Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-tn8tq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-04T14:29:34.860Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Food Safety Meta-Controls in the Netherlands

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Paul Verbruggen  and
Tetty Havinga
Paul Verbruggen
Affiliation:
Private Law, Radboud University, Nijmegen
Tetty Havinga
Affiliation:
Sociology of Law, Radboud University, Nijmegen
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Public food safety authorities in Europe and elsewhere have recently developed forms of coordination and collaboration with private compliance systems in the monitoring and enforcement of public food safety laws. Such policies bring with them the risk of regulatory capture, loss of transparency and fuzzy accountability relationships. In this paper we analyse how the Netherlands Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority (NVWA) assesses and monitors the functioning of private food safety control systems so it can use these private systems in its own enforcement activities. We do so by discussing two national private systems that have been formally accepted by the NVWA and are as such subject to its meta-control. The article examines the safeguards that the public enforcement agency uses while coordinating its own activities with private food safety controls, the advantages and risks involved in this strategy, and the extent to which this policy can be improved. From this we draw lessons for public agencies elsewhere willing to engage with private compliance mechanisms. The study is based on the analysis of policy documents, public and private regulation and open-ended interviews with representatives of the public and private sector in the Netherlands.

Type
Special Issue on the Patterns of Interplay between Public and Private Food Regulation
Information
European Journal of Risk Regulation , Volume 6 , Issue 4 , December 2015 , pp. 512 - 524
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Tetty Havinga and Frans Van Waarden, Veilig voedsel: Toezicht toevertrouwen? Sectorschets toezicht in de voedselsector, Webpublicatie nr. 70 (Den Haag: Wetenschappelijke Raad voor het Regeringsbeleid 2013).

2 Martinez, Marian Garcia, Verbruggen, Paul and Fearne, Andrew “Risk-based Approaches to Food Safety Regulation: What Role for Co-regulation?”, 16 Journal of Risk Research (2013), pp. 1101–1121 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3 Ruth Kirk-Wilson “Review of Food Assurance Schemes for the Food Standards Agency”, 2002 available on the internet at <http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20101209122142/http://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/foodassureguidance.pdf> last consulted 31-10-2014 and Ruth Kirk-Wilson, “Review of Uptake of FSA Food Assurance Scheme Guidance by UK Scheme Operators”, 2008 available on the internet at <http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20101209122142/http:/www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/foodassurancereview.pdf> last consulted 31-10-2014.

4 Canadian Food Inspection Agency “Improved Food Inspection Model. Proposed Draft”, 2012, available on the internet at < http://www.inspection.gc.ca/about-the-cfia/accountability/inspection-modernization/proposed-draft/eng/1342549427433/1342549854104> last consulted 31-10-2014.

5 U.S. Food & Drug Administration “FSMA Facts. Proposed Rule on Accreditation of Third-Party Auditors”, 2013, available on the internet at <http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Food/GuidanceRegulation/FSMA/UCM362561.pdf> last consulted 31-10-2014. See more specifically the contribution in this Special Issue by Oldfield.

6 Osborne, D. and Gaebler, T., Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1992)Google Scholar.

7 Coglianese, Cary and Lazer, David, (2003) “Management-based Regulation: Prescribing Private Management to Achieve Public Goals”, 37 Law & Society Review (2003), pp. 691 et sqq.CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Fairman, Robyn and Yapp, Charlotte, (2005) “Enforced Self-Regulation, Prescription, and Conceptions of Compliance within Small Businesses: The Impact of Enforcement”, 27 Law & Policy (2005), p. 491 et seqCrossRefGoogle Scholar.

