Department of Food Science, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas 72704, USA.
J Food Prot. 2012 Sep;75(9):1660-72. doi: 10.4315/0362-028X.JFP-11-550.
International attention has been focused on minimizing costs that may unnecessarily raise food prices. One important aspect to consider is the redundant and overlapping costs of food safety audits. The Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) has devised benchmarked schemes based on existing international food safety standards for use as a unifying standard accepted by many retailers. The present study was conducted to evaluate the impact of the decision made by Walmart Stores (Bentonville, AR) to require their suppliers to become GFSI compliant. An online survey of 174 retail suppliers was conducted to assess food suppliers' opinions of this requirement and the benefits suppliers realized when they transitioned from their previous food safety systems. The most common reason for becoming GFSI compliant was to meet customers' requirements; thus, supplier implementation of the GFSI standards was not entirely voluntary. Other reasons given for compliance were enhancing food safety and remaining competitive. About 54 % of food processing plants using GFSI benchmarked schemes followed the guidelines of Safe Quality Food 2000 and 37 % followed those of the British Retail Consortium. At the supplier level, 58 % followed Safe Quality Food 2000 and 31 % followed the British Retail Consortium. Respondents reported that the certification process took about 10 months. The most common reason for selecting a certain GFSI benchmarked scheme was because it was widely accepted by customers (retailers). Four other common reasons were (i) the standard has a good reputation in the industry, (ii) the standard was recommended by others, (iii) the standard is most often used in the industry, and (iv) the standard was required by one of their customers. Most suppliers agreed that increased safety of their products was required to comply with GFSI benchmarked schemes. They also agreed that the GFSI required a more carefully documented food safety management system, which often required improved company food safety practices and increased employee training. Adoption of a GFSI benchmarked scheme resulted in fewer audits, i.e., one less per year. An educational opportunity exists to acquaint retailers and suppliers worldwide with the benefits of having an internationally recognized certification program such as that recognized by the GFSI.
国际社会一直关注如何尽量降低可能导致食品价格不必要上涨的成本。其中一个需要考虑的重要方面是食品安全审核中存在的冗余和重叠成本。全球食品安全倡议（GFSI）已经根据现有的国际食品安全标准制定了基准方案，用作许多零售商认可的统一标准。本研究旨在评估沃尔玛（Bentonville，AR）决定要求其供应商符合 GFSI 标准的决策所产生的影响。对 174 家零售供应商进行了在线调查，以评估食品供应商对这一要求的看法，以及他们从之前的食品安全系统过渡时所获得的益处。符合 GFSI 标准的最常见原因是满足客户的要求；因此，供应商实施 GFSI 标准并非完全自愿。其他合规原因包括提高食品安全水平和保持竞争力。约 54%使用 GFSI 基准方案的食品加工厂遵循了食品安全 2000 准则，37%遵循了英国零售商协会的准则。在供应商层面，58%遵循了食品安全 2000 准则，31%遵循了英国零售商协会的准则。受访者报告称，认证过程大约需要 10 个月。选择特定 GFSI 基准方案的最常见原因是因为它得到了客户（零售商）的广泛认可。其他四个常见原因是：（i）该标准在行业内享有良好声誉，（ii）该标准得到了他人的推荐，（iii）该标准在行业内最常用，（iv）其客户之一要求使用该标准。大多数供应商认为，为了符合 GFSI 基准方案，他们需要提高产品的安全性。他们还认为，GFSI 需要一个记录更详细的食品安全管理体系，这通常需要改进公司的食品安全实践并增加员工培训。采用 GFSI 基准方案后，审核次数减少，即每年减少一次。需要向全球零售商和供应商宣传具有国际认可的认证计划（如 GFSI 认可的认证计划）的好处，这是一个教育机会。
