The main aim of the International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) is to coordinate international industrial standards. The food industry has its own technical committee within the organisation, dealing with everything from fruit and veg and dairy products to spices, condiments and tea. Keith Nuthall describes the pros and cons of such a set-up and explains how food companies might use it to their advantage.
Go deeper with GlobalData
Today’s international food industry is a truly global affair, as anyone involved in the business is aware. And there is also common agreement that the great benefits this offers in new markets and suppliers need to be protected. That is where common agreed standards can play a key role, ensuring that transportation and handling of exports is carried out carefully and that imported ingredients are of a high quality. In this process, the Geneva-based International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) is king.
Formed after the Second World War, the time when most of today’s international organisations were formed, ISO’s stated aim is “to facilitate the international coordination and unification of industrial standards”. It is a network of the national standards institutes of 146 countries, coordinated by a central secretariat. Separate technical committees (TCs) develop standards for every industry on the planet and, naturally, the food industry has its own committee – TC34 – subdivided into specialist sub-committees on oilseeds, fruits and vegetables, cereals and pulses, milk and milk products, other animal products, spices and condiments, tea, microbiology, animal feed, fats and oils, coffee and analysis.
Importantly, there are also separate working groups for new standards now under discussion: on genetically modified organisms and products, food safety management systems and traceability in the food chain. Over the years, ISO has published 645 standards of relevance to the food industry, each offering detailed and – hopefully – practical guidelines on how to successfully run a food business and be sure that its practices mirror those of other companies worldwide.
Reducing food scares
How well do you really know your competitors?
Access the most comprehensive Company Profiles on the market, powered by GlobalData. Save hours of research. Gain competitive edge.
Thank you!
Your download email will arrive shortly
Not ready to buy yet? Download a free sample
We are confident about the unique quality of our Company Profiles. However, we want you to make the most beneficial decision for your business, so we offer a free sample that you can download by submitting the below form
By GlobalDataThat ISO standards are useful is illustrated by the involvement of food industry giants in their development. Speaking recently to an ISO bulletin, Nestlé technical production, environmental, research and development executive vice president Dr Werner Bauer said global standards “contribute very effectively to enhance fair competition and…raise the overall level of quality”. He said it was crucial that the industry involve itself in developing standards, to avoid the risk of outsiders creating guidelines that “might impose too many restrictions on the company’s ability to develop and expand and could in some cases impose excessive costs”.
Nowhere is this consideration more relevant than in ISO’s work to create a new standard, ISO 22000 on food safety management, which cuts across much of the sector’s work. Obviously, given the damage wreaked on the food industry by diseases such as BSE and salmonella, the value of having tight health standards amongst producers, manufacturers and distributors worldwide is immense.
But there are problems. Developing countries have long complained of over-burdensome health regulations in rich countries impeding their exports. The same also applies to multilateral rules laid down by UN watchdog Codex Alimentarius. As a result, the ISO 22000 working group has been working with Codex to develop practical guides on how international food health safety rules can be applied. According to TC34 chairman Professor András Salgó: “Using international standards may help a regulator to achieve aims in public health and safety at less cost to manufacturers, consumers and the taxpayer.”
He added that ISO standards can also help companies comply with World Trade Organisation (WTO) technical barriers to trade and sanitary and phytosanitary rules. Salgó claimed that closer cooperation between Codex and ISO would “reduce the number of food-borne illnesses and avoid food scares”.
A costly business
So much for the gloss. What about the meat? With 645 standards to choose from, it might be said that a management standard is needed from ISO on how to pick, choose and implement its standards. And they are not free. Companies have to pay for these detailed documents, so it’s best to choose well. The organisation (which – curiously – uses a Greek language acronym), does offer help, however, from officials and online.
Browsing the list of all relevant food industry standards shows the extent to which companies could rely on ISO for micro-management advice. Want to know the best way to determine moisture content in cocoa beans? ISO has a standard. Worried about tin content in canned evaporated milk? ISO has a spectrometric test method. Want to check ash content in tea? No problem. You get the idea. But money is required here. ISO wants to cover its costs, a detailed standard such as counting tin particles in evaporated milk carries a CHF47 (US$39) price tag. Fairly cheap. But for the broader standards that include comprehensive management guidelines, these costs rise. The standard on applying ISO’s quality management standard 9001:2000 in the food and drink industry costs CHF122 (US$101), which is hardly exorbitant. But when added to general quality management standards (fundamentals and vocabulary – CHF110; requirements – CHF97; guidelines for performance improvements – CHF150; etc), the outlay starts to rack up. And that is just the purchase of the standard; much management time has then to be spent on implementing these rules, and maybe arranging for certification that they have been properly rolled out.
Food safety a priority
Aside from the resulting marketing and efficiency gains, it is clear that food companies, like other sectors, need to look before they leap into the embrace of an ISO standard. The organisation itself has a comprehensive website and a customer services department, and national standards bodies should also be of help. Industry and enterprise ministries worldwide often push ISO standards as a way of boosting international profile and operational efficiency, so inquiries at central government level may be useful.
Looking to the future, ISO 22000 on food safety management is clearly a priority of the organisation. Nestlé’s Dr Bauer is enthusiastic, saying it could “contribute to reducing the number of individual, non-official food safety standards currently appearing on the market. Their variety and ever-increasing number is creating complexity and confusion in the food chain, thus raising costs without bringing consistent reliability”. By contrast, “an internationally agreed standard would improve the relationship between suppliers and customers throughout the food chain”. The new GM standard, according to a recent ISO paper, would enable companies to “respond to labelling provisions…and provide food control authorities with a tool to control compliance with legal requirements”. And the traceability standard would create generic guidelines helping any food manufacturer trace ingredients back to a producer, including notes on documentation, procedures and defining products or ingredients.