8 Coglianese, Cary and Mendelson, Evan, “Meta-regulation and Selfregulation”, in: Cave, Martin, Baldwin, Robert, Lodge, Martin (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Regulation (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), p. 147 Google Scholar. See also: Gilad, Sharon , “It Runs in the Family: Meta-regulation and Its Siblings” 4 Regulation & Governance (2010) 485 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 Parker, Christine, The Open Corporation: Effective Self-regulation and Democracy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), at p. 15 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 Scott, Colin, “Regulating Everything: From Mega- to Meta-regulation”, 60 Administration (2012), pp. 61–89 Google Scholar. Paul Verbruggen and Tetty Havinga, “The Rise of Transnational Private Meta-Regulators”, Osgoode Legal Studies Research Paper No. 71/2014, available on the internet at <http://ssrn.com/abstract=2512843> last consulted 31-10-2014.

11 Scott, Colin, “Private Regulation of the Public Sector: A Neglected Facet of Contemporary Governance”, 29 Journal of Law & Society (2002), pp. 56–76 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 Verbruggen and Havinga, The rise of transnational private metaregulators, supra note 10.

13 Havinga and Van Waarden, Veilig voedsel 2013, p. 81ff. After several food safety (the salmonella Thomson and EHEC outbreaks) and non-food safety related incidents (horsemeat), an increase in the number of food safety inspectors was announced in December 2013. See: Brief van de staatssecretaris van Economische Zaken en de minister van Volksgezondheid, Welzijn en Sport aan de Tweede Kamer d.d. 19 december 2013, Plan van aanpak NVWA).

14 Vos, Ellen, “EU Food Safety Regulation in the Aftermath of the BSE Crisis”, 23 Journal of Consumer Policy (2000), pp. 227–255 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15 Article 17(1) and (2) of Regulation 178/2002/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety [2000] OJ L 31/1.

16 Jan-Kees Helderman and Marlies Honingh, (2009) Systeemtoezicht. Een onderzoek naar de condities en werking van systeemtoezicht in zes sectoren (Den Haag: Boom Juridische uitgevers 2009). De Bree, Martin, “Hoe landelijke inspectiediensten omgaan met systeemtoezicht”, 2 Tijdschrift voor Toezicht (2010), pp. 51–70 Google Scholar.

17 Article 3(1) Regulation 882/2004/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on official controls performed to ensure the verification of compliance with feed and food law, animal health and animal welfare rules [2004] OJ L 191/1.

18 Recital 13 Regulation 882/2004/EC.

19 Not only the owners, but also food business operators have noted that they would like to see the NVWA take (greater) consideration of private systems and certifications in determining its enforcement action. Almost half the firms certified by ISACert (a major certification body in the Netherlands) suggested in a survey conducted by ISACert among its customers that the NVWA does not take sufficient consideration of their audit results to base its inspections on. Available on the internet at <http://netherlands.isacert.com/artikelen/Resultaten%20enquete%20betrouwbaarheid%20certificaten-94.html> last consulted 31-10-2014.

20 <https://www.nvwa.nl/onderwerpen/toezicht-nvwa-eten-en-drinken/dossier/kwaliteitssystemen-zelfcontrolesystemen-levensmiddelen> last consulted 31-10-2014.

21 Havinga, Tetty, “National variations in the implementation and enforcement of European food hygiene regulations. Comparing the structure of food controls and regulations between Scotland and the Netherlands”, 35 Recht der Werkelijkheid (2014), pp. 32–53 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

22 See in general: <https://www.riskplaza.nl/index.php> last consulted 31-10-2014.

23 Havinga and Van Waarden, Veilig voedsel, 2013, p. 61.

24 We conducted four interviews, namely with the ‘system expert’ of RiskPlaza, the technical director of BDW (who is responsible for the development of the verification system), an auditor working for one of the RiskPlaza recognized certification bodies that perform RiskPlaza Audit+ visits, and a NVWA staff member responsible for developing of the policy of accepted self-control systems in the catering, retail and health care sector. In addition, we used data obtained from two interviews conducted by one of the authors with a staff member of the Product Board involved in the development of RiskPlaza and a staff member of the NVWA responsible for the development of the policy of accepted selfcontrol systems for food and feed production.

