79. The Chairperson of the Committee introduced this Agenda Item and recalled that, during its 13th Session[13], the Committee had endorsed a number of recommendations regarding the use of risk analysis in the development of national food standards. She also recalled the discussions on risk analysis that had taken place at the 23rd Session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission and reminded Delegates that they had been invited to report on the situation and experience in implementing risk analysis in their own countries.
80. The Committee noted that a two day Regional Workshop on Risk Analysis - Exposure
Assessment for countries in the region had been organized and sponsored by FAO, WHO and ILSI. The general objectives of the Workshop were to acquaint participants with the principles of risk analysis and the methodologies for assessing exposure to foodborne hazards; to sensitize them to the risk assessment needs in the region; to provide guidance on the necessary data required for exposure assessment; and to encourage them to apply the acquired knowledge in risk analysis of foodborne hazards in the development of their food legislation. The report[14] of the workshop was presented to the Committee.
81. The Committee endorsed the following recommendations made by the Workshop:
· Codex standards, guidelines and other recommendations should be adopted and used by all countries;82. In addition the Workshop reaffirmed the recommendations made by the 13th Session[15] of the Committee.· Training in different aspects of risk analysis, and also on the Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point System (HACCP) and Good Hygienic Practices (GHP) at regional, sub-regional or national levels for countries in the region should be continued by FAO and WHO;
· Work necessary to gather data to do national risk assessments such as food consumption patterns, contaminant levels in food and incidence of foodborne disease should be strengthened;
· Government officials and decision makers should be sensitised to the necessity of performing risk assessments at the national/regional level;
· Areas where risk assessment needs to be done at the national level should be identified, clearly defined and prioritized;
· Co-operation and communication at national/regional level for various sectors should be emphasized;
· Good Agricultural Practices (GAP), Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP), and GHP's should be applied, as appropriate, as a first step in reducing foodborne risks;
· Products where the African region has competitive advantages and that would benefit by a risk assessment should be given higher priority in the allocation of resources to ensure consumer protection and facilitate trade;
· Research institutes and relevant faculties in universities in the region should consider focusing more of their research programmes on providing data necessary to carry out exposure assessment.
83. The Delegation of South Africa informed the Committee that risk analysis activities in the country were mainly conducted by the Departments of Agriculture and Health and focus on chemical hazards. When available, ADI's and MRL's established at the international level by JECFA and JMPR are accepted; otherwise these must be established locally. The GEMS/Food Regional Diets and JECFA food basket are used in estimating exposure but South Africa is currently undertaking a dietary intake survey for this purpose. Risk management decisions and practices are published and some monitoring of chemical hazards is carried out.
84. The Delegation of Morocco highlighted the lack of resources in its country for risk analysis activities but noted its plans to establish a scientific advisory body that would be responsible for these activities. The Delegations of Benin and Senegal also emphasized the difficulties encountered in implementing risk analysis and the need for technical support in this area.
85. The Delegation of Uganda expressed its appreciation for the inclusion of this subject in the agenda of the Committee and also highlighted its limited capacity and the need for assistance in this area, particularly in relation to training. The Delegation emphasised the importance of collaboration between countries in the region on data generation for risk analysis in the fisheries sector and also requested that Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus be included in the Codex list of priorities for expert microbiological risk assessment advice.
86. The importance of co-ordination at both the national and regional levels, particularly in relation to data generation, was further stressed by the Delegation of Kenya. While Kenya had carried out some risk assessment work in relation to chemical hazards, the need to increase risk assessment activities in other areas such as coffee was stressed.
87. The Delegation of Tanzania informed the Committee that risk analysis activities in the country were carried out by the Ministries of Health, Agriculture and Natural Resources and Tourism (fisheries). While recognizing the importance of risk analysis, Tanzania was first focusing on more basic problems, such as the need for training in GAP, GHP, GMP and HACCP. Before embarking on risk analysis activities, the national policy was to first explore the available Codex Standards, guidelines and recommendations and use them where possible.
88. The Observer from Consumers International highlighted the need for elaboration of clear guidelines on how to carry out risk analysis and also pointed out the need to take consumer concerns into account when doing risk analysis.
89. In supporting the approach taken by Tanzania, the Codex Secretariat reminded the Committee that if Codex Standards were used, countries would be in compliance with the provisions of the SPS Agreement and would not need to carry out a risk assessment. However, if a country deviates from them, then a risk assessment would need to be undertaken.
