Standard for Canned Green Beans and Wax Beans Standard for Canned Applesauce Standard for Canned Sweet Corn Standard for Edible Fats and Oils not Covered by Individual 2 Standards Standard for Olive Oils and Olive 1 Pomace Oils Standard for Quick Frozen Finfish.codexalimentarius. CODE OF PRACTICE.9.8 CODEX STANDARDS. GUIDELINES Source: http://www.net/web/standard_list. MAX RESIDUE LIMITS.

Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 132 .CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN 38 39 40 41 42 52 53 55 56 57 58 60 61 62 66 67 69 70 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1985 1987 1981 1981 1981 1981 Standard for Edible Fungi and Fungus Products Standard for Dried Edible Fungi Standard for "Chanterelle" Fresh Fungus Standard for Quick Frozen Peas Standard for Canned Pineapple Standard for Strawberries Quick Frozen 1 1983 1 1987 Standard for Special Dietary Foods with Low-Sodium Content Standard for Canned Mushrooms Standard for Canned Asparagus Standard for Processed Tomato 1 Concentrates Standard for Canned Green Peas Standard for Canned Raspberries Standard for Canned Pears Standard for Canned Strawberries Standard for Table Olives Standard for Raisins Standard for Raspberries Quick Frozen 1995 1 1987 1 2001 2007 Standard for Canned Tuna and 1 Bonito STANDARD FOR INFANT FORMULA AND FORMULAS FOR 1 SPECIAL MEDICAL PURPOSES INTENDED FOR INFANTS Standard for Canned Baby Foods Standard for Processed CerealBased Foods for Infants and 1 Young Children Standard Peaches Standard Bilberries Standard Spinach for for for Quick Quick Quick Frozen Frozen Frozen CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 86 87 88 89 90 92 94 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 2007 4 3 2006 1997 1989 Standard for Canned Fruit Cocktail Standard for Jams Preserves) and Jellies Standard for Canned Processed Peas Standard for Cocoa Butter Standard for Chocolate Standard for Corned Beef Standard for Luncheon Meat Standard for Canned Crab Meat Standard for Quick Shrimps or Prawns Standard for Sardines Frozen (Fruit Standard for Citrus Marmalade Mature 1 1 1 1 1 1 2001 2003 1991 1991 1995 1995 2007 and 2 Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.

Sardine-Type Products CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN 95 96 97 98 99 103 104 105 106 107 108 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 130 131 132 133 140 141 143 144 145 146 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1983 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1981 1983 1983 1985 1985 1985 1985 Standard Lobsters for Quick Frozen 1 1 1995 1991 1991 1991 Standard for Cooked Cured Ham Standard for Cooked Cured Pork 1 Shoulder Standard for Chopped Meat Cooked Cured 1 Standard for Canned Tropical Fruit Salad Standard for Blueberries Quick Frozen Standard for Quick Frozen Leek Standard for Cocoa powders (cocoas) and dry mixtures of cocoa 1 and sugars General Standard for Irradiated 1 Foods General Standard for the Labelling of Food Additives when sold as such Standard Waters for Natural Mineral 1 1997 1 2001 2001 2003 Standard for Quick Frozen Broccoli Standard for Cauliflower Quick Frozen Frozen Standard for Quick Brussels Sprouts Standard for Quick Frozen Green and Wax Beans Standard for Quick Frozen French Fried Potatoes Standard for Pickled Cucumbers Standard for Canned Carrots Standard for Consommés Bouillons and 2 2001 1 1 1995 1983 Standard for Gluten-Free Foods Standard for Canned Finfish Standard for Dried Apricots Standard for Unshelled Pistachio Nuts Standard for Quick Frozen Whole Kernel Corn Standard for Quick Frozen Cornon-the-Cob Standard for Quick Frozen Carrots Standard for Cocoa (Cacao) Mass (Cocoa/Chocolate Liquor) and 1 Cocoa Cake Standard for Dates Standard for Canned Palmito Standard for Canned Chestnuts and Chestnut Purée Standard for Labelling of and 2001 Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 133 .

Minced Fish Flesh 1 and Mixtures of Fillets and Minced Fish Flesh Standard for Quick Frozen Fish Sticks (Fish Fingers). Fish Portions 2 and Fish Fillets .Breaded or in Batter Standard for Salted Fish and Dried Salted Fish of the Gadidae Family 1 of Fishes Standard for Whole and 1 Decorticated Pearl Millet Grains Standard for Pearl Millet Flour Standard for Certain Pulses Standard for Sorghum Grains Standard for Sorghum Flour General Standard for Vegetable Protein Products Standard for Soy Protein Products Standard for Edible Cassava Flour 1 Standard for Grated Desiccated Coconut Standard for Durum Wheat 1 Semolina and Durum Wheat Flour Standard for Labelling of and Claims for Foods for Special Medical Purposes Standard for Formula Foods for Use in Weight Control Diets Standard for Pineapple Standard for Papaya Standard for Mangoes Standard for Nopal Standard for Prickly Pear Standard for Carambola Standard for Baby Corn Standard for Dried Shark Fins 1 1 1 1 1 1 1995 CODEX STAN 166 1989 2004 CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN 167 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 1989 1989 1989 1989 1989 1989 1989 1989 1989 1991 1991 1991 1991 1993 1993 1993 1993 1993 1993 1993 1993 1995 1 1995 1995 1995 1995 1995 2005 1995 1995 1999 1 2001 1 1 1 1 1 1 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.Claims for Prepackaged Foods for Special Dietary Use CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 159 160 163 1985 1985 1985 1985 1985 1985 1987 1987 1987 1987 Standard for Food Grade Salt Standard for Gari Standard for Wheat Flour Standard for Maize (Corn) 1 1 1 1 1997 3 1995 1995 1995 1995 1995 1 1989 2006 Standard for Whole Maize (Corn) 1 Meal Standard for Degermed Maize (Corn) Meal and Maize (Corn) 1 Grits Standard for Follow-up formula Standard for Canned Mangoes Standard for Mango Chutney Standard Products for Wheat Protein 1 2001 CODEX STAN 165 1989 Standard for Quick Frozen Blocks of Fish Fillets. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 134 .

CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN

190 191 192 193 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227

1995 1995 1995 1995 1995 1995 1995 1995 1995 1995 1995 1995 1997 1997 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 2003 1999 2001 2001 2001 2001 2001 2001 2001

General Standard for Quick Frozen Fish Fillets Standard for Quick Frozen Raw Squid General Additives Standard for Food 8 2007 2007 2 1 1 2004 2005 2005

General Standard for 3 Contaminants and Toxins in Foods Standard for Litchi Standard for Avocado Standard for Rice Standard for Wheat and Durum Wheat Standard for Peanuts Standard for Oats Standard for Couscous Standard for Formula Foods for Use in Very Low Energy Diets for Weight Reduction Standard for Mangosteens Standard for Bananas General Standard for Use of Dairy Terms Standard for Milk Powders and Cream Powder Standard for Cheeses in Brine (Group Standard) Standard for Named Vegetable 1 Oils Standard for Named Animal Fats Standard for Sugars Standard for Limes Standard for Pummelos (Citrus grandi) Standard for Guavas Standard for Chayotes Standard for Mexican Limes Standard for Ginger Standard for Grapefruits (Citrus paradisi) General Methods of Analysis for 1 Food Additives Standard for Longans Group Standard for Unripened Cheese including Fresh Cheese Standard for Crackers from Marine and Freshwater Fish, Crustaceans and Molluscan Shellfish Standard for Kimchi Standard for Tannia Standard for Asparagus Standard for Cape Gooseberry General Standard for

1 1

2005 2005

1 2001 2

2001 2005

1 3 2 1 1 1 1 2 2004 1

2001 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005

2005

1 1 1

2005 2005 2005

Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper

135

Bottled/Packaged Drinking Waters (Other Than Natural Mineral Waters) CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN 228 229 231 234 236 237 238 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 249 250 2001 1999 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 2004 2004 2005 2005 2006 2006 2001 General Methods of Analysis for 1 Contaminants Analysis of Pesticide Residues: Recommended Methods General Codex Methods for the 1 Detection of Irradiated Foods Recommended Methods Analysis and Sampling of 2 2004 1993 1 2003 2007 2003

Standard for Boiled Dried Salted Anchovies Standard for Pitahayas Standard for Sweet Cassava Standard for Aqueous Coconut Products: Coconut Milk and Coconut Cream Standard Shoots for Canned Bamboo 1 1 2005 2005

Standard for Canned Stone Fruits Standard for Fermented Milks Standard for Salted Herring and Salted Sprat Standard for Oranges Standard for Rambutan General Standard for Fruit Juices and Nectars Standard for Instant Noodles Standard for a Blend of Evaporated Skimmed Milk and Vegetable Fat Standard for a Blend of Skimmed Milk and Vegetable Fat in Powdered Form Standard for a Blend of Sweetened Condensed Skimmed Milk and Vegetable Fat Standard for Dairy Fat Spreads Standard for Citrus Fruits Certain Canned Atlantic 1 2005

CODEX STAN

251

2006

CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN

252 253 254 255 256 260 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269

2006 2006 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 1966 1966 1966 1966 1966 1966 1967

Standard for Table Grapes Standard for Fat Spreads and Blended Spreads Standard for Pickled Fruits and Vegetables Standard for Mozzarella Standard for Cheddar Standard for Danbo Standard for Edam Standard for Gouda Standard for Havarti Standard for Samsoe Standard for Emmental 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007

Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper

136

CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CODEX STAN CAC/RCP

270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 1

1968 1968 1968 1968 1969 1973 1973 1973 1978 1969

Standard for Tilsiter Standard for Saint-Paulin Standard for Provolone

1 1 1

2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007

Standard for Cottage Cheese incl. 1 Creamed Cottage Cheese Standard for Coulommiers Standard for Cream Cheese Standard for Camembert Standard for Brie Standard for Extra Hard Grating Cheese Recommended International Code of Practice - General Principles of 4 Food Hygiene Recommended International Code of Hygienic Practice for Canned Fruit and Vegetable Products Recommended International Code of Hygienic Practice for Dried Fruits Recommended International Code of Hygienic Practice for Desiccated Coconut Recommended International Code of Hygienic Practice for Dehydrated Fruits and Vegetables including Edible Fungi Recommended International Code of Hygienic Practice for Tree Nuts System for the Description of Carcasses of Bovine and Porcine Species Recommended International Code of Practice for the Processing and 2 Handling of Quick Frozen Foods Recommended International Code of Hygienic Practice for Egg 1 Products Recommended International Code of Hygienic Practice for Molluscan Shellfish Recommended International Code of Practice for Radiation 2 Processing of Food Code of Ethics for International 1 Trade in Food Recommended International Code of Hygienic Practice for Foods for Infants and Children Recommended International Code of Hygienic Practice for Groundnuts (Peanuts) Recommended International Code of Hygienic Practice for Low-Acid 2 and Acidified Low-Acid Canned Foods Recommended International Code 1 1 1 1