25 BDW, Inspectieprotocol Zelfcontrolesysteem BDW, 1 March 2012, Version 7 (on file with authors).

26 Convenant horizontaal toezicht tussen het Productschap Akkerbouw (systeemeigenaar RiskPlaza) en de Nederlandse Voedselen Warenautoriteit, Staatscourant 2012, 13450.

27 Ibid, at ‘Doelen en uitgangspunten’, no. 7.

28 Product Board, ‘Auditreglement RiskPlaza-audit+ systeem (versie 2.0, maart 2013, Den Haag), p. 23, available on the internet at <http://www.productschapakkerbouw.nl/files/PA_28032013_B14.pdf> last consulted 31-10-2014.

29 Product Board, Auditreglement 2013, supra note 28, p. 20

30 Product Board, Auditreglement 2013, supra note 28, p. 24.

31 Product Board, ‘Certificerende instellingen’, <https://www.riskplaza.nl/index.php/home/index/3/2> accessed May 2014.

32 Product Board, Auditreglement 2013, supra note 28, p. 33.

33 Product Board, Auditreglement 2013, supra note 28, p. 39-40.

34 Convenant RiskPlaza – NVWA 2012, supra note 26, at ‘Verplichtingen NVWA’, no. 4.

35 Ibid, at ‘Verplichtingen NVWA’, no. 5.

36 The list is available on the internet at <https://www.riskplaza.nl/index.php/home/index/3/1> last consulted 31-10-2014.

37 Personal communication NVWA.

38 Convenant RiskPlaza – NVWA 2012, supra note 26, at ‘Verplichtingen NVWA’, no. 1.

39 Product Board, Auditreglement 2013, supra note 28, p. 37.

40 Product Board, Auditreglement 2013, supra note 28, p. 40.

41 Convenant RiskPlaza – NVWA 2012, supra note 26, at ‘Verplichtingen Productschap Akkerbouw’, no. 2, 5 and 7.

42 The covenant concerns only the situation that the NVWA provides information to the Product Board about food safety incidents at participating firms. See Convenant RiskPlaza – NVWA 2012, supra note 26, at ‘Verplichtingen Productschap Akkerbouw’, no. 8.

43 Ibid, at ‘Verplichtingen NVWA’, no. 2-3.

44 NVWA (Internal Audit division), ‘RiskPlaza Audit’, November 2013 (not published, on file with authors), p. 5.

45 This conclusion was also drawn in the NVWA audit for RiskPlaza (supra note 44, p 5-6).

46 See also: M. Wright, G. Palmer, A Shahriyer, R Williams and R. Smith (2013) ‘Assessment and Comparison of Third Part Assurance Schemes in the Food Sector: Towards a Common Framework’, Final Report for the Food Standards Agency, Project Code FS245006, available on the internet at <http://www.foodbase.org.uk/results.php?f_category_id=&f_report_id=835> last consulted 31-10-2014, p. 45.

47 Beuger, H (2012) ‘Overheidstoezicht en certificatie: Verhogen betrouwbaarheid vergt inspanning van alle betrokkenen’ 45 Voedingsmiddelentechnologie, p. 21 Google Scholar.

48 Lytton, Timothy D. and McAllister, Lesley K. (2014) ‘Oversight in Private Food Safety Auditing: Addressing Auditor Conflict of Interest’, Wisconsin Law Review, p. 289–335 Google Scholar.

49 Havinga and Van Waarden, Veilig voedsel 2013, p 80.

50 NVWA “Criteria voor acceptatie van kwaliteitssystemen door de NVWA” (July 2014) available on the internet at <http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/bestanden/documenten-en-publicaties/rapporten/2014/07/07/criteria-voor-acceptatie-van-kwaliteitssystemen-door-de-nvwa/criteria-voor-acceptatie-van-kwaliteitssystemen-door-de-nvwa.pdf> last consulted 31-10-2014.

51 The 2014 policy document remains very general in this regard. See NVWA 2014, supra note 50, p. 5.