Author: Roshan Nayak

Publisher:

Published: 2016

Total Pages:

ISBN-13:

In the wake of multistate outbreaks and subsequent economic cost and health causalities, food industry stakeholders formulated policies for their produce suppliers. The U.S. Food and Drug Administrations guidance on Good Agricultural Practices (GAPs) have been the basis for most of the industry initiated GAP certifications or audit processes. In this food safety regulatory setting, a third-party audit is a critical tool to ensure neutral and impartial assessment of safety standard compliance by the produce growers. Growers reported audit burden when they have to meet multiple duplicative standards and GAP audits. In response to the growing audit burden, the United Fresh Food Safety and Technology Council harmonized GAP standards. The Produce GAPs harmonized food standards are accepted by major food retailers and auditing agencies. In this given scenario, which recognizes the undeniable significance of GAPs in preventing microbial contaminations of produce, it is not always the case that growers were able to have successfully implemented GAPs on their farms and pass the audits. Therefore, it becomes necessary to assess the areas of frequent GAP noncompliance along with the barriers that growers are facing in implementing GAP programs. The study employed evaluation and monitoring stage of a policy cycle model and a mixed method approach to assess the implementation GAPs of harmonized food safety standards by the produce growers of Mid-Atlantic states and New York. The primary purpose of the study was to identify the food safety standards of frequent noncompliance, aspects of noncompliance, barriers to GAP implementation and risk assessments, and GAP information sources. Produce USDA GAPs harmonized audits (field operations and harvesting) for the 2013-14 growing season were treated as a principal on-farm evaluation tool. Audits from Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia were accessed and analyzed to identify standards as well as criteria of GAP noncompliance. Based on the findings from the analysis of 166 audits, a paper survey was designed and administered to 212 USDA harmonized GAPs certified growers of those six states. In total 116 usable mail surveys were analyzed to validate the findings from the audits, identify challenging food safety standards, and assess the barriers to GAP compliance and risk assessments. Analysis of audits and surveys produced both confirmatory and contradictory findings. The across-validated evidence pointed to problematic food safety standards that included having a food safety policy for subcontractors, documentation of corrective actions, policy for glove use, workers compliance with hygienic practices, and writing water management plan and testing procedures. There were no significant differences in the proportions of growers who rated complying with food safety standards as a challenging task in states such as Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York. Time and cost were two significant constraints for GAP incorporation. Preparing a risk assessment plan and understanding auditors expectations were major barriers to carrying out risk assessments on the farms. Survey respondents mostly obtain GAP information from Cooperative Extension, sell their produce to resellers and expressed their intention to renew their GAP certificate annually. Findings of the study have implications for Extension and outreach agencies to improve and tailor on-farm food safety programming. Emphasizing and prioritizing the problematic requirements in food safety programs, Extension can better assist the growers to successfully implement GAP programs on their farms and prepare them for the audit. Further study is necessary to determine the effect of farm size, marketing channels, and barriers on GAP compliance.