2003

CAC/RCP

2

1969

CAC/RCP

3

1969

CAC/RCP

4

1971

CAC/RCP

5

1971

CAC/RCP CAC/RCP

6 7

1972 1974

CAC/RCP

8

1976

1983

CAC/RCP

15

1976

2007 2

1985

CAC/RCP

18

1978

CAC/RCP CAC/RCP CAC/RCP

19 20 21

1979 1979 1979

2003 1985

CAC/RCP

22

1979

CAC/RCP CAC/RCP

23 24

1979 1979

1993

Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper

137

Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 138 .Latin America and the Caribbean) Recommended International Code of Practice for the Packaging and Transport of Tropical Fresh Fruit and Vegetables Code of Practice for the Reduction of Aflatoxin B1 in Raw Materials and Supplemental Feedingstuffs for Milk-Producing Animals Code of Hygienic Practice for Refrigerated Packaged Foods with Extended Shelf-Life Code of Hygienic Practice for the Transport of Food in Bulk and Semi-Packed Food Recommended Code of Hygienic Practice for Bottled/Packaged Drinking Waters (Other than Natural Mineral Waters) Code of Practice Concerning Source Directed Measures to Reduce Contamination of Foods with Chemicals Code of Practice for the Prevention and Reduction of Patulin Contamination in Apple Juice and Apple Juice Code of Practice for the Prevention 1 2001 2001 1999 3 2005 CAC/RCP 33 1985 CAC/RCP 36 1987 CAC/RCP 38 1993 CAC/RCP 39 1993 CAC/RCP CAC/RCP 40 42 1993 1995 CAC/RCP 43 1995 CAC/RCP 44 1995 1 2004 CAC/RCP 45 1997 CAC/RCP 46 1999 CAC/RCP 47 2001 CAC/RCP 48 2001 CAC/RCP 49 2001 CAC/RCP CAC/RCP 50 51 2003 2003 Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Processing and Marketing of Natural Mineral Waters Recommended International Code of Hygienic Practice for the 1 Storage and Transport of Edible Oils and Fats in Bulk Recommended International Code of Practice for the Control of the Use of Veterinary Drugs Code of Hygienic Practice for Precooked and Cooked Foods in Mass Catering Code of Hygienic Practice for Aseptically Processed and Packaged Low-Acid Foods Code of Hygienic Practice for Spices and Dried Aromatic Plants Code of Hygienic Practice for the Preparation and Sale of Street 1 Foods (Regional Code .of Hygienic Practice for Lobsters CAC/RCP CAC/RCP CAC/RCP 25 28 30 1979 1983 1983 Recommended International Code of Hygienic Practice for Smoked Fish Recommended International Code of Hygienic Practice for Crabs Recommended International Code of Hygienic Practice for the Processing of Frog Legs Recommended International Code of Hygienic Practice for Collecting.

Fumonisins and tricothecenes CAC/RCP CAC/RCP CAC/RCP CAC/RCP 52 53 54 55 2003 2003 2004 2004 Code of Practice for Fish and 3 Fishery Products Code of Hygienic Practice for Fresh Fruits and Vegetables Recommended Code of Practice on Good Animal Feeding Code of Practice for the Prevention and Reduction of Aflatoxin Contamination in Peanuts Code of Practice for the Prevention and Reduction of Lead Contamination in Foods Code of Hygienic Practice for Milk and Milk Products Code of Hygienic Practice for Meat Code of Practice for the Prevention and Reduction of Aflatoxin Contamination in Tree Nuts Code of Practice for the Prevention and Reduction of Tin Contamination in Canned Foods Code of Practice to Minimize and Contain Antimicrobial Resistance Code of Practice for the Prevention and Reduction of Dioxin and Dioxin-like PCB Contamination in Food and Feeds Code of Practice for the Prevention and Reduction of Ochratoxin A Contamination in Wine Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) for Pesticides Maximum Residue Limits Veterinary Drugs in Food Extraneous Maximum Limits (EMRLs) 1976 for 2001 2006 2001 2007 CAC/RCP CAC/RCP CAC/RCP CAC/RCP 56 57 58 59 2004 2004 2005 2005 CAC/RCP CAC/RCP 60 61 2005 2005 CAC/RCP 62 2006 cac/rcp CAC/MRL CAC/MRL CAC/MRL CAC/MISC CAC/MISC CAC/MISC CAC/MISC CAC/MISC CAC/GL CAC/GL CAC/GL CAC/GL CAC/GL 63 1 2 3 2 3 4 5 6 22-R 1 2 3 4 2007 Residue Statement on Infant Feeding Inventory of Processing Aids Classification of Foods and Animal Feeds 1 1 2007 1999 1991 1993 2 2006 1993 2003 1993 Glossary of Terms and Definitions (Veterinary Drugs Residues in Foods) List of Codex Advisory 13 Specifications for Food Additives 1997 1979 1985 1989 1989 Design of Control Measures for 1 Street-Vended Foods in Africa General Guidelines on Claims Guidelines on Nutrition Labelling Guidelines for Simple Evaluation of Food Additive Intake General Guidelines for the 1 1 Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 139 . including Annexes on Ochratoxin A. Zearalenone.and Reduction of Mycotoxin Contamination in Cereals.

Assessment and Accreditation of Food Import and Export Inspection and Certification Systems Guidelines for the Assessment of the Competence of Testing Laboratories Involved in the Import and Export Control of Foods International Harmonized Protocol for the Proficiency Testing of 1 (Chemical) Analytical Laboratories General Requirements for Natural 2004 2004 CAC/GL 26 1997 CAC/GL 27 1997 1 2006 CAC/GL CAC/GL 28 29 1995 1985 1997 Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 140 . Operation.Utilization of Vegetable Protein Products (VPP) in Foods CAC/GL 6 1991 Guideline Levels for Vinyl Chloride Monomer and Acrylonitrile in Food and Packaging Material Guidelines for Formulated Supplementary Foods for Older Infants and Young Children General Principles for the Addition of Essential Nutrients to Foods Advisory List of Mineral Salts and Vitamin compounds for Use in Foods for Infants and Children Guidelines for the Preservation of Raw Milk by Lactoperoxidase System Guide for the Microbiological Quality of Spices and Herbs Used in Processed Meat and Poultry Products Guidelines for the Use of NonMeat Protein Products in Processed Meat and Poultry Products Guidelines for the Establishment of a Regulatory Programme for Control of Veterinary Drug Residues in Foods Guideline Procedures Visual Inspection of Canned Foods for the Lots of 2 2 1991 1991 CAC/GL CAC/GL CAC/GL 8 9 10 1991 1987 1979 CAC/GL 13 1991 CAC/GL 14 1991 CAC/GL 15 1991 CAC/GL 16 1993 CAC/GL 17 1993 CAC/GL CAC/GL CAC/GL CAC/GL CAC/GL CAC/GL 19 20 21 23 24 25 1995 1995 1997 1997 1997 1997 Guidelines for the Exchange of Information in Food Control 1 Emergency Situations Principles for Food Import and Export Certification and Inspection Principles for the Establishment and Application of Microbiological Criteria for Foods Guidelines for Use of Nutrition and 2 Health Claims General Guidelines for Use of the Term Halal Guidelines for the Exchange of Information between Countries on Rejections of Imported Foods Guidelines for the Design.

Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 141 .Flavourings CAC/GL 30 1999 Principles and Guidelines for the Conduct of Microbiological Risk Assessment Guidelines for the Sensory Evaluation of Fish and Shellfish in Laboratories Guidelines for the Production. PRODUCTION. ISSUANCE AND 2 USE OF GENERIC OFFICIAL CERTIFICATES Analysis of Pesticide Residues: Guidelines on Good Laboratory 1 Practice in Pesticide Residue Analysis Analysis of Pesticide Residues: Portion of Commodities to which Codex MRLS Apply and which is Analyzed 2003 African Regional Guidelines for Codex Contact Points and National Codex Committees Principles for the Risk Analysis of Foods Derived from Modern Biotechnology Guideline for the Conduct of Food Safety Assessment of Foods Derived from Recombinant-DNA Plants Guideline for the Conduct of Food Safety Assessment of Foods Produced Using Recombiant-DNA Microorganisms Guidelines for Food Import Control 1 Systems Model Certificate for Fish and Fishery Products Harmonized IUPAC Guidelines for Single-Laboratory Validation of Methods of Analysis 2006 2007 2001 4 2006 2001 3 2007 CAC/GL 31 1999 CAC/GL 32 1999 CAC/GL 33 1999 CAC/GL 34 1999 CAC/GL 36 1989 CAC/GL 37 2001 CAC/GL 38 2001 CAC/GL 40 1993 2003 CAC/GL 41 1993 CAC/GL 43 CAC/GL 44 2003 CAC/GL 45 2003 CAC/GL 46 2003 CAC/GL CAC/GL CAC/GL 47 48 49 2003 2004 2003 Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Processing. Labelling and 1 Marketing of Organically Produced Foods Recommended Methods of Sampling for Pesticide Residues for the Determination of Compliance with MRLs Guidelines for the Development of Equivalence Agreements Regarding Food Imports and Export Inspection and Certification Systems Class Names and the International Numbering System for Food 6 Additives Harmonised IUPAC Guidelines for the Use of Recovery Information in Analytical Measurement GUIDELINES FOR DESIGN.

Conduct and Interpretation of Method Performance Studies Harmonized Guidelines for Internal Quality Control in Analytical Chemistry Laboratories CAC/GL 61 2007 CAC/GL 62 2007 CAC/GL 63 2007 CAC/GL 64 1995 CAC/GL 65 1997 Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Confirmation and Quantative Determination of Residues Asian Regional Guidelines for National Codex Contact Points and National Codex Committees Regional Guidelines for Codex Contact Points and National Codex Committees (Near East Region) Guidelines on Estimation Uncertainty of Results of CAC/GL 56 2005 CAC/GL 57 1999 CAC/GL CAC/GL 58 59 2005 2006 CAC/GL 60 2006 Principles for Traceability / Product Tracing as a Tool Within a Food Inspection and Certification System Guidelines on the Application of General Principles of Food Hygiene to the Control of Listeria monocytogenes in Ready-to-Eat Foods Working Principles for Risk Analysis for Food Safety for Application by Governments Principles and Guidelines for the Conduct of Microbiological Risk Management Protocol for the Design. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 142 .CAC/GL CAC/GL 50 51 2004 2003 General guidelines on sampling Guidelines for Packing Media for Canned Fruits Guidelines on the Judgement of Equivalence of Sanitary Measures associated with Food Inspection and Certification Systems Guidelines Uncertainty on Measurement CAC/GL 53 2003 CAC/GL CAC/GL 54 55 2004 2005 Guidelines for Vitamin and Mineral Food Supplements Guidelines on the Use of Mass Spectrometry (MS) for Identification.

Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 143 . meat products. and other animal products Fish and fish products Subtotal Water quality Soil quality Industrial waste water quality Subtotal Number of Standards 331 129 94 28 42 70 694 90 91 84 265 Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. 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 Agriculture Food Fruit and Vegetables Tea Meat.9.9 Viet Nam National Standards (TCVN) for Food and Agriculture 471.

Aubergine Maze Potato.1 soil No. Radish.10.0 70. 1 2 3 Permitted Residue Limit for some heavy metals in cropping Permitted Residue Limit (mg/kg) 12.9. Bell pepper Tomato.1 Testing Method TCVN 5941:1995 TCVN 6665:2000 TCVN 6665:2000 TCVN 6665:2000 TCVN 6665:2000 9. Asparagus. Carrot Fruity beans.3 Permitted Residue Limit for some harmful bioorganisms and toxic chemicals in fresh vegetables No. 10 TCN 797:2006 TCVN 6498:1999. Garlic Chinese chives. Chille pepper. 10 TCN 796:2006 TCVN 6498:1999.500 600 500 400 300 250 200 150 90 80 60 mg/ kg Testing Method TCVN 5247:1990 - Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.10 Examples of some Vietnamese Standards related to VIETGAP 9. Bok Choy.0 Testing Method TCVN 6498:1999.001 0.01 0. Cauliflower.10. 10 TCN 796:2006 Element Arsenic (As) Cadimium (Cd) Lead (Pb) 9. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 144 .1 0.10. I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 II Indicator Nitrate content (NO3) Lettuce Herbs Cabbage.0 2. Cucurbit. Cucumber Melon Onion Watermelon Heavy metals and toxic substances content Permitted Residue Limit mg/ kg 1.2 Permitted Residue Limit for some chemicals in irrigation water No 1 2 3 4 Element Mercury(Hg) Cadmium(Cd) Arsenic (As) Lead (Pb) Permitted Residue Limit (mg/litre) 0.

0 0.0 1.05 0. TCVN 5367:1991 TCVN 7602:2007 TCVN 7604:2007 TCVN 5368:1991.Other vegetables Zinc (Zn) Stannum (Sn) Harmful bioorganism Samonella Coliforms Escherichia coli Pesticide Residue Chemicals listed in CODEX 1.Lettuce .1 0.02 40 200 CFU/ g 0 100 10 TCVN 7601:2007.1 2 3 4 5 Arsenic (As) Lead (Pb) Mercury (Hg) Copper (Cu) Cadmium(Cd) . Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 145 .2 0. TCVN 6848:2007 TCVN 6846:2007 According to According to CODEX CODEX According to According to ASEAN or Chemicals not listed in ASEAN or Taiwanese standards 2 Taiwanese CODEX standards Note: Identifying potentially harmful chemicals that need to be analysed is based on actual pesticide usage situation on vegetables at production units. TCVN 6541:1999 TCVN 7603:2007 6 7 III 1 2 3 IV 1 TCVN 5487:1991 TCVN 5496:2007 TCVN 4829:2005 TCVN 4883:1993.Root type .Leafy type . Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.3 30 0.

