Risk-Based surveillance as a strategic tool to improve food safety in the russian consumer market

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

Introduction. Protecting consumers’ lives and health in a condition when the number of producers and the variety of food products is continually growing is one of the state’s strategic tasks and the goals of the administrative reform in the Russian Federation.

Material and methods. The work uses methods of analysis, synthesis, comparison, and generalization of the existing in international practice methodological approaches and criteria to assess product safety in planning control and supervision activities, assessing the risk of harm to human health, applied the comparative legal method, methods of mathematical modeling and other methods used when searching legal and analytical research.

Results. A risk-oriented model of control and supervisory activities for food safety is proposed and tested. The model is built under the general principles of the risk assessment methodology and is based on the analysis of the results of previous checks, studies and trials, data from epidemiological studies and relevant scientific literature. The model assumes three successively implemented stages: the categorization (classification) of the economic entity’s activities according to the potential risk of harm to health. Target – to select facilities for the most frequent and in-depth inspections by the supervisory authorities. The second stage is the classification of food products according to the potential risk to consumer health to justify the types of food products subject to priority supervision during scheduled inspections of economic entities. The third stage is constructing “risk profiles” of certain products to optimize laboratory control of food safety.

Discussion. The construction of risk-oriented control based on the principle of step-by-step substantiation and clarification of supervision objects was shown to ensure the targeting of authority and an increase in inspection pressure on precisely those objects that are characterized by the most frequent violations of legal requirements with the most severe and large-scale consequences for health. Increasing the control density at the highest risk categories’ facilities does not require additional resources from the regulator. It is still implemented by removing facilities with moderate or low risk from planned supervision and optimizing laboratory support.

Conclusion. Work out and implement a risk-based food safety surveillance model corresponds to the strategic vector of development of state control (supervision) in the Russian Federation. The system assumes that “risky” goods are unsafe for the consumer’s health. Accordingly, their producers, distributors, and sellers should be under robust inspection, including laboratory supervision, and precisely according to those indicators for which these risks are most significant. The system is in a dynamic state and development.

About the authors

Nina V. Zaitseva

Federal Scientific Center for Medical and Preventive Health Risk Management Technologies

Author for correspondence.
Email: noemail@neicon.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-4315-5307
Russian Federation

Irina V. May

Federal Scientific Center for Medical and Preventive Health Risk Management Technologies

Email: may@fcrisk.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7738-6832

MD, Ph.D., DSci., Professor, Deputy Director responsible for research work, Federal Scientific Center for Medical and Preventive Health Risk Management Technologies, Perm, 614045, Russian Federation.

