Non-compliances - an indicator of food control effectiveness
Introduction: This paper presents an option for evaluating food control effectiveness by analysing the frequency of non-compliances (FnC). Material and methods: A food business establishment can have several different types of control areas (i.e. pest control, HACCP), that can be inspected to assess...
| Auteurs principaux: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Langue: | English |
| Publié: |
Taylor & Francis Group
2019-01-01
|
| Collection: | Infection Ecology & Epidemiology |
| Sujets: | |
| Accès en ligne: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20008686.2019.1599276 |
| _version_ | 1828154817346797568 |
|---|---|
| author | Christian Berking Ivar Vågsholm Lisa-Marie Hedberg Sölvi Sörgjerd Rauni Niskanen |
| author_facet | Christian Berking Ivar Vågsholm Lisa-Marie Hedberg Sölvi Sörgjerd Rauni Niskanen |
| author_sort | Christian Berking |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Introduction: This paper presents an option for evaluating food control effectiveness by analysing the frequency of non-compliances (FnC). Material and methods: A food business establishment can have several different types of control areas (i.e. pest control, HACCP), that can be inspected to assess its compliance with regulations in the food sector. From April 2012 to April 2014, 10 736 inspections were performed in Sweden, covering all 15 types of control areas. In these inspections, 2223 non-compliances were found, giving a FnC of 0.21 per control area inspected. Outlying types of control areas, inspection teams and establishments were selected for supervision of the internal audit procedure. Results and discussion: The key and surprising finding was that types of control area, teams and establishments with high FnC had a higher ratio of false negative non-compliances than those with low FnC. Moreover, false negative non-compliances were more common than false positive non-compliances. Possible explanations include the complexity of legislation affecting food businesses and the complexities of the food business. Conclusions: The risk of non-compliance going undetected is greatest where many non-compliances have already been detected. These results should inform future food control strategies. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-11T22:45:20Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-7d4c4e7f29e94a77b870d65b51a731f6 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2000-8686 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-11T22:45:20Z |
| publishDate | 2019-01-01 |
| publisher | Taylor & Francis Group |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Infection Ecology & Epidemiology |
| spelling | doaj.art-7d4c4e7f29e94a77b870d65b51a731f62022-12-22T03:58:47ZengTaylor & Francis GroupInfection Ecology & Epidemiology2000-86862019-01-019110.1080/20008686.2019.15992761599276Non-compliances - an indicator of food control effectivenessChristian Berking0Ivar Vågsholm1Lisa-Marie Hedberg2Sölvi Sörgjerd3Rauni Niskanen4National Food AgencySwedish University of Agricultural SciencesNational Food AgencyNational Food AgencyNational Food AgencyIntroduction: This paper presents an option for evaluating food control effectiveness by analysing the frequency of non-compliances (FnC). Material and methods: A food business establishment can have several different types of control areas (i.e. pest control, HACCP), that can be inspected to assess its compliance with regulations in the food sector. From April 2012 to April 2014, 10 736 inspections were performed in Sweden, covering all 15 types of control areas. In these inspections, 2223 non-compliances were found, giving a FnC of 0.21 per control area inspected. Outlying types of control areas, inspection teams and establishments were selected for supervision of the internal audit procedure. Results and discussion: The key and surprising finding was that types of control area, teams and establishments with high FnC had a higher ratio of false negative non-compliances than those with low FnC. Moreover, false negative non-compliances were more common than false positive non-compliances. Possible explanations include the complexity of legislation affecting food businesses and the complexities of the food business. Conclusions: The risk of non-compliance going undetected is greatest where many non-compliances have already been detected. These results should inform future food control strategies.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20008686.2019.1599276supervisionofficial controlverificationeffectivenessfood businessscreening |
| spellingShingle | Christian Berking Ivar Vågsholm Lisa-Marie Hedberg Sölvi Sörgjerd Rauni Niskanen Non-compliances - an indicator of food control effectiveness Infection Ecology & Epidemiology supervision official control verification effectiveness food business screening |
| title | Non-compliances - an indicator of food control effectiveness |
| title_full | Non-compliances - an indicator of food control effectiveness |
| title_fullStr | Non-compliances - an indicator of food control effectiveness |
| title_full_unstemmed | Non-compliances - an indicator of food control effectiveness |
| title_short | Non-compliances - an indicator of food control effectiveness |
| title_sort | non compliances an indicator of food control effectiveness |
| topic | supervision official control verification effectiveness food business screening |
| url | http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20008686.2019.1599276 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT christianberking noncompliancesanindicatoroffoodcontroleffectiveness AT ivarvagsholm noncompliancesanindicatoroffoodcontroleffectiveness AT lisamariehedberg noncompliancesanindicatoroffoodcontroleffectiveness AT solvisorgjerd noncompliancesanindicatoroffoodcontroleffectiveness AT rauniniskanen noncompliancesanindicatoroffoodcontroleffectiveness |