farmers) have the responsibility to assure that fresh/raw vegetables. Pre-packaged foods shall be labeled. In others. planting crops are not polluted by surrounding environments and be away from premises likely causing environmental pollution. without causing an adverse impact on human lives and health or environmental pollution. the existing infrastructure and common practices will need modification in order to reduce or prevent contamination. equipment meeting the requirements for food hygiene and safety and without causing food contamination. During the procedure for food processing. processors have the responsibility of using tools/equipment. plant protection drugs. built. The use of material for food processing complies with requirement for hygiene and safety prescribed by law.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. using detergents. MOH in developing and promulgating guidance documents exercising authority of management on food hygiene and safety. households and individuals) engaging in production of fresh vegetables. MOH in developing and promulgating guidance documents exercising authority of management on food hygiene and safety. accurately. fruits and tea must assure that places for seeding. 474. 475. designed. 473. and other substances relating to food hygiene and safety. tools. it must strictly comply with the stipulations of law and regulations. preside over and coordinate with MOST. MARD in coordinating with MOST and MOH exercises some steps at which contamination may occur and can be controlled. MOST preside over and coordinate with MOH and MOIT in developing Vietnam Standards on food. veterinary drugs. Input providers (organizations. packages. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 146 . 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. certification and accreditation procedure of food business meeting quality and safety standards. Distributors. food contamination and take measures for waste disposal in compliance with the law and regulations on environmental protection. MOST.9. dated 14 May 2008 472. organizing the inspection of implementing of legal and regulatory documents. MOIT coordinating with MARD. developing and promulgating legal and regulatory document on trade condition of food service. install and operated in a manner that meets the requirements for food hygiene and safety. MOH implement State management on food hygiene and safety of food product throughout the premise’s process of production until market circulation. MOIT coordinate with MOST. Food labels shall fully. growthpromoting substance. clearly and truthfully be inscribed with food compositions and other details as prescribed by law. The processors have the responsibility to assure that place reserved by them is located in an area having adequate conditions. especially toxic chemicals and from other pathogenic sources. fruits and tea produced by them are not contaminated and be away from places storing chemicals. animal feeds. The producers (growers. containers. They are also responsible for the origins of the produced fresh/raw food. MARD preside over to manage the use of fertilizers. They shall only produce or trade in food meeting the standards for food hygiene and safety. exercising food safety supervision and inspection in market circulation and export. traders. bactericides and antidotes with safety. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.

not simply curing them since. Consumers shall be entitled to information about food hygiene and safety. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. protecting their self in food consumption and fully complying with guidance on food hygiene and safety. to assure that the same problem does not affect future products. any organizations or individuals discovering firstly shall immediately inform the Health Department for timely taking measures to solve and remedy of consequences. 478.476. The People’s Committee at all levels shall investigate. Ministry of Health shall stipulate the reporting regime for food poisoning and food borne diseases. MOH coordinates with concerning sectors to conduct and organize the implement control of biological and chemical contamination in vegetables. 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. it is virtually impossible to go back and improve it for that item. remedy and solve the consequences immediately. voluntarily declare incident of food poisoning and food borne diseases. it shall be reported immediately to the health agencies and the nearest local People’s Committee. give the comments of compiling and implementing policy on food hygiene. 477. responsible for practicing food hygiene and safety. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 147 . If food borne disease occurs. compensated for use on unhygienic and unsafe food as prescribed by law. Both safety and quality assurance should focus on the prevention of problems. once safety or quality is reduced. Where it is a mass outbreak which means having many cases or death or occurring in more than 2 central provinces or cities. 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. choice and use of suitable foods as well safety foods. It is possible however. fruits and tea for consumption. In case out of control.

000 7.000 1 $ 15.1.1 Activity Review and assess regulations and roles on food safety and quality Regulations for the piloting of crop food safety management system Develop policies and regulations for planning of SAZ Develop policies and regulations for the establishment of monitoring system Design and Implementation of Provincial Food Safety Index Inputs Consulting services .000 2 $ 30.International Consulting services .000 24.000 .000 3.National Consulting services .International Consulting services .1.National Unit month month month month month month Unit Cost $ $ $ $ $ $ 15.000 3.000 1.1.500 6.12 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 1.5 2 Total $ $ $ $ $ $ 30.3 1.5 Consulting services for methodology development of PFSI (international) month $ 15.5 2 0.International Consulting services .000 15.1.4 Consulting services .000 Quantity 2 8 0.000 7.000 1.000 15.000 3.International month $ 15.1.National Consulting services .2 1.500 6.9.

1.000 3.International Consulting services .000 3.000 12.000 $ $ 10.000 1.000.000 45.000 3.000 1 4 4 12 3 9 $ $ $ $ $ $ 15.International Consulting services .International Consulting services .000 3.000 3.000 1.10 Incentive Policy Consulting services .000 1 4 $ $ 15.1.000 15.6 Consulting services .000 3 9 $ $ 45.000 12.000 1.000 4 1 $ $ 12.000 100 $ 1.National month month $ $ 15.National Consulting services .100 national certification bodies to be funded competitively by accreditation agency at DCP month month $ $ 15.1.1.9 1.8 1. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 149 .National Fund for certification (avg $10.000 per province) Develop policies and regulations for the establishment of information system Develop policies and regulations for the establishment of communication system Development and review of VIETGAPs Development of standards month survey $ 3.National month month month month month month $ $ $ $ $ $ 15.International Consulting services .000 $ 160.1.National Consulting services .000 27.000 60.7 Consulting services .000/certified organization) .International Consulting services .000 Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.Consulting services for methodology development of PFSI (local) Baseline in 16 provinces(10.000 160.000 15.000 27.000 36.

000 Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.Subtotal .Investment Costs Sub-comp 1 $ 1. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 150 .592.

000 10.000 200 200 1140 120 120 160 5 5 120 120 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 228.000 1. staff at DCP (1 additional full time) Staff at NAFIQAD (1 additional full time) Workshops (2/year/province) Conference (1/year) Newsletters.1.000 24.000 month month month workshop conference lump sum month month $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 200 200 300 1.1.000 1.076.Recurrent Costs subcomp 1 Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. staff at provinces (1 additional full time) Staff at NAFIQAD (1 additional full time).Table 27 Recurrent Costs for Output 1 of Policy and Institutional Component – Improving Regulatory Framework and Coordination No 1.7 Establishment of information system Establishment of communication system 1.000 24.000 10.1. etc Staff at DCP (1 additional full time) Staff at DCP (1 additional FT) Unit survey Unit Cost $ 3.000 50.5 Activity Design and Implementation of Provincial Food Safety Index Inputs Surveys (2 per year in each province Staff at NAFIQAD (2 additional full time).000 36.1.000 50. staff at DCP (1 additional full time). posters. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 151 .6 1.000 24.9 Development and review of VIETGAP Development of standards Subtotal .1.000 Quantity 160 Total $ 480.8 1.000 160.

