Challenges in the Regulatory Monitoring of Fortified Foods

Transcription

1 Challenges in the Regulatory Monitoring of Fortified Foods June 2017

2 GAIN - Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition International organisation Established 2002 Delivering solutions to the complex problem of malnutrition Building alliances with Governments, NGOs, businesses & civil society

3 Food Fortification Micronutrient deficiencies Salt Vegetable oil Wheat flour Maize meal Rice Sugar Condiments National food fortification programmes Legislation, regulatory monitoring and enforcement

4 The Regulatory Monitoring Landscape

5 Benefits of external, regulatory monitoring? Provides a measure of overall effectiveness of a national fortification program Links to national health programs Hold producers and importers accountable Precursor to prosecution and improvement strategies

6 Overview of Barriers to Regulatory Monitoring

7 Research on Regulatory Monitoring 1. Perceived effectiveness, barriers, and good practices - Survey of 39 respondents from food control agencies and industry in 17 countries (Africa and Asia) - 11 key informant interviews with donors and development partners 2. Legislative documents, standards, and monitoring manuals - Review of 73 mandatory programs for wheat, maize, and rice - Assessment based on 44 criteria, including justification, protocols, sampling and testing, and data collection and sharing. Luthringer C, Rowe A, Vossenaar M, Garrett G. Regulatory Monitoring of Fortified Foods: Identifying Barriers and Good Practices. Global Health: Science and Practice 2015 Vol 3

8 What are the barriers? Industry Government Low priority and capacity for inspection and follow up. Minimal harmonization of standards and legislation. Limited funding. Limited personnel for legal action. Corruption among inspection personnel. Poor laboratory capacity. Limited training in rapid testing methods or technical auditing.

9 What are the barriers? Industry Government Poor quality or unsafe inputs. Poor processing procedures and expertise. Lack of SOPs and documentation. Lack of adequate internal laboratory capacity. Improper packaging and handling/storage. Lack of awareness of standards. Purposeful under-fortification

10 Cited Priorities to Improve Compliance 71% Regulatory Agencies Food Industries 70% 60% 57% 50% 43% 45% 55% 36% 35% 29% 30% 20% 20% 21% 10% 7% 0% Clear regulations Reg. agency structure Reg. agencyreg. agency capacity financing Laboratory capacity Sampling/ testing procedures Food industry engagement Enforcement Communication (incentives/ b/w sectors penalties)

11 Recommendations from the study 7 broad-reaching recommendations for improving fortification compliance can be synthesized from this study: o Legislation o Leadership o Enforcement o Financial & Human capacity o Community o Data capture o Relationship building 11

12 Enablers to improve regulatory monitoring Increasing budgets for inspectorates Improving human capacity MIS - Management Information System Regular independent surveys Engaging civil society and academia Closing legal loopholes Litigation fund? Working groups and global guidance

13 Regulatory Monitoring: Summarizing Priorities and the Enablers Human Capacity Financial Capacity Civil Society Political Will Better Data Capture & Use Legislation Improved Regulatory Monitoring Lab Capacity 13

14 THANK YOU

15 Afghanistan Bangladesh Canada Denmark Ethiopia India Indonesia Kenya Mozambique Nigeria Netherlands Pakistan Singapore Switzerland Tanzania United Kingdom USA Rue de Vermont CH-1202 Geneva Switzerland T F E info@gainhealth.org Copyright GAIN Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition. All rights reserved.