Project Work – M.Sc.

International Food Business and Consumer Studies

Fulda University of Applied Sciences and University of Kassel
This guide was created by: Oluwatimilehin Ajekola, José Luis Hernández Rivero
Owusu Eunice Afua Abuaa and Esther Umunna

WORKSHOP: QUALITY OF HONEY IN DEVELPOING

COUNTRIES

TOPIC 5: HAZARD ANALYSIS AND CRITICAL

CONTROL POINT (HACCP)

INTRODUCTION

According to Codex Alimentarius, HACCP is a system which identifies, evaluates, and controls
hazards which are significant for food safety (Codex Alimentarius, 1997). Some aims of this
preventive safety system are ensuring a high level of food safety, fulfilling legal requirements,
meeting the industry´s food safety standards, employing preventative measure that minimize
risk, training and sensitizing staff about potential hazards and illustrating potential hazards that
could affect the business (Janssen and Lehrke, 2017).

Contamination of honey is the major factor affecting the quality of honey. The contamination
sources can roughly be divided into environmental and apicultural ones. It is said that the
greatest danger for the contamination of honey and the other bee products comes less from the
environment, but from incorrect apicultural practices (Bogdanov et al., 2005).

According to the legislation of the European Union food must be produced according to the
principles of Good Manufacturing Practices and Good Hygiene Practices (Bogdanov et al.,
2005). Dangers for the contamination of food are analysed by the Hazard Analysis Critical
Control Point (HACCP) based approach.

APPLICATION OF HACCP IN THE PRODUCTION OF HONEY

In terms of food safety in honey production, every phase of the food chain must be considered.
The HACCP methodology described by the CAC (1999) defines seven principles of HACCP
which must be followed to develop a plan at each production plant to help ensure the safety of
the final honey produced. HACCP is made on condition that good hygiene practices and
prerequisites program has fully been implemented. The seven principles are explained with
various examples. These examples were obtained and based on our “Honey Flow Chart”
according to several authors from different sources.

1
Project Work – M.Sc. International Food Business and Consumer Studies
Fulda University of Applied Sciences and University of Kassel
This guide was created by: Oluwatimilehin Ajekola, José Luis Hernández Rivero
Owusu Eunice Afua Abuaa and Esther Umunna

Figure 1: Example of a honey flow chart. Adopted from SAGARPA Mexico, 2015; Vica et al.,
2009; Reaño, 2016.

1. Conduct a Hazard Analysis

Hazard analysis is an overall process of hazard identification, risk assessment and risk
evaluation. Hazard identification is the process of finding, listing and characterizing potential
hazards. Hazards can be identified as biological, chemical or physical. Examples for hazards
are:

Biological: salmonella, Clostridium botulinum (pathogenic microorganisms)

Chemical: pesticides, antibiotics

Physical: glass splinter, piece of metal

Risk assessment is a process for comprehending the nature of hazards and determining the level
of risk (CCOHS, 2017). After identifying the potential hazards, the risk assessment can be
carried out with different methods. One of the simplest methods is risk assessment by means
of a matrix (Janssen and Lehrke, 2017):

2
Project Work – M.Sc. International Food Business and Consumer Studies
Fulda University of Applied Sciences and University of Kassel
This guide was created by: Oluwatimilehin Ajekola, José Luis Hernández Rivero
Owusu Eunice Afua Abuaa and Esther Umunna

• Matrix with two assessment factors – Probability x Severity –

Frequent
Probable
Hazard Occasionally
probability
Remotely Possible
Unlikely
Unimaginable
Minor Low Medium High

Hazard severity

Figure 2. Risk matrix with two assessment factors

Last step of a risk assessment is a risk evaluation, what is the process of comparing an estimated
risk against given risk criteria to determine the significance of the risk (CCOHS, 2017).
1 to 15 Overall risk levels acceptable
Introduce simple preventive measures if required
16 to 25 Overall risk level tolerable
Preventive measures may be necessary, check exactly whether a CCP, CP or
PRP is required
>25 Overall risk levels not acceptable
Specific control measures required to reduce overall risk level (CCO or PRP)

Table 2. Example of risk evaluation using a FMEA criteria table: Table 1.

2. Determine the Critical Control Points (CCP)

In this step it is important to identify what is a Critical Control Point (CCP) and Control Point
(CP). CCP is defined as a step important to prevent or eliminate a biological, chemical or
physical food safety hazard or reduce to an acceptable level and to monitor measures
continously while a CP is any point in a specific food system at which biological, physical and
chemical hazards can be controlled, but not continously.

In this paper and based on Figure 1, we obtained results shown on the table 3

3
Project Work – M.Sc. International Food Business and Consumer Studies
Fulda University of Applied Sciences and University of Kassel
This guide was created by: Oluwatimilehin Ajekola, José Luis Hernández Rivero
Owusu Eunice Afua Abuaa and Esther Umunna

Process Potential Type Preventive Measures CP or

Step Hazard CCP?