000 1. and tea. vegetables. and planning Capacity of formulating food safety regulations. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 152 . 2 staff at DST (2 staff/dept). provide training.3 Capacity of accreditation agency (DCP) to certify.000 10 $ 30.000 12.000 Study tour $ 15. 2 training course/year Study tours abroad for 5 staff from NAFIQAD and DCP (3 study tours to 3 different countries) month month month month $ $ $ $ 15. certification bodies.000 3 $ 45.000 2 $ 30. 10 staff at DCP.2 Training course $ 3.International Consulting services .National Consulting services . and strategies Inputs Unit Unit Cost Quantity Total Consulting services . policies.000 3.1 Activity Assessment of current capacity.capacity needs for food safety at MARD.000 30.National Training 10 staff at NAFIQAD.International month $ 15.000 Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.000 1 2 2 4 $ $ $ $ 15.2. 5 staff at DPP.2.000 15. 2 staff at Dept Legislation.International Consulting services .000 1.000 3.000 6.2. and laboratories for fruit. and audit certification bodies Consulting services .Table 28 Investment Costs for Output 2 of Policy and Institutional Component – Strengthening Capacity No 1.

training courses per year for 15 staff month month Training course month month Training course $ $ $ $ $ 15.000 3. and disseminating GAPs effectively $ 2.000 15.National Training for 20 organizations each year.000 30.International Consulting services .000 Quantity 4 12 2 6 10 Total $ 12.000 1.000 5. and DPP .000 1.6 Capacity of testing.000 $ $ $ $ 3.National Training of trainers at NAFIQAD. 3 training course/year Consulting services .000 $ $ $ $ 36.000 Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.No Activity Inputs Consulting services . demonstrating.000 3. 2 training course/year Unit month Training course month month Training course Unit Cost $ 3.5 Capacity of laboratories to provide testing and analytical services to monitoring and inspection agencies Consulting services .2. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 153 .2.International Consulting services .4 Capacity of certification bodies to provide training and audit certified organizations 1.000 45.2.000 50.000 3.000 15.000 50. DCP.000 18.000 15.National Training 10 staff at DCP and 16 staff from DARD.000 10 $ 20.000 18. 2 training course/year Consulting services .000 5.000 5 5 10 3 6 $ $ $ $ $ 75.International Consulting services .National Training for 20 laboratories each year.

2. 2 training course/year $ $ $ 5.000 Quantity 10 Total $ 30.000 10 2 4 $ $ $ 30.National Training for 10 staff from NAFIQAD.000 30.000 2 4 $ $ 30.000 12.000 12.2 training course per year for 30 staff Unit Training course Unit Cost $ 3.000 1.8 Capacity of monitoring food safety from pre-production to postproduction level Consulting services . 2 training course/year month month Training course month month Training course month month $ $ 15.International Consulting services .000 12.000 $ $ $ 3.000 1.International Consulting services . DCP.National Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. DPP.000 10 2 4 $ $ $ 50.2.000 3.000 3.No Activity Inputs Training of trainers at NAFEQ .000 15. and DST.9 Capacity of inspecting food safety from pre-production to postproduction level Consulting services .000 30. DPP.000 15.International Consulting services .National Training for 10 staff from NAFIQAD. DCP.000 1.2.000 3. and 16*2 staff from DARD. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 154 .7 Capacity of developing and harmonizing domestic standards with international standards Consulting services .

000 3.000 45.2.000 6.000 6. and 16*2 staff from DARD.11 Capacity of communicating effectively about food safety issues 1.13 Capacity in Risk Analysis Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.International Consulting services .International $ $ $ 5. 2 training course/year Consulting services .000 1. 2 training course/year Consulting services .000 1. NAFIQAD.2.000 3. DPP.10 Capacity of informing effectively about food safety issues Consulting services .International Consulting services .000 15.000 50. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 155 . DPP.12 Capacity of planning for SAZ $ $ $ $ $ 5.1.000 10 1 2 10 3 $ $ $ $ $ 50.International Consulting services .000 10 1 2 $ $ $ 50.000 1.2. DCP.000 15.000 15.National Training for 16*2 staff from DARD.000 3. DPP.000 15. 2 training course/year Unit Training course month month Training course month month Training course month month Training course month Unit Cost Quantity Total $ $ $ 5. and 16 staff from provinces. DCP.000 15. 2 training course/year Consulting services . DCP. plus 16 staff from province.000 5.National Training for 10 staff from ICARD.000 10 1 2 $ $ $ 50.000 15.000 15. NAFIQAD.No Activity Inputs Training for 10 staff from NAFIQAD.National Training for 10 staff from ICARD.000 6.

Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 156 .National Training for 20 laboratories.000 $ $ 50.000 - Subtotal .Investment Costs Output 2 $ 1. 2 training course/year Unit month Training course Unit Cost $ 3.No Activity Inputs Consulting services .000 Quantity 3 10 Total $ 9.000 $ 5.140.000 Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.

3.3 Training course $ 300 960 $ $ $ 288.000 4 $ 12. 2 training course/year. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 157 .3.2 1. training delivered by MARD and DARD staff Equipment $ 3.000 - 1.000 Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.1 Activity Establish Standing Committee on Food Safety Establish unit for Food Monitoring at NAFIQAD Safety Inputs Unit Unit Cost Quantity Total $ $ Equipment (1 server plus 3 PC computer system) Equipment $ 3.000 4 $ $ 12.3 Establish unit for Food Safety at DCP and sub-units for Food Safety at DARD Equipment (1 + 16 PC computer system) Training for 16*3 staff at district level (3 districts/province). and 16*6 staff at commune level (2 commune/province).000 312.Table 29 Investment Costs for Output 3 of Policy and Institutional Component – Crop Food Safety Management System No 1.4 Food Safety Specialists at MARD/DARD and Food Safety Facilitators at district and commune level Subtotal .3.000 1.Investment Costs Subcomp 1.3.