e-mail: may@fcrisk.ru

Russian Federation

References

  1. Control and supervision activities in the Russian Federation: Analytical report – 2014. Moscow: MAKS Press; 2015. (in Russian)
  2. Chaplinskiy A.V., Plaksin S.M. Risk management in the state control in Russia. Voprosy gosudarstvennogo i munitsipal’nogo upravleniya. 2016; (2): 7–29. (in Russian)
  3. Eliseeva L.G., Makhotina I.A., Kalachev S.L. Food safety is one of the key ingredients for ensuring food security. Natsional’naya bezopasnost’ / Nota bene. 2019; (1): 1–19. https://doi.org/10.7256/2454-0668.2019.1.28958 (in Russian)
  4. State report «On the state of sanitary and epidemiological welfare of the population in the Russian Federation in 2019». Moscow; 2020. (in Russian)
  5. Petrosyan A.E. Problems of identification of goods produced using modern technologies, on the example of dietary supplements. In: Materials of the V International Conference «Cerevitin Readings-2018» [Tserevitinovskie chteniya – 2018: materialy V Mezhdunarodnoy konferentsii]. Moscow; 2018: 53–6 (in Russian)
  6. Balatskiy E., Ekimova N. The qualitative components of Russia food security. Obshchestvo i ekonomika. 2011; (11–12): 224–45. (in Russian)
  7. Karelin A.O., Lomtev A.Yu., Eremin G.B., Mozzhukhina N.A., Ganichev P.A. Legal analysis of the use of health risk assessment in the field of ensuring the sanitary and epidemiological well-being of the population. Gigiena i Sanitaria (Hygiene and Sanitation, Russian journal). 2020; 99(6): 624–30. https://doi.org/10.33029/0016-9900-2020-99-6-624-630 (in Russian)
  8. Rakitskiy V.N., Avaliani S.L., Shashiia T.A., Dodina N.S. Actual problems of population health risks management in Russia. Gigiena i Sanitaria (Hygiene and Sanitation, Russian journal). 2018; 97(6): 572–5. https://doi.org/10.18821/0016-9900-2018-97-6-572-575 (in Russian)
  9. Gaevskiy I.V., Zaytseva N.V., May I.V., Karymbaeva S.T., Sychik S.I., Fedorenko E.V. On methodical support for risk-oriented surveillance over consumer products safety on the unified economic territory of the Eurasian economic union. Analiz riska zdorov’yu. 2019; (1): 4–16. (in Russian)
  10. Sedik D., Ul’brikht K., Dzhamankulov N. Food safety control system in the European Union and the Eurasian Economic Union. Torgovaya politika. 2016; 2(6): 41–83. (in Russian)
  11. Bender W.J., Ayyub B.M. Risk-based cost control for construction. In: AACE International Transactions. Morgantown; 2000.
  12. Health Canada. Health Canada Decision-Making Framework for Identifying, Assessing, and Managing Health Risks. Ottawa; 2010.
  13. NRC 2004. Air Quality Management in the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press Publ. U.S.; 2004.
  14. Better regulation in Europe: Executive summaries. OECD; 2010. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-policy/45079126.pdf
  15. Aven T. Risk assessment and risk management: Review of recent advances on their foundation. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2016; 253: 1–13.
  16. CAC/GL 62-2007 Working Principles for Risk Analysis for Food Safety for Application by Governments. Rome; 2007.
  17. Overview of health Canada consumer product safety program risk characterization method. 2017. Available at: https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/consumer-product-safety/legislation-guidelines/guidelines-policies/overview-health-canada-consumer-product-safety-program-risk-characterization-method.html
  18. Héraud F., Nikiforova N.V. European food safety authority experience in assessing of the exposure of agricultural and domestic animals to chemical impurities grain and ready-feed mixtures (for example, deoxynivalenol). Analiz riska zdorov’yu. 2014; (4): 52–9. (in Russian)
  19. McEvoy J.D.G. Emerging food safety issues: An EU perspective. Drug Test. Anal. 2016; 8(5–6): 511–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/dta.2015
  20. Olaru I., Waigmann E. Annual report of the EFSA Scientific Network for Risk Assessment of GMOs for 2017. EFSA Sup. Pub. 2018; 15(2): 18.
  21. EFSA CONTAM Panel (EFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain). Scientific Opinion on risks for animal and public health related to the presence of nivalenol in food and feed. EFSA J. 2013; 11(6): 3262. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2013.3262
  22. WHO. Ingested nitrate and nitrite and cyanobacterial peptide toxins. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). Monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans. Geneva; 2010.
  23. Beltoft V., Nørby K. Annual Report of preparatory work on the toxicological studies and animal feeding studies performed under the EFSA contract OC/EFSA/GMO/2014/01, Lot 2 during the period 1.3.2017 to 27.11.2018. EFSA Sup. Pub. 2019; 16(2). https://doi.org/10.2903/sp.efsa.2019.EN-1586
  24. Hampton P. Reducing administrative burdens: effective inspection and enforcement. Available at: https://hm-treasurear.gov.ru/hampton
  25. Salomatova K.A. Risk profile as the main element of customs control when detecting customs crimes. Molodoy uchenyy. 2017; (46): 241–4. (in Russian)

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML

Copyright (c) 2020 Zaitseva N.V., May I.V.



СМИ зарегистрировано Федеральной службой по надзору в сфере связи, информационных технологий и массовых коммуникаций (Роскомнадзор).
Регистрационный номер и дата принятия решения о регистрации СМИ: серия ПИ № ФС 77 - 37884 от 02.10.2009.