Receiving Use of Chemical 1. Cooperation of CP

pesticide, beekeepers with farmers in
antibiotics eliminating the use of
pesticides on the farmlands
where the apiary is situated
Receiving Clostridium Chemical 1. Pregnant and lactating CP
Botulinum mothers should be informed
about the adverse effect of
consuming honey.
2. Babies should not be fed
with honey
Bottling Presence of Physical 1. Guarantees of the supplier CCP
foreign objects. + purchase specification of
e.g. bee parts, bottle
dead bees, sand, 2. Proper cleaning of bottles
stones, pollen, to remove all physical
pieces of wood contaminants
or sticks etc
3. Visual control, all bottles
Fragments of should be checked before
broken bottles and after filling

Table 3. The table above shows these processing points, type of hazard, and control measures

3. Establish Critical Limits

Critical limit values must be defined and validated for every CCP to recognise in a timely
manner when a process is no longer controlled. In the case of bottling the limit is: zero foreign
parts.

4. Establish a system to monitor control of the CCPs

Watch and check CCPs to ensure that instructions and corrective procedures are carried out
right. Monitoring of chemical hazards by the beekeepers could in case of a CP be carried out
by documenting certain questions and procedures such as (Formato et al., 2011):

• Are treatments still ongoing?

4
Project Work – M.Sc. International Food Business and Consumer Studies
Fulda University of Applied Sciences and University of Kassel
This guide was created by: Oluwatimilehin Ajekola, José Luis Hernández Rivero
Owusu Eunice Afua Abuaa and Esther Umunna

• Is any device from previous hive treatments (sponges, strips) still present in the brood
box?
• Has a withdrawal time of an agent in question been reported in the medicines book, and
if so, has it been adhered to?

5. Establish the corrective actions

Corrective actions (immediate actions) must be determined for every CCP when a process is
deemed out of control. Also, all corrective actions are to be taken and documented. (Janssen
and Lehrke, 2017).

6. Determining verification procedures

Establish procedures for verification to confirm that the HACCP system is working effectively.
In this step is recommended to collect data such as type of method, criteria, frequency,
responsible and proof (Janssen and Lehrke, 2017)

7. Documentation and keeping records

Establish documentation concerning all procedures and records appropriate to these principles
and their application.

5
Project Work – M.Sc. International Food Business and Consumer Studies
Fulda University of Applied Sciences and University of Kassel
This guide was created by: Oluwatimilehin Ajekola, José Luis Hernández Rivero
Owusu Eunice Afua Abuaa and Esther Umunna

SOURCES

• Bogdanov S., Fluri P., Imdorf A., Charrierre J.D., Kilchenmann V. (2005). Self-control
system for the production of high quality honey: the swiss example, Apiacta 40, 28-33.

• CAC. (1999). Recommended international code of practice: general principles of food

hygiene. Rome, Italy: FAO/ WHO. Document CAC/RCP 1-1996, Rev. 4-2003.

• CCOHS (2017). Risk Assessment. Hamilton, Canada. Retrieved from

https://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/hsprograms/risk_assessment.html

• Codex Alimentarius. (1997). Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP)
system and guidelines for its application. Rome, Italy: FAO/WHO. Retrieved from
http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/y1579e/y1579e03.htm

• Food Safe Authority (2005). Code of Practice. Processing of bees products. Part 3:
HACCP Application. New Zealand. Retrieved from
http://www.foodsafety.govt.nz/elibrary/industry/code-practice-bee/bee-cop-part-3.pdf

• G. Formato, R. Zilli, R Condoleo, S. Marozzi, I. Davis and F.J.M. Smulders (2011).

Risk management in primary apicultural production. Part 2: A Hazard Analysis Critical
Control Point approach to assuring the safety of unprocessed honey: Veterinary
Quarterly Vol. 31, No. 2, 87–97

• Janssen J. and Lehrke, M. (2017). HACCP compact and comprehensible: A guide to

implementing HACCP in the food industry. Hamburg, Germany: Lehrke Verlag
GmbH.

• NaturReplica (2014). Quality standards for honey. United States of America. Retrieved
from http://www.natureplica.com/tag/fda-standards-for-honey/

• SAGARPA (2015). Manual de Buenas Prácticas de Producción de Miel. SAGARPA,

Mexico. Retrieved from

6
Project Work – M.Sc. International Food Business and Consumer Studies
Fulda University of Applied Sciences and University of Kassel
This guide was created by: Oluwatimilehin Ajekola, José Luis Hernández Rivero
Owusu Eunice Afua Abuaa and Esther Umunna

http://www.sagarpa.gob.mx/ganaderia/Publicaciones/Lists/Manuales%20apcolas/Atta
chments/1/mbpp.pdf

• Reaño A. (2016). Elaboración del Plan HACCP para el proceso de miel de abeja
envasada en la empresa Toyva Eirl en Lambayeque. Universidad Señor de Sipán.
Retrieved from
http://repositorio.uss.edu.pe/bitstream/uss/843/1/REAÑO%20ARZE%2C%20KHAR
LA%20YSABEL.pdf

• Vica M., Mirel G., Dumitrel G. and Varvara S. (2009). Microbiological Role in Hazards
Analysis of Natural Honey Processing. In Journal of Agroalimentary Process and
Technologies. Vol. 15. No. 3. 353-360