8 at NAFEC) . 5 at DCP.000 Subtotal . Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 158 .salaries Unit Unit Cost Quantity Total 1.4 Food Safety Specialists at MARD/DARD month $ 300 1200 $ 360.3 $ 360.000 Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.3. 2 at DPP.Recurrent Costs Sub-comp 1.Table 30 Recurrent Costs for Output 3 of Policy and Institutional Component – Crop Food Safety Management System No Activity Inputs New food safety staff at MARD (5 at NAFIQAD.

000 312.000 1.140. Recurrent costs are for 5 years Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.Table 31 Summary of Costs for Outputs and Component on Policy and Institutional Development Investment Cost Recurrent Cost Total Cost Output 1 Output 2 Output 3 Total $ $ $ $ 1.044.000 1.000 3. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 159 .592.668.000 1.436.000 360.076.000 $ $ $ $ 1.140.000 Note.000 $ $ $ $ 2.480.000 672.000 4.

Standing Committee on Food Safety headed by Vice Minister of MARD for food quality and safety established with Secretariat provided by NaFIQAD 3. including organic production) 5. and tea including regulations on SAZ. vegetables.13 Design and Monitoring Framework Institutional Component of the Project for the Policy and Table 32 Design and Monitoring Framework for the Policy and Institutional Component of the QSIAP Output Targets Data Sources and Monitorin g 1. decisions on food safety and quality 4. Resistance to separate monitoring agency from implementation agency Output 1 Improved regulatory framework and coordination for state management of safety and quality of fruit. Reports of the monitoring unit under MARD. vegetables. and information. and tea established Output 2 Strengthened capacity of 5. About 130 staff from MARD and 140 staff from DARD trained in regulations 6. communication. and monitoring. information system. Sustained commitment of MARD to improving policy and regulatory framework 2. Incentive policy. including Provincial Food Safety Index 6. Rent seeking behavior might result from an empowered inspection system 3. and tea 1. GAP and other standards reviewed annually and revised to meet user concerns and any changes in market requirements 5. Food safety monitoring system. MARD decrees. Rationalization of laboratory system may involve making use of analytical services of agencies outside of MARD 4. and tea (standards for at least 10 different types of vegetables. High global food prices might retard the emphasis on food safety and quality 2. 4. 10 different types of fruit. Reports of the information and communication units at MARD Assumptions and Risks Assumptions 1. and tea. CPMU reports and document records Assumptions 1. Cooperation among departments to transfer responsibilities and assets as necessary 3. A comprehensive and readily accessible set of regulations for the implementation of food safety and quality of fruit. A review of existing regulations submitted to MARD decision makers 2. STAMEQapproved TCVN related to fruit. vegetables.9. and tea 5. Phasing out of subsidies to certified bodies over the course of the Project Risks 1. Standing Committee on Food Safety minutes and list of meeting attendance 3. Sustained . vegetables. and communication system for fruit. A consistent and readily available set of good practices (VIETGAP) and standards in production and postharvest operations (TCVN) related to fruit. vegetables. CPMU reports and document records 2.

Standing Committee for Food Safety established by first half of 2009 2. Records of staff fully devoted to food safety activities in the project 4. and tea. Risks 1. The piloted system does not lead to replicable outcome in other provinces. and tea. 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. inspection. Coordination with other projects involved in capacity strengthening activities for food quality and safety 3. Job descriptions. communication. Pilot units for Food Safety established at DCP and DARDs in 16 provinces by second half of 2009 4. and trading of fruit. Quality of service surveys conducted by independent organization Assumptions 1. vegetables. processing. including Provincial Food Safety Index 8. and certified bodies 2. Number of certified bodies by DCP 9. monitoring. Minutes of Standing Committee for Food Safety and attendance lists 3. certification bodies. and laboratories involved in the implementation of quality and safe food production. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 161 . Staff from 100 certified/certifying bodies trained 7. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Food safety reflected in new degree programs at education institutions and research programs at research organizations Risks 2. reassignment of staff. Staff from 20 laboratories trained 8. and policy formulation.Output Targets state agencies. Staff from 16 DARD provinces trained in planning SAZ Data Sources and Monitorin g 7. Sustained commitment of MARD to pilot the crop food safety management system. Area of SZA established by DARD 10. GAP. standards. Quality of service surveys conducted by independent organization Assumptions and Risks commitment of MARD to capacity strengthening of state organizations. Pilot units for Food Safety Monitoring established by second half of 2009 at NAFIQAD 3. Reports of the monitoring unit under MARD. and risk analysis 6. vegetables. Scheduling of training activities might conflict with other activities Output 3: Establishment of a pilot Crop Food Safety Management System (CFSMS) from the central level of MARD to the commune level for fruit. laboratories. 1. 1. planning. certification. information. CPMU reports and document records 2.

the National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food Standards (ACFS) is the Accreditation Body responsible to accredit Certification Bodies for food related systems (HACCP.9. Ltd. 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. To issue certificate and accredit Certification Body. 2002 in accordance with the Ministerial Regulations governing Division of Government Service: the National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food Standards.14. and monitor food safety Program. Other departments at MOAC such as Department of Agriculture. Japan. 9. processed agricultural commodities and food. To serve as a key information center for primary agricultural. and Department of Fishery support and facilitate exporting activities to ensure the quality and safety in food products.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. ACFS has set new National Agricultural Standards that cover all quality and safetyrelated issues in agricultural commodities and practices.2 • • • • • • • Responsibilities of ACFC To set standards for primary agricultural. Overseas Merchandise Inspection Co. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 162 . 9.14. To coordinate and co-negotiate on non-tariff trade barrier issues as well as on international standardizations. To serve in other capacities as requested by law or the cabinet.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. processed agricultural and food products. February 2006 Two key ministries have the key role for food safety. enforce. ACFS also accredits food laboratories. To supervise. In MOAC. processed agricultural. etc). and food products. 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. Its duties include standardization and certification of standard from farm to table. GAP. To serve as a secretariat to the Board of National Agriculture Commodity and Food Standards. Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives as a Department under Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives. Department of Livestock Development.. GMP. 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.. 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 Bureau has been entrusted to serve as focal point of standardization of agricultural commodities. or the minister Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.

Any standard set by ACFS will cover all elements of safety and hygiene of human beings. orchids.4 ACFS and Standards Establishment Agricultural commodity and food standards are used as references for manufacturing. ACFS could ask the Food and Drug Administration to pass a law that specifies levels of toxic residues. Commodity Standards are set as national references for production. beef. their production standards to international accepted. For instance. either voluntarily or compulsorily. and guarantees of products. asparagus. ACFS can ask for cooperation from other authorized bodies to pass such laws. practice system standards and general safety standards. domestic and international trade. durian. toxic residues standards. However ACFS will always listen to opinions from all stakeholders before it passes any standard. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 163 . Although there are no existing laws demanding mandatory safety standards for food and agriculture commodity. Among standardizations are Good Agricultural Practice or GAP. and method for identification of animal disease. 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 Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products.14. ACFS divides its standardizations into three categorie?s commodity standards.14. exports and imports and certifications. pork. are rather done on voluntary than compulsory basis because people see the benefits of harmonization. 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.9.3 Structure Figure 7 Structure of National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food Standards in Thailand 9. However if necessities on consumer health or export competitiveness arise. animals and plants and qualifications of specific consumer products both food and non-food. etc. mangoes. trade. fish. they may soon be made compulsory.

14. distributors. or standards on autopsies.htmTo implement Thai food safety policies.go. ACFS usually organizes a public hearing forum for all sides from farmers. MOAC uses Q-Mark as national logo for certification of all agricultural commodities. hearing of opinion from all concerned parties. including risk assessment. 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. Some information derives from works of related agencies. is also very crucial.abattoirs and millers. The procedures are as follows: 1) Prioritization of issues or items be standardized 2) Appoint a technical committee to consider draft. 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. General safety standards are specifically designed for safety and sanitation of animals and plants. standards on samplings and analysis. Maximum Residue Limit (MRL) for pesticide maximum limit (ML) for contamination standards. 9. 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 . GAP for Bee Farms and Requirements for Wood Packaging for Export. 4) Propose to the committee for consideration. Department of Livestock Development. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 164 .doae. which are imposed on agriculture commodities and all kinds of food.which requires information gathering. The fifth step. Among manufacturing standards announced in 2004 were GAP for Food Crops. 5) Hearing of opinion from all concerned parties 6) Submit to a scrutiny committee. Also. 9. Department of Fishery.5 Standard elaboration steps ACFS has set up eight-steps for elaboration of standard. exporters and consumers to discuss on any complications of the standards.th/English/index. The Q-Mark logo is not only used for agricultural and food products for export but also for the domestic food market. processors dealers. All farm producers Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. 3) Set up the draft standard. for example.14. Such standards can be used as benchmarks for farmers.Set up the draft standard . ACFS accredits the food laboratories.as logo for certification of all agricultural commodities. namely Department of Agriculture. To implement the government food safety policy. MOAC uses the Q-Mark – indication of quality guarantee . http://www.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. Among these standards are Good Agricultural Practice (GAP) Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) or Good Hygienic Practice (GHP). But sometimes available information is insufficient and ACFS has to fill in the gap by initiating its own research. ACFS has set the new National Agricultural Standards that cover all quality and safety related issues in agricultural commodities and practices. studies and research. which are transparent and well accepted by all parties.

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. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. The food safety management system is in accordance with international food standards required by importing countries related to food safety systems.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. 193. There are about 30 certification bodies in Thailand currently providing various food safety certification services for the food industry. Food Act No. GAP and HACCP are voluntary while implementation of GMP for packinghouses and processing establishment are upon request. The FDA issued food regulations titled: “Code of Practice General Principles of Food Hygiene”. import or sell unsafe food. subject: Manufacturing Processes. Equipment and Storage of Food products. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 165 .The Department of Health (DOH) is responsible for ensuring food safety for food handling services and retail for domestic consumers. Figure 8 shows the roles of MOAC and MOPH in food safety management. This regulation covers 57 food group products. The law is enforced by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

MOAC developed several manuals to guide GAP application to farmers. Check list for GAP inspection: Check list for GAP inspection have right requirements including water source. Content of GAP includes: 1. The national GAP program was divided into 2 parts: One for government officers and the other for farmers and producers. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 166 . use of agro-chemicals and their application method. GAP. cultivation practices. • Recording forms on quality management system: GAP on crops for growers and farm advisors 4. HACCP Department Agriculture Organic. transportation and record keeping have also been addressed. post harvest. storage and transportation on farm. • Supporting document on quality management system: GAP on crops for growers and farm advisors. varieties. fertilizer use. GAP implementation guideline for growers and farm advisors: • Quality management system: GAP on crops for growers and farm advisors. irrigation. ACFS Figure 8 Roles of MOAC and MOPH in food safety management 9. record keeping. Suitable farm site. growing area. and farm inspectors. harvesting. farm advisors.Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives (MOAC) Ministry of Public Health (MOPH) Food business operators Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Control and Monitoring Program Department of Health (DOH) Control and Monitoring Program Exporters Manufacturers Processors Primary producers Inputs Department for Livestock development GAP. GAP on crops: A manual describes practices required to improve quality and safety of products. Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Thai government has paid great effort to develop capacities of government officers and farmers in GAP understanding and implementation. crop protection. HACCP for GMP. 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. GAP inspection manual: A general manual for inspecting farms applying for GAP certification. pesticide use. GMP. crop sanitation.7 GAP Implementation MOAC executed food safety strategic policy since 2003. production process. HACCP Department for Fishery GAP. GMP. 2. 3.14. COC.

8 GAP Certification Procedure Farmer applies to GAP Regional staff GAP members records Record the location and ID of farmer Farmer GAP training (2 days) Farmer advisor monitors farmer Farmer GAP practices Regional staff conducts final inspection for pesticide analysis Farmer products harvests Passed Not passed Products supplied to market/packer Document sent to Food Safety Committee Regional staff trains farmer/farm advisor for GAP Certificate Issuance (1 year valid) Figure 9 GAP steps Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Many importing countries require a Pesticide Residues Certificate at the time of export. Many requirements and regulations have been promulgated regarding inspection of pesticide residues or antibiotics which may have contaminated vegetables.14. 9. The level of maximum residue limited (MRL) of agro-chemical substances or antibiotics and methods of analysis are in accordance with importing country regulations.Currently. meat and fishery products before exporting to various countries. GAP focuses more on foods for export than foods for domestic consumption. fruits. Institutional Analysis – Background Paper 167 .

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful