thuat ngu luật

8/8/2019 thuat ngu lut

1/167

QUALITY AND SAFETY IMPROVEMENT IN

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS PROJECTTA 4972-VIE

BACKGROUND PAPER

INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS AND CAPACITYBUILDING

Prepared by

Francesco Goletti and Nguyen Thi Minh Hai

November 2008

MARDMinistry of Agriculture and Rural Development

ADBAsian Development Bank

In association

with

Agrifood

ConsultingInternational


2/167

2

LIST OF ACRONYMS

ADB Asian Development BankASEAN Association of Southeast Asia NationsAusAID Australian Agency for International DevelopmentCAC Codex Alimentarius Commission

CIDA Canadian International Development AgencyCOC Code of ConductCPRGS Comprehensive Poverty Reduction and Growth StrategyCSP Country Strategy and ProgramDANIDA Danish International Development AgencyDARD Provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural DevelopmentDCP Department of Crop ProductionDMF Design and Monitoring FrameworkDMTP Department of Multilateral Trade PolicyDPP Department of Plant ProtectionDST Department of Science and TechnologyEUREPGAP European Good Agricultural PracticesFAVRI Fruit and Vegetables Research Institute

FAO Food and Agriculture OrganizationFAPQDCP Food Agricultural Products Quality Development Control ProjectFFA Food and Foodstuff AssociationGAP Good Agricultural PracticesGATT General Agreement on Tariffs and TradeGHP Good Handling PracticesGLOBALGAP Global Good Agricultural Practices (previously EUREPGAP)GMP Good Manufacturing PracticesHACCP Hazard Analysis Critical Control PointICD International Cooperation DepartmentIEC Information, Education, and CommunicationIFAD International Fund for Agriculture DevelopmentIPM Integrated Pest ManagementIPPC International Plant Protection Convention

ISO International Standards OrganizationJAS-ANZ Joint Accreditation System Australia and New ZealandLIFSAP Livestock Foodstuffs Safety ProjectMARD Ministry of Agriculture and Rural DevelopmentMIO Ministerial Inspection OfficeMOF Ministry of FinanceMOH Ministry of HealthMPI Ministry of Planning and InvestmentMOIT Ministry of Industry and TraceMOST Ministry of Science and TechnologyNAFEC National Agricultural and Fisheries Extension CenterNAFIQAD National Agro-Forestry and Fisheries Quality Assurance DepartmentNGO Non Governmental OrganizationNZ New Zealand

ODA Official Development AssistanceOIE World Organization for Animal Health (Office International dePFZ Pest Free ZonePM Prime MinisterPPRI Plant Protection Research InstituteQCDP Technical Regulation LocalQCVN Technical Regulation - NationalQUACERT Certification Body under MOSTSAZ Safe Agricultural ZoneSBV State Bank of VietnamSEDP Socio-Economic Development Plan


3/167

3

SME Small and Medium EnterpriseSOFRI Southern Fruit Research InstituteSPS Sanitary and PhytosanitarySTAMEQ Directorate for Standards and QualitySTDF Standards and Trade Development FacilitySWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, ThreatsTA Technical Assistance

TBT Technical Barriers to TradeTCCS Vietnam Local StandardsTCVN Vietnam National StandardsUSAID United States Agency for International DevelopmentVFA Viet Nam Food AdministrationVIETGAP Viet Nam Good Agricultural PracticesVINAFRUIT Viet Nam Fruit AssociationVITAS Viet Nam Tea AssociationWB World BankWHO World Health OrganizationWTO World Trade Organization

GLOSSARY OF VIETNAMESE REGULATIONS

Term English EnglishAbbreviation

Term Vietnamese VietnameseAbbreviation

National Assembly NA Quc hi QHStandingCommittee, NationalAssembly

SC y ban Thng V Quchi

UBTVQH

Government Chnh ph CPPrime Minister PM Th tng Chnh ph PMMinistry ofAgriculture & RuralDevelopment

MARD B Nng nghip v Phttrin Nng thn

BNN

Ministry of Health MOH B Y t BYTMinistry of Fishery MOFI B Thy sn BTSMinistry of Science& Technology

MOST B Khoa hc & Cngngh

BKHCN

Constitution Hin php HPLaw LutOrdinance Php lnh PLDecree ND Nghnh NDirective Chth CTDecision QD Quyt nh QCircular Thng t TTInter-ministerial

Circular

Thng t lin b TTLT

Resolution Ngh quyt NQ

For example, the regulation 02/2007/ND-CP refers to the Resolution (QD) No 2 issued bythe Government (CP) in 2007.


4/167

4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 Executive Summary............................................................................................112 Introduction .........................................................................................................263 Approach and Methodology................................................................................28

3.1 Definition of Food Safety and Quality.........................................................283.2 Institutional Dimensions of Food Quality and Safety..................................28

4 The Institutions Involved in Food Quality and Safety..........................................314.1 Introduction.................................................................................................31 4.2 Ministries and Related Agencies ................................................................34

4.2.1 Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development ......................................344.2.2 Ministry of Science and Technology.......................................................364.2.3 Ministry of Health....................................................................................374.2.4 Ministry of Industry and Trade................................................................37

4.3 International Organizations and Agencies..................................................374.4 Research Institutes and Universities ..........................................................394.5 Associations and Cooperatives..................................................................394.6 Private Sector and NGOs...........................................................................404.7 Markets and Supermarkets ........................................................................40

5 Key Legislation....................................................................................................425.1 Introduction.................................................................................................42 5.2 National Assembly Standing Committee Ordinance on the Plant Protectionand Quarantine No. 36/2001/PL-UBTVQH10 of 25 July 2001 ...............................445.3 Government Decree on the Regulation on Plant Protection, the Regulationon Plant Quarantine and the Regulation on Plant Quarantine, and the Regulationon Management of Plant Protection Drugs No. 58/2002/ND-CP dated 3 June 2002

445.4 Government Decree on Plant Quarantine No. 02/2007/ND-CP dated 5January 2007..........................................................................................................465.5 National Assembly Standing Committee Ordinance on Food Hygiene andSafety No.12/2003/PL-UBTVQH11 dated 26 July 2003.........................................465.6 Government Decree on the Implementation of Ordinance on Food Hygiene

and Safety No.163/2004/ND-CP dated 7 September 2004....................................46

5.7 Prime Minister Decision on the Approval of National Action Plan on theAssurance of Food Safety to 2010 No 43/2006/QD-TTg dated 20 February 2006 475.8 Prime Minister Directive on the Implementation of Urgent Methods toAssure Food Hygiene and Safety No 06/2007/CT-TTg dated 28 March 2007.......485.9 MARD Decision on Regulations on Safe Tea Production, Processing, andBusiness Management No. 43/2007/QD-BNN dated 16 May 2007 .......................495.10 MARD Decision on Safe Vegetable Production and Trading ManagementNo 106/2007/QD-BNN dated 28 December 2007 ..................................................505.11 Ministry of Health Decision on Food Safety No. 57/QD-BYT dated 9January 2008..........................................................................................................515.12 MARD Directive on Declaring 2008 to be the Year of Quality and Safety No56/CT-BNN-KHCN dated 8 January 2008..............................................................52

5.13 MARD Decision on Good Practices for the Production of Fresh Fruit andVegetables No. 379/Q-BNN-KHCN dated 28 January 2008................................525.14 MARD Decision on Good Practices for the Production of Tea No. 1121/Q-BNN-KHCN dated 14 April 2008 ............................................................................525.15 Ministry of Fisheries Decision on Establishing the National Agriforestry andFisheries Quality Assurance Department (NAFIQAD) No. 29/2008/QD-BTS dated28 January 2008.....................................................................................................535.16 Government Decree on Labeling of Goods No. 89/2006/ND-CP dated 30August 2006 ...........................................................................................................53


5/167

5

5.17 Law on Standards and Technical Specifications No. 68/2006/QH11 dated29 June 2006..........................................................................................................535.18 Government Decree on Detailed Implementation of several Articles of Lawon Standards and Technical Specifications No. 127/2007/N-CP dated 1 August2007 545.19 Government Decree on administrative fine in plant protection andquarantine No. 26/2003/N-CP dated 19 March 2003...........................................545.20 Law on Inspection No. 22/2004/QH11 dated 15 June 2004.......................545.21 Government Decree on Organization and Operation of Inspection inAgriculture and Rural Development No. 153/2005/N-CP dated 15 December2005 555.22 MARD Circular on guiding mandate duties, organization and personnel ofinspection in agricultural and rural development and inspection of agencies underMARD No. 73/2006/TT-BNN dated 18 September 2006........................................555.23 Government Decree on administrative fine in plant protection andquarantine No. 26/2003/N-CP dated 19 March 2003...........................................555.24 Criminal Code.............................................................................................555.25 Government Decree No. 79/2008/N-CP dated 18 July 2008 stipulatingsystems of food safety management, inspection and testing.................................565.26 Prime Minister Decision No. 107/2008/Q-TTg dated 30 July 2008 onseveral policies to support production, processing and consuming development ofsafe vegetable, fruit and tea up to year of 2015.....................................................565.27 MARD Decision No. 84/2008/Q-BNN, dated 28 July 2008, on issuingregulations on VietGap certification for vegetable, fruit and tea .............................565.28 Summary....................................................................................................57

6 Key Issues ..........................................................................................................586.1 Introduction.................................................................................................58 6.2 Standards...................................................................................................58

6.2.1 Current Situation in Standards ...............................................................586.2.2 Issues in Standards................................................................................59

6.3 Good Practices...........................................................................................606.3.1 Current Situation in Good Practices .......................................................60

6.3.2

Issues in Good Practices........................................................................61

6.4 Certification ................................................................................................626.4.1 Current Situation in Certification.............................................................626.4.2 Issues in Certification .............................................................................63

6.5 Planning for Safe Agricultural Zones..........................................................646.5.1 Current Situation in Planning for Safe Agricultural Zones ......................646.5.2 Issues on Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones.......................................65

6.6 Inspection ...................................................................................................676.6.1 Current Situation in Inspection ...............................................................676.6.2 Issues in Inspection................................................................................68

6.7 Monitoring...................................................................................................69 6.7.1 Current Situation in Monitoring...............................................................696.7.2 Issues in Monitoring................................................................................69

6.8 Laboratories ...............................................................................................706.8.1 Current situation in Laboratories ............................................................706.8.2 Issues in Laboratories ............................................................................71

6.9 Information .................................................................................................726.9.1 Current Situation on Information.............................................................726.9.2 Issues on Information .............................................................................72

6.10 Education ...................................................................................................726.10.1 Current Situation in Education............................................................726.10.2 Issues in Education ............................................................................73

6.11 Extension....................................................................................................74


6/167

6

6.11.1 Current Situation on Extension...........................................................746.11.2 Issues in Extension.............................................................................74

6.12 Communication ..........................................................................................756.12.1 Current situation on Communication ..................................................756.12.2 Issues on Communication ..................................................................76

6.13 Research ....................................................................................................766.13.1 Current Situation on Research ...........................................................766.13.2 Issues on Research............................................................................76

6.14 Regulations, Policies, and Strategies.........................................................776.14.1 Current Situation in Regulations, Policies, and Strategies .................776.14.2 Issues in Regulations, Policies, and Strategies..................................77

6.15 Capacity .....................................................................................................786.15.1 Current Situation in Capacity..............................................................786.15.2 Issues in Capacity ..............................................................................79

7 Relevant Experiences of Other Countries in Food Safety ..................................807.1 Malaysia .....................................................................................................807.2 Thailand......................................................................................................81 7.3 Other Countries ..........................................................................................83

8 Recommendations..............................................................................................86 8.1 General Framework....................................................................................86

Policy and Institutional Development for Food Safety.....................................868.2...........................................................................................................................86

8.2.1 Lead Agency at MARD for food safety ...................................................868.2.1.1 Options for the leading agency.......................................................868.2.1.2 Recommendations regarding Lead Agency for Food Safety atMARD 87

8.3 Establishment of a Food Safety Monitoring System at MARD...................888.3.1.1 The Provincial Food Safety Index...................................................888.3.1.2 Recommendations regarding Establishing Food Monitoring Systemat MARD 89

8.4 Establishment of Food Safety Information and Communication Systems atMARD 89

8.4.1.1

Recommendations regarding Establishing Food Safety Informationand Communication Systems at MARD..........................................................908.5 Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones ...........................................................90

8.5.1.1 Recommendations regarding Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones 908.6 Development and Harmonization of Standards..........................................90

8.6.1.1 Recommendations regarding Development and Harmonization ofStandards 91

8.7 Development of Good Practices.................................................................918.7.1.1 Recommendations regarding Development of Good Practices......91

8.8 Incentive Policy for Adoption of Good Practices ........................................918.8.1.1 Recommendations regarding Incentives Policies for Adoption ofGood Practices................................................................................................92

8.9 Institutional Capacity of Key Agencies at MARD, Labs, and Certification

Bodies 928.9.1.1 Recommendations regarding Institutional Capacity for Food Safety

938.10 PILOT CROP FOOD SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (CFSMS).........93

8.10.1 RATIONALE .......................................................................................938.10.1.1 Coordination ...............................................................................938.10.1.2 Monitoring...................................................................................94 8.10.1.3 Management of Food Safety ......................................................94

8.10.2 PROPOSED SOLUTIONS .................................................................958.10.3 VISION ...............................................................................................95


7/167

7

8.10.4 COMPONENTS OF THE CFSMS ......................................................958.10.4.1 Elements.....................................................................................96 8.10.4.2 Legislation...................................................................................96 8.10.4.3 Management Structure ...............................................................96

8.10.5 MODEL OF MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE AT MARD......................978.10.5.1 Central Level - MARD.................................................................978.10.5.2 Province Level DARD..............................................................988.10.5.3 District and Commune Level.......................................................988.10.5.4 Sustainability of the System........................................................98

8.11 Policy and Institutional Development for Food Safety at the central level -Outputs, Targets, Activities, Inputs, and Monitoring.............................................101

8.11.1 List of outputs ...................................................................................1038.11.2 Output 1: Improved regulatory framework and coordination for statemanagement of safety and quality of fruit, vegetables, and tea........................103

8.11.2.1 Activities for Output 1................................................................1038.11.2.2 Targets for Output 1..................................................................1068.11.2.3 Inputs for Output 1....................................................................1078.11.2.4 Costs for Output 1.....................................................................1078.11.2.5 Data sources and reporting mechanisms for Output 1 .............107

8.11.3 Output 2: Strengthened capacity of state agencies, certificationbodies, and laboratories involved in the implementation of quality and safe foodproduction, processing, and trading of fruit, vegetables, and tea. ....................107

8.11.3.1 Activities for Output 2................................................................1078.11.3.2 Targets for Output 2..................................................................1098.11.3.3 Inputs for Output 2....................................................................1098.11.3.4 Costs for Output 2.....................................................................1108.11.3.5 Data sources and reporting mechanisms for Output 2 .............110

8.11.4 Output 3: Establishment of a pilot Crop Food Safety ManagementSystem (CFSMS) from the central level of MARD to the commune level for fruit,vegetables, and tea...........................................................................................110

8.11.4.1 Targets for Output 3..................................................................1118.11.4.2 Inputs for Output 3....................................................................111

8.11.4.3

Costs for Output 3.....................................................................111

8.11.4.4 Data sources and reporting mechanisms for Output 3 .............1118.12 Justification, Benefits, and Risks..............................................................111

8.12.1 Justification.......................................................................................111 8.12.2 Benefits.............................................................................................112 8.12.3 Assumptions and Risks ....................................................................112

8.12.3.1 Assumptions for Output 1 .........................................................1128.12.3.2 Risks for Output 1.....................................................................1128.12.3.3 Assumptions for Output 2 .........................................................1128.12.3.4 Risks for Output 2.....................................................................1128.12.3.5 Assumptions for Output 3 .........................................................1138.12.3.6 Risks for Output 3.....................................................................113

9 ANNEXES.........................................................................................................114

9.1 Codex Alimentarius Commission .............................................................1159.1.1 Office of Vietnam food standardization commission (AbbreviatedVietnam Codex Contact Point - VCAC) ............................................................115

9.1.1.1 Technical Committees of Vietnam Codex Alimentarius commission116

9.1.1.2 Contact Address: ..........................................................................1169.2 Introduction to SPS and TBT Agreements ...............................................1179.3 The SPS Agreement ................................................................................118

9.3.1 What Is the WTO Sanitary and Phytosanitary (WTO-SPS) Agreement?118


8/167

8

9.3.2 What Is the Economic Rationale for Governments to Become Involved?118

9.3.3 Why Does the WTO-SPS Agreement Promote Free Trade? ...............1199.3.4 What Is the Genesis of the WTO-SPS Agreement?.............................1199.3.5 What Are the Main Provisions of the WTO-SPS Agreements?............1209.3.6 Final Comments ...................................................................................1219.3.7 References ...........................................................................................121

9.4 The TBT Agreement.................................................................................1229.4.1 The focus of GATT ...............................................................................1229.4.2 The problem of de facto discrimination.................................................1229.4.3 The concept of "technical barriers to trade"..........................................1229.4.4 Discriminatory measures and technical barriers to trade .....................1239.4.5 The structure of the TBT Agreement....................................................1239.4.6 The rules pertaining to technical regulations........................................1249.4.7 The rules pertaining to standards.........................................................1249.4.8 Conformity Assessment Procedures ....................................................1259.4.9 Other provisions ...................................................................................1259.4.10 Dispute settlement............................................................................125

9.5 Risk Analysis ............................................................................................1269.5.1 What Is Risk Analysis?.........................................................................1269.5.2 What Is the Origin of Risk Analysis? ....................................................126

9.6 Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) ................................1299.6.1 Principle of Equivalence .......................................................................1299.6.2 The GMO Debate .................................................................................129

9.7 Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP).............................1309.8 CODEX STANDARDS, CODE OF PRACTICE, MAX RESIDUE LIMITS,GUIDELINES........................................................................................................131 9.9 Viet Nam National Standards (TCVN) for Food and Agriculture ..............1439.10 Examples of some Vietnamese Standards related to VIETGAP..............144

9.10.1 Permitted Residue Limit for some heavy metals in cropping soil .....1449.10.2 Permitted Residue Limit for some chemicals in irrigation water.......1449.10.3 Permitted Residue Limit for some harmful bioorganisms and toxic

chemicals in fresh vegetables...........................................................................144

9.11 Implications of Food Hygiene and Safety Regulations for Different Actorsalong the Value Chain ..........................................................................................1469.12 Preliminary Estimation of Costs for the Project Component: Policy andInstitutional Development for Food Safety at the central level .............................1489.13 Design and Monitoring Framework for the Policy and InstitutionalComponent of the Project.....................................................................................1609.14 Model of Food Safety in Thailand.............................................................162

9.14.1 National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food Standards(ACFS) 1629.14.2 Responsibilities of ACFC..................................................................1629.14.3 Structure ...........................................................................................1639.14.4 ACFS and Standards Establishment................................................163

9.14.5 Standard elaboration steps...............................................................1649.14.6 Utilization of Standardization............................................................1649.14.7 GAP Implementation ........................................................................1669.14.8 GAP Certification Procedure ............................................................167


9/167

9

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Summary of Costs for Subcomponents of the Policy and InstitutionalDevelopment Component of the Project ....................................................................23Table 2 Design and Monitoring Framework for the Policy and Institutional Componentof the QSIAP ..............................................................................................................24Table 3 Institutional Issues and Ministries along the Value Chain of Food andAgricultural products ..................................................................................................32Table 4: Key Players in Food Quality and Safety Improvement.................................33Table 5 Summary of relevant Legislation related to Food Safety and Quality ...........43Table 6 SWOT Analysis of Standards........................................................................60Table 7 SWOT Analysis of Practices .........................................................................62Table 8 SWOT Analysis of Certification.....................................................................64Table 9 SWOT Analysis of Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones................................66Table 10 SWOT Analysis of Inspection......................................................................68Table 11 SWOT Analysis of Monitoring .....................................................................70Table 12 SWOT Analysis of Laboratories..................................................................71Table 13 SWOT Analysis of Information....................................................................72Table 14 SWOT Analysis of Education......................................................................73Table 15 SWOT Analysis of Extension ......................................................................75Table 16 SWOT Analysis of Communication.............................................................76Table 17 SWOT Analysis of Research.......................................................................77Table 18 SWOT Analysis of Regulations, Policies, and Strategies ...........................78Table 19 SWOT Analysis of Capacity........................................................................79Table 20 Analysis of Alternative Options for a Lead Agency at MARD on Food Safety...................................................................................................................................87 Table 21 Elements for the design of a Provincial Food Safety Index.........................88Table 22 Summary of Costs for Output 1.................................................................107Table 23 Summary of Costs for Output 2.................................................................110Table 24 Summary of Costs for Output 3.................................................................111Table 25 Number of National Standards Related to Food and Agricultural Products

and Processes .........................................................................................................143

Table 26 Investment Costs for Output 1 of Policy and Institutional Component Improving Regulatory Framework and Coordination................................................148Table 27 Recurrent Costs for Output 1 of Policy and Institutional Component Improving Regulatory Framework and Coordination................................................151Table 28 Investment Costs for Output 2 of Policy and Institutional Component Strengthening Capacity............................................................................................152Table 29 Investment Costs for Output 3 of Policy and Institutional Component CropFood Safety Management System...........................................................................157Table 30 Recurrent Costs for Output 3 of Policy and Institutional Component CropFood Safety Management System...........................................................................158Table 31 Summary of Costs for Outputs and Component on Policy and InstitutionalDevelopment............................................................................................................159

Table 32 Design and Monitoring Framework for the Policy and InstitutionalComponent of the QSIAP.........................................................................................160


10/167

10

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Approach and Methodology of Report ........................................................30Figure 2: Ministries Responsible Along the Food Chain ............................................31Figure 3 The Crop Food Safety Management System.............................................100Figure 4 The Division of Food Safety Monitoring, Information and Commnication atNAFIQAD .................................................................................................................100Figure 5 The Division of Food Safety at DCP..........................................................101Figure 6 Food Safety Facilitators at District and Commune Level...........................101Figure 7 Structure of National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food Standardsin Thailand................................................................................................................163Figure 8 Roles of MOAC and MOPH in food safety management..........................166Figure 9 GAP steps..................................................................................................167


11/167

11

1 Executive Summary

BACKGROUND

1. Since the early 2000s, there has been an intense regulatory activity related tofood safety and quality in Viet Nam. The defining moments were the issuing of theNational Assembly Standing Committee Ordinance of Food Hygiene and Safety in2003, which was followed by several decrees and directives, and the approval of theNational Action Plan for Food Safety in 2006. Laws on Standards, Good Labels, andInspection were also issued during this period. The Law on Inspection will beamended; the laws on Plant Protection, Animal Health, and Food Safety are currentlyunder preparation and expected to be drafted in 2008.

2. Regulations on good agricultural practices have been issued. VIETGAP forfruits, vegetables and tea were issued during the first 4 months of 2008. TheVIETGAP regulations are based on ASEAN GAP and GLOBALGAP. The Ministry ofAgricultural and Rural Development (MARD) has issued Regulations No.

106/2007/Q-BNN and No.43/2007/QD-BNN on management of production andbusiness of the three commodity groups includes rules for accreditation andcertification processes.

3. There is still considerable work to be done on establishing a comprehensiveregulatory framework for food safety. Most of this work is planned to occur over the5-year period 2008-2012 of the Action Plan for Food Safety.

INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES

Standards

4. The national organization for establishing standards is STAMEQ underMOST. According to the Law on Standards and Technical Specifications No.68/2006/QH11 all standards have to be issued as national standards (TCVN) or localstandards (TCCS). The process of revision of all previous sectoral standards issuedby ministries (TCN) will ensure that all future standards will be within one systemmanaged by STAMEQ. The new VIETGAP for fruits, vegetables, and tea alreadymake reference to the TCVN system.

5. While it is the intention of the Government to conform to internationalstandards in the longer term, the current state of hygiene in Vietnam prevents thisfrom being achieved in the short to medium term. About 48% of Vietnams food andagricultural standards are harmonized with Codex. The objective is to harmonize50% of all standards in Viet Nam by 2010. Currently, for the country as a whole, onlyabout 30% of standards are harmonized. Having harmonized 48% of its standardsalready, agriculture fares a little better than the average of all sectors in Viet Nam.

6. The current process of development of standards led by STAMEQ isconsistent with the principles of the TBT Agreement. Any organization (public orprivate) can submit a standard for approval, and a review committee includingdifferent stakeholders ensures the relevance, technical accuracy, feasibility, andtransparency of the standard.


12/167

12

7. Considerable progress has already occurred in improving standards andcommunicating them to the public. The Catalogue of Standards issued by STAMEQis a laudable effort in this direction. There remain however several standards to bedeveloped to improve quality and safety of specific food and agricultural products.Product-specific standards for the numerous types of fruits and vegetables need tobe developed.

Good Practices

8. Viet Nam has developed its own good agricultural practices called VIETGAPfor fresh vegetables and fruit and tea during the first 4 months of 2008. VIETGAP isclosely inspired by ASEANGAP, EUREPGAP/GLOBALGAP, and FRESHCARE.There are organizations already certified for EUREPGAP, for example the Ham MinhDragon Fruit Cooperatives located in Binh Thuan Province.

9. Given the novelty of VIETGAP it will take some time to ensure that a largenumber of farmers and organization adopt these good practices or other practicesconsistent with international standards. The adoption of VIETGAP will require testing,establishing of demonstration sites, development of manuals, training, anddissemination. Cost and benefit analysis of VIETGAP needs to be conducted throughresearch studies so as to evaluate VIETGAP promotion programs and facilitate thework of extension workers in disseminating the new practices to farmers andenterprises.

10. As of now, it is not clear whether most farmers and enterprises will benefitfrom the adoption of VIETGAP. It is likely that farmers and enterprises engaged ininternational trade will comply with VIETGAP and even more advanced practicessuch as EUREPGAP/GLOBALGAP. However, adoption of VIETGAP for domesticmarkets might be more problematic, particularly if the VIETGAP are perceived asprocedures increasing the cost of production without a corresponding increase in theprice paid by consumers. The growth of supermarkets in Viet Nam is an opportunityfor establishing safer production, handling, and distribution of food products and

supermarkets are already engaging in VIETGAP-like procedures. It is likely thatsupermarkets and enterprises engaged in exporting food products will be the earliestadopters of VIETGAP.

11. Incentives for the adoption of VIETGAP should be established. Constraints tothe adoption of VIETGAP by smallholder farmers and SME need to be assessed.

Certification

12. The VIETGAP certification is obtained from certification bodies which must beaccredited by DCP to operate over the national territory, and by DARDs to operate atthe province level.

13. As of May 2008, there are only 5 certified organizations in VIETGAP for safevegetables located in Hanoi, 2 organizations will be certified in HCMC and one will becertified in Dalat. The certification follows procedures explained in the relatedregulations and must be renewed after 3 years. Currently, accreditation is obtainedfree of charge, whereas certification of safe vegetable, fruit, and tea is obtained bypaying the certification bodies.

14. Apart from the VIETGAP certification bodies, Vietnam has nineteen othercertification bodies, all of which are foreign with the exception of QUACERT, thecertification body under MOST. QUACERT is accredited by JAS-ANZ (Australia and


13/167

13

New Zealand Joint accreditation system) to provide certification for HACCP and ISO9000 and 14000. In the ISO 9000 certification market, QUACERT has 34 percentmarket share; QUACERT is planning to become a GAP Certifying Body.

15. Currently, some farmers in Viet Nam are EUREPGAP certified. The projecton Dragon Fruit in Binh Thuan and Tien Giang, funded by USAID and AUSAID andimplemented by Southern Fruit Research Institute (SOFRI) uses EUREPGAPstandards for monitoring production of dragon fruit.

16. Capacity of the accreditation organizations (DCP and DARDs) is still weak.Most of the staff involved in accreditation do not have a sufficient background in foodsafety and accreditation and certification. As the number of organizations requiringcertification increases, the demand for accreditation will grow. The current capacity(both in terms of number and skills of staff) will have to increase over time.

17. Accreditation is currently obtained free of cost. This situation might also needto change over time in order to ensure sustainability of the accreditation system.

18. For certification to be effective and ensure consumers that the promise ofsafe food is maintained, reputation and trust have to be established. That requiresfrequent monitoring (including un-announced visits) and auditing by the accreditationand the certification agencies, the availability of a code of conduct that is respectedby the industry, and the availability of reliable diagnostics and testing centers.

19. Reputation and trust are probably the two most important elements of a goodcertification system. Reputation and trust require a multi-dimensional process ofcapacity strengthening, awareness, dissemination of information, and transparency.These are elements that need to be promoted by both regulation and initiatives of thegovernment and the industry (workshops, public hearings, publications, websites,field visits, etc).

Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones (SAZ)

20. In 1995 the GOV launched a safe vegetable program in response to publicconcerns of vegetable safety. Programs for safe production of vegetables in VietNam started in 1999. In spite of these and other initiatives, up to the present, safeproduction zones occupy just a small proportion of total cultivated area. Pilots of safevegetable production have occurred in 54 provinces (out of 64) and 24 provinceshave developed their own procedures for safe vegetable production.

21. Infrastructure for safe production zones is often poor. Unsafe water forirrigating vegetables is common and sources from river, lakes, and pools (60% of thetotal), wells (29%), and waste water (11%) are not adequately controlled for safety.Almost 100% of vegetable production is not tested and about 12% of vegetableproduction occurs near industrial zones, main roads and hospitals.

22. As of April 2008, in the Red River Delta only 6,320 ha of safe productionareas have been declared safe by DARD(s). The planned safe vegetable productionareas are 13,216 ha which represents only 13% of the total vegetable cultivated areain the region.

23. Planning of safe production zone is a complex task. Agricultural land hasbeen allocated to farmers who are mostly smallholders and usually have fragmentedlandholdings. To establish contiguous land plots of land which could be declared part


14/167

14

of a safe production area requires coordination and the establishment of rules andincentives.

24. Currently the DARDs are responsible for declaring a zone safe for agriculturalproduction. However, there are not yet regulations on how to plan and declare anagricultural zone safe for agricultural production.

25. The regulation No. 02/2007/ND-CP envisages Pest Free Zones (PFZ).However, up to now, there are no PFZ and the Inspectorate Division of theDepartment of Plant Production is in the process of formulating the relevantstandards. The problems of declaring a pest free zone are similar to the onesdeclaring a safe agricultural zone. Technical determinations could be made and clearrules on monitoring established. However, ultimately, it depends on the adherenceand participation of local communities to engage in a certain type of practices andCode of Conduct (COC) for the zone to remain safe or pest free. This suggests theneed of including a communication strategy that involves the local communities.

26. The declaration of a safe production zone could also be linked toGeographical Indications so that products coming from a certain area are provided acertificate of origin stating that the area is a SAZ or a PFZ.

Inspection

27. The inspection system for agricultural products consists of the MinisterialInspectorate Office (MIO) at MARD and inspectorate divisions at differentdepartments of MARD, such as the Inspectorate at the Department of PlantProtection, the Inspectorate at the Department of Veterinary Services, andInspectorate at the Department of Crop Production. At the local level, there areDARD(s) Inspectorates and Inspectorates at the Sub-Departments specialized inplant protection and quarantine, and veterinary and animal health.

28. Each Inspectorate Division at MARD reports to the head of the respective

department and also to the MIO. The 2004 Law on Inspection did not provide clearinstruction about the roles and responsibilities of the Inspectorate Divisions. The2005 Decree on Inspection No 153/2005/N-CP did remedy to this deficient of the2004 Law. The amendment to the Law on Inspection under preparation (expected tobe submitted to the National Assembly in 2008) is likely to confirm the roles andresponsibilities of the Inspectorate Divisions as clarified in the Decree of 2005.

29. There are relatively few inspectors both at the central and at the local level.There are no inspectors at the commune level. Most of the inspectors are not fulltime specialized inspectors, and perform various functions besides inspection.

30. Inspection takes place several times during the year and different types ofinspections are carried out. In the case of plant protection, inspections occur for

pesticide use, pesticide trading, testing in markets for different residues, quarantineinspection, and inspection upon request, complaints and denunciations.

31. When a violation is discovered, inspectors have the right to issueadministrative fines and to recommend suspension of the violating organization.Administrative and financial penalties are common; however they do not seem to betoo heavy. For example, traders who have been found trading in fake products areoften ready to pay the fines, provided they can continue their business. For seriousviolations against food hygiene and safety the Criminal Code could be applied with


15/167

15

penalties including imprisonment; however, inspectors can only recommendapplication of the Criminal Code. In practice imprisonment occurs rarely (if ever).

32. While coordination between inspectorates and MOI at MARD is relativelyfrequent and smooth, there is less coordination between MARD and MOH in term ofinspection activities. The Inspectorate of the Department of Plant Protection, forexample, carries out monthly testing of chemical residues from samples collected atmajor markets. This function would seem to be under the responsibility of MOH.

33. The power of inspectorates appears to be limited either in terms of applyingfines, confiscating products, or suspension of violators. At the same time, anyadditional power given to the inspectors should be checked against increasedincentives for rent seeking behavior. Some kind of external monitoring of inspectorswill need to be introduced in the new Law to reduce rent seeking behavior and undueoutside interference with the work of inspectors.

Labs

34. Vietnam has 8 laboratories which have reached ISO 17025 standards forlaboratory analysis, including 1 laboratory at the Nutrition Institute of the Ministry ofHealth, 1 laboratory at the Office of Animal Health Control in HCMC, and 6laboratories at NAFIQAD with two laboratories capable to analyze pesticide residues,hormones, additives, and heavy metals. In the plant protection area, there is nolaboratory which has reached up to international standard.

35. The level of soil and water contamination is serious. Surveys findings showhigh levels of chemical residue on tea and high use of chemicals. About 4.5% offarmers still use pesticides which are not permitted for use in Vietnam. Almost 100%of land for vegetable cultivation is not tested, 12% of vegetable cultivation area isnear industrial zones, big roads or hospitals. Fresh manure and urine are stillcommon in irrigation water used for vegetable production.

36. Even though there are qualified laboratory technicians and professionals,their number is limited. Testing facilities in many laboratories are out of date and thecost of testing is often not affordable to poor farmers. For example a complete set oftests from samples collected at the market place costs between 1.8 and 2 millionVND, according to the Inspectorate of Plant Protection Department. Testing soilrequires sending samples to the central Soil and Fertilizer Institute. Water testingfacilities at the local level (province) have limited capacity in several provinces andare not yet available in many provinces; the water testing facilities are located atCenters for Quarantine of Agricultural Products and Supplies or at Centers for CleanWater and Rural Environment which have been established in several provinces atthe end of 2007.

37. Rapid testing methods are not yet developed. For example the testing of food

samples collected at market takes about one week to be completed, which is too lateto take any measure to prevent the circulation of unsafe food in the distributionsystem. According to the Department for Plant Protection, support to rapid testingmethods is useful and vital.

Monitoring

38. Almost all the regulations mention monitoring and reporting. Directive No.06/2007/CT-TTg indicates that annual and bi-annual reports on food safety should besubmitted to the Prime Minister by the lead agency for food safety, namely the MOH.


16/167

16

VIETGAP regulations indicate that both regular and irregular monitoring ofcertification bodies will be conducted by the accreditation agency.

39. In spite of all these references to monitoring in the regulations, there is not yeta monitoring system for food safety that is consistent, reliable, publicly available, andeffective. The MOH publicizes cases of incidence of food borne diseases. Thepublished data are however considered to be an underestimation of the real situation.In the case of MARD, there are occasional reports, but these tend to be occasionalrather than regular.

40. Without a monitoring system, it is rather difficult (or impossible) to assess thecurrent situation on food safety and, most importantly, progress made. There is nolead agency within MARD responsible for monitoring of food safety issues.

Information, Education, Communication

41. In spite of an intense regulatory activity related to food safety, informationabout food safety in Viet Nam is scattered among different agencies. There are nowell organized databases on food safety dimensions such as regulations, standards,practices, laboratories, and inspection.

42. For an organized information system on food safety to arise at MARD, a clearmandate needs to be provided to an agency, responsibilities and authorities have tobe defined, and adequate resources have to be ensured. The Information Center ofMARD could initially take up this role and using its website www.agroviet.gov.vn tomake this information available.

43. The education system is lagging behind in incorporating food hygiene andsafety issues in its programs. Food hygiene principles and practices needs to beinstilled since the primary education level. At the tertiary level, food hygiene andsafety courses and programs are not yet available. A master and PhD program infood hygiene and safety needs to be developed.

44. In most recent years, there has been a considerable attention of the media onfood safety. The latest issue of Outlook Magazine (May 26, 2008) is entirelydedicated to food safety. Television and radio programs often report about foodborne diseases and communicate to the general public activities and decisions of theGovernment related to food safety. The VFA launches awareness campaign aboutfood hygiene and safety.

45. These efforts are laudable; however they seem still insufficient to inform thegeneral public and farmers in a professional and regular manner. Workshops andconferences dedicated to food safety are increasing, but their number is still limited.Programs to inform children at school could be strengthened. Mass organizations(Women Union, Youth Union, and Farmer Union) have a critical role to play in

communication and have the organization to enable them to communicate effectively.Publications and websites dedicated to food safety are still limited.

Extension

46. Food safety and quality is a new concept for most farmers and extensionworkers in Viet Nam. The recently developed VIETGAP for fruit, vegetables, and teawill require a considerable effort to ensure that good practices are disseminated andadopted by farmers and enterprises.


17/167

17

47. There are leading farmers and organizations who have already adopted goodpractices, including EUREPGAP and HACCP. Certified organizations for safe foodproduction and trading are increasing, partly motivated by the incentives of capturingnew export markets and higher value consumers in the domestic market.

48. VIETGAP (and other GAPs) require considerable behavioral changes byfarmers and enterprises. Unless there are adequate incentives for adoption, the foodsafety practices will remain limited to few leading farmers.

49. Clear evidence that adoption of safe practices could benefit smallholdingfarmers should be provided. Technical and socioeconomic research could supportthe production of such evidence.

50. The development of an extension system capable and effective in ensuringthat safe practices are adopted by a larger number of farmers requires a concertedeffort that involves on-farm testing of GAP, development of manuals and guidelines,training of trainers, establishment of models, and focused extension activities.

51. Close collaboration with research organizations and private sector (includingprocessors and supermarkets) might facilitate the work of extension workers andprovide additional incentives to farmers.

52. Well established methods of extension such as demonstrations and farmerfield schools should be combined with incentives such as prizes for best safe foodproducers, participation in study tours (eg to certified farmers in dragon fruit),facilitating access to markets (through contracts with enterprises and supermarkets)and participation in producer marketing groups.

Strategies, Policies, and Regulations

53. Since the early 2000 there has been an intense regulatory activity on foodhygiene and safety. The Laws on Standards and Good Labels have already been

approved. Currently the amendment to the Law on Inspection and a new Law onFood Safety are under preparation. An Action Plan for Food Safety has beenapproved in 2006 and additional clarifications on the Action Plan 2008-2012 havebeen issued in 2008.

54. There remains considerable work to be done to complete the regulatoryframework, formulate policies, and develop strategies. The priorities for actioninclude the establishment of a lead agency for food safety at MARD, theestablishment of monitoring, information, and communication systems, thedevelopment of standards and good practices, the planning of safe agriculturalzones, and an incentive policy for adoption of good practices.

Capacity

55. There is a limited number of staff within MARD and related researchorganizations who are specialists in food safety. In the DCP there are only 4 staffinvolved in food safety, and only 2 are full time. At the DPP there are 37 inspectors,of which only 7 are full time. At the province level, on average there are less than 7staff who have responsibilities related to food safety and most of them are notspecialists. In the research organizations, the situation is similar, as food safetyresearch programs are just starting to be established. In the livestock production andanimal health department, and in the fishery department, the situation seems to bebetter, with a larger number of specialists involved in food safety issues.


18/167

18

56. Farmers lack knowledge and capacity for safe food production and basicpostharvest operations such as grading, handling, packaging. Good sorting,handling, packaging, washing, and labeling practices in the marketing chains fromfarm to consumers are also largely lacking.

57. There are capacity needs at all levels of the food safety institutionaldimensions examined in this report, from standards, practices, to regulations,policies, and strategies. The immediate gaps seem to be those related to improvingcapacity for formulating regulations, policies, and strategies. As the regulatoryframework becomes better defined, the subsequent priorities for capacitystrengthening are in certification, extension, inspection, monitoring, and information.

RECOMMENDATIONS

58. Lead Agency for Food Safety at MARD. Establish a lead agency at MARDdevoted to food safety.

59. Establishment of a Food Safety Monitoring System at MARD. Issue aregulation to establish a food safety monitoring system under the responsibility of aunit at MARD. Develop a methodology and pilot the construction and monitoring of aProvincial Food Safety Index.

60. Establishment of Food Safety Information and Communication Systemsat MARD. Issue a regulation to establish a food safety information andcommunication system under the responsibility of the lead agency for food safety atMARD and the technical support of the Information Center at MARD.

61. Planning of Safe Agricultural Zones. Issue a new regulation on planning ofSafe Agricultural Zones including the participation of communities in developing codeof conducts, the planning of infrastructure, and the establishment of a monitoringsystem.

62. Development and Harmonization of Standards. Establish an action planfor the development of standards to ensure food quality and safety and improvecapacity to carry out the action plan. Focus on the development of standards for thespecific products in fruit, vegetables, and tea that contribute to improve safety andquality.

63. Development of Good Practices. Issue regulations to develop existingVIETGAP and formalize a Standing Committee for the Development of VIETGAP.Issue regulations for developing new VIETGAP. Establish a road map to ensure agradual convergence of national good practices with internationally recognized goodpractices.

64. Incentive Policy for Adoption of Good Practices. Issue a policy onincentives to adoption of good practices including direct incentives to operators(farmers and enterprises) such as reduced costs of certification, matching grants forinvestment in good practices, rewards to best performers, and access to credit; andindirect incentives through improvement of infrastructure (eg for building safeagricultural zones, safe stalls in fruits and vegetable markets), technical assistance,and information.

65. Institutional Capacity of Key Agencies at MARD, Labs, and CertificationBodies. Conduct an in-depth capacity needs assessment for food safety and quality


19/167

19

improvement of MARD agencies and DARDS. Assess scope and plans of ongoingcapacity building projects. Establish a coordination body for capacity buildingactivities. Formulate a 5-year plan for capacity building. Conduct capacity buildingactivities including training, study tours, certif ication programs, and degree programs.

PROPOSED CROP FOOD SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (CFSMS)

66. Rationale. A number of regulations indicate functions and responsibilities ofvarious departments of MARD related to policy formulation, management,monitoring, inspection, communication, accreditation, and development of standardsrelated to food safety. The existing regulations however do not provide sufficientclarity on three key institutional issues, namely (i) who will take the lead incoordinating the efforts of various departments; (ii) who will take the lead inmonitoring; and (iii) how the food safety management system will be managed.

67. Coordination. The issue of coordination is both internal and external toMARD. Internally at MARD, various departments are mandated with monitoring (forexample DCP and NAFIQAD) and all departments are mandated with communicationand policy formulation. It is not clear however who will take the lead in coordinationand how various efforts will be harmonized. Externally, MARD needs to coordinate itsactivities on food safety with other key ministries, mostly notably the Ministry ofHealth (MOH), the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST), the Ministry ofIndustry and Trade (MOIT), the Ministry of Planning and Investment (MPI), andvarious key organizations such as the Viet Nam Food Administration (VFA) andSTAMEQ. For example, the development of national food standards is managed bySTAMEQ, but requires considerable input from MARD. There is not yet a body withinMARD that is coordinating with external agencies.

68. Monitoring. Existing regulations indicate monitoring as a responsibility of alldepartments at MARD, with NAFIQAD in charge of supervising specialized

monitoring activities by other departments. This indication of responsibility howeverdoes not translate into an actual system of monitoring. Specific resources, budgets,and tools to carry out a monitoring system for food safety are not in place. There isnot yet a system of monitoring able to produce regular reports on various aspects offood safety that allow assessing progress towards achievement of policy objectiveson food safety.

69. Management. For an effective management of food safety system to emerge,operational structures have to be established. Currently, no food safety units exist,either at the central (MARD) or at the provincial level (DARD). Staff engaged in foodsafety are usually involved in other activities and not fully specialized in food safety.At MARD, for example, standards and practices for safe production of fruit,vegetables, and tea have been established and a body of related regulations has

been developed. However, there only 3 part-time staff at DCP are involved in theseactivities, while the Department itself is charged with numerous functions andresponsibilities including policy formulation, accreditation of certification bodies,monitoring and inspection, communication, promotion of safe agricultural zones, andtraining.

70. Proposed Solutions. The QSEAP will contribute to the establishment of aneffective food safety system at MARD by addressing the issues of coordination,monitoring, and management. The project will pilot a crop food safety management


20/167

20

system (CFSMS) that that could eventually be institutionalized and extended to otheragri-products. The proposed solutions include:

1. Establishment of a Standing Committee on Food Safety headed by a ViceMinister of MARD with Secretariat at NAFIQAD

2. Establishment of Food Safety Divisions in the Department of Crop Production(DCP) at MARD and sub-divisions at DARD dealing with Crop Food Safety

3. Establishment of a Food Safety Monitoring Division at NAFIQAD for overallcrop food safety monitoring, communication and information

4. Creation of new staff positions for Food Safety Specialists (at DCP/MARDand DARD) and Food Safety Facilitators at district and commune level

5. Capacity building program of staff involved in the crop food safety6. Review and formulation of policy and regulations for food safety

71. The proposed solutions address the problem of coordination, monitoring, andmanagement by (i) establishing a standing committee on food safety to coordinatethe work of the departments; (ii) assigning leadership to NAFIQAD in establishing amonitoring system for the Ministry; and (iii) using the comparative advantage andexperience of DCP by giving to DCP the leadership in several functions related tocrop food safety.

72. Vision. The vision for the crop food safety management system (CFSMS) is aregulatory and management system that assures that safe agricultural products areproduced, processed, and distributed. The system benefits both consumers andproducers. Producers, processors, wholesalers, retailers, exporters, and importersare able to provide buyers an independent verification that a recognized program ofsafe agricultural products production, handling, processing, and distribution practiceshas been followed. The CFSMS will meet food safety requirements of domesticconsumers and international trading partners, including WTO, through certification tomutually agreed and recognized standards.

73. Elements. The proposed CFSMS is consistent with 7 essential elements of a

food safety system, namely:1. Standards and Codes of Practices which prevent or minimize potential foodsafety hazards, based on the hazard analysis critical control point (HACCP)method.

2. Certification that entities have met the Standards or follow the Codes ofPractices.

3. Inspection and Auditing of entities to verify they continue to meet theStandards.

4. Monitoring to ensure progress towards policy objectives on food safety.5. Internal Control Systems to ensure that certified business units (including

farmer groups, cooperatives, and enterprises) comply with food safetyStandards.

6. Information, Education, and Communication to ensure that all the actors in

the food supply chain are aware and can access knowledge about foodsafety.

7. Research to identify the most suitable technologies and socioeconomicmechanisms to promote food safety.

74. Legislation. Policies and regulations are clearly defined to provide authorityto the management agencies and protect the rights and integrity of consumers andcommercial entities. Key to the development of legislation is a comprehensive FoodSafety Law that completes and harmonizes the existing large body of regulations.The management structure is defined in the legislation. Within MARD different


21/167

21

departments have functions and responsibilities for various elements of the CFSMS;coordination is provided by the proposed Standing Committee on Food Safety(SCFS). The QSEAP will provide support to the review of existing regulations and theformulation of new policies and regulations consistently with the new Food SafetyLaw expected to be submitted to the National Assembly in 2009.

75. Management Structure - Overall. The CFSMS will be part of a nationalmanagement structure that defines the responsibilities for each of the elements of thesystem and the agencies involved. The following is typical of many countries in theworld:

1. Food Administration Authority VFA has overall responsibility for food safety2. Standards Authority STAMEQ has overall responsibility for issuing

standards The standards authority coordinates with sector agencies that areresponsible for the development of standards and codes of practices (eg DCPresponsible for VIETGAP)

3. Certification It includes Accreditation Bodies (eg DCP for VIETAP) andCertification Bodies

4. Inspection and Auditing It includes laboratories certified ISO 17025 andprofessionals or companies trained and competent to ISO 9000.

5. Monitoring Bodies to manage and coordinate monitoring conducted bydifferent units

6. Information, Education, and Communication Bodies Public or privateorganizations that disseminate information and provide access to knowledgeto improve food safety

7. ICS Service Providers Public or private organizations that help farmers andenterprises achieving Internal Control Systems (ICS) to assure compliancewith Standards and Codes of Practices

8. Research Organizations Public or private organizations that provideresearch on socioeconomic and technological aspects of food safety.

76. Management Structure - MARD. The proposed Crop Food SafetyManagement System (CFSMS) includes a coordination body at MARD (the Standing

Committee on Food Safety), a department leading in monitoring, information, andcommunication (NAFIQAD), a department leading in policy formulation, developmentof standards, and accreditation of certification bodies (the Department of CropProduction), and positions at the central, provincial, district, and commune levelresponsible for the management of the food safety system and facilitation of safefood production for fruit, vegetables, and tea.

77. Central Level MARD. The CFSMS envisages the following:1. Standing Committee on Food Safety (SCFS) coordinates policy formulation,

monitoring and inspection, development of standards, communication andinformation among different departments of MARD and ensures coordinationwith other agencies outside of MARD. The committee is headed by a ViceMinister of MARD and NAFIQAD provides the Secretariat for the Standing

Committee; members include all departments involved in food safety.2. NAFIQAD has lead responsibility in establishing and managing the monitoring

system for food safety and an information and communication system.3. A Food Safety Monitoring, Information, and Communication Division is

established at NAFIQAD with staff responsible in the five areas of (i)methodologies; (ii) statistics; (iii) evaluation and reporting; (iv) operations; and(v) information and communication.

4. Monitoring of food crop safety is based on surveys, visits, and testing carriedout by national and regional laboratories under DCP, DPP, NAFIQAD, andany other laboratory authorized by NAFIQAD. NAFIQAD has overall


22/167

22

responsibility for managing the monitoring system including the developmentof a Provincial Food Safety Index that will include not only variables such astest results (water and soil quality, MRL, heavy metals, and microbiologicalcontamination), but also infrastructure variables (eg number of watertreatment units, packhouses and cold storage), variable on certification(number of certification bodies and certified organizations), inspection(number and gravity of violations), food-borne diseases, and consumerconfidence variables.

5. DCP has lead responsibility for policy formulation related to crop food safety,accreditation and monitoring of VIETGAP certification bodies, development ofstandards and manuals for VIETGAP and other standards, training of otherdepartments and DARDs staff in VIETGAP and other standards.

6. A Food Safety Division is established at DCP with staff responsible in the fiveareas of (i) policy, (ii) standards, (iii) monitoring and inspection, (iv)accreditation, and (v) communication.

7. Other relevant departments such as Department of Plant Protection (DPP)and Department of Science and Technology (DST) carry out activities inpolicy formulation, standards development, monitoring, and communication;NAFEC carries out extension programs for food safety. All these activities willbe coordinated through the SCFS.

8. QSIAP will undertake a comprehensive program of capacity building at MARDand in the provinces covered by the project.

78. Province Level DARD. The CFSMS envisages the following:1. A sub-Division of Food Safety is established at DARD with overall

responsibility for managing implementation of regulations on crop food safetyin each project province, training, monitoring, accreditation of certificationbodies, promotion of safe agricultural zones (SAZ), and facilitation of theestablishment of internal control systems at business units (farmer groupsand cooperatives) engaged in safe food production.

2. Positions for Food Safety Specialists will be established. The QSIAP willprovide capacity building for the Food Safety Specialists at the province level.

Some of the staff will be trained and certified as VIETGAP inspectors.

79. District and Commune Level. The CFSMS envisages the following:1. Positions for Food Safety Facilitators (FSF) will be created at the district and

at the commune level. The QSEAP will build capacity of FSF to provideservices to farmers groups and cooperatives engaged in safe food productionof fruit, vegetables, and tea.

2. Services by FSF will include training, liaising with certification bodies andbuyers, and facilitating the establishing Internal Control Systems for foodsafety. This involve ensuring that individual farmers maintain records requiredby the standards, maintaining a register of farmer records, including monthlyconsolidated records of all farm inputs, outputs and certified sales for auditingpurposes; conducting regular monitoring and spot checks of member farmers,

and guiding them on any corrective actions; conducting an internal audit ofthe certified entity, prior to each audit by the Certification Body, and at leastonce per year; ensuring all Corrective Action Requests by the CertificationBody are complied in a timely fashion; and facilitating the production of allcertification compliance, quality assurance and traceability documents.

3. The FSF will pass an accredited VIETGAP inspector or manager course(gaining a certificate) and attend annual or bi-annual refresher trainingcourses to maintain current accreditation status.


23/167

23

80. Sustainability of the System. The proposed system is a pilot that could beinstitutionalized over time. The sustainability and replicability of the system beyondthe project life depend on the following:

1. As the demand for certification increases and knowledge about safe foodproduction becomes more widespread, several services of facilitators will beprovided by the private sector; alternatively the services could be provided bythe public sector based on a fee. The pilot will allow to understand whatservices could be delivered for a fee and which services will still require publicfunding.

2. The services provided by the food safety specialists (at MARD and DARDlevel) are likely to remain essential (with the possible exception ofaccreditation that could be outsourced outside of the public sector). There is astrong rationale for them to continue to be publicly funded, as they providepublic goods. This is the practice in most countries. As Viet Nam movestowards middle income country status and beyond, it will increase itsemphasis on food safety both to promote health of the population and to meetthe increasing domestic and international demand for safe agroproducts. Theneed of policies and regulations, monitoring, certification, inspection,information and communication about food safety will increase and willrequire an adequately funded public sector.

PROJECT DESIGN OF THE POLICY AND INSTITUTIONAL COMPONENT

81. The design and monitoring framework for the Policy and InstitutionalComponent of the Project is summarized in Table 2. The costs of this component arepresented in the following table:

Table 1 Summary of Costs for Subcomponents of the Policy and Institutional

Development Component of the Project

Investment Cost Recurrent Cost Total Cost

Sub-component 1.1 $ 1,592,000 $ 1,076,000 $ 2,668,000

Sub-component 1.2 $ 1,140,000 $ - $ 1,140,000

Sub-component 1.3 $ 312,000 $ 360,000 $ 672,000

Total $ 3,044,000 $ 1,436,000 $ 4,480,000


24/167

Table 2 Design and Monitoring Framework for the Policy and Institutional Component of theQSIAP

Output Targets Data Sources andMonitoring

Assumptions andRisks

Output 1 -

Improvedregulatoryframework andcoordinationfor statemanagement ofsafety andquality of fruit,vegetables, andtea

1. A review of existing

regulations submitted toMARD decision makers2. Standing Committee onFood Safety headed by ViceMinister of MARD for foodquality and safetyestablished with Secretariatprovided by NaFIQAD3. A comprehensive andreadily accessible set ofregulations for theimplementation of foodsafety and quality of fruit,vegetables, and tea including

regulations on SAZ,Incentive policy, andmonitoring, communication,and information.4. A consistent and readilyavailable set of goodpractices (VIETGAP) andstandards in production andpostharvest operations(TCVN) related to fruit,vegetables, and tea(standards for at least 10different types of vegetables,10 different types of fruit, and

tea; including organicproduction)5. Food safety monitoringsystem, information system,and communication systemfor fruit, vegetables, and teaestablished

1. CPMU reports

and documentrecords

2. StandingCommittee onFood Safetyminutes andlist of meetingattendance

3. MARDdecrees,decisions onfood safetyand quality

4. STAMEQ-

approvedTCVN relatedto fruit,vegetables,and tea

5. Reports of themonitoring unitunder MARD,includingProvincialFood SafetyIndex

6. Reports of theinformation

andcommunicationunits at MARD

Assumptions

1. Sustainedcommitment of MARD toimproving policy andregulatory framework2. Cooperation amongdepartments to transferresponsibilities andassets as necessary3. Rationalization oflaboratory system mayinvolve making use ofanalytical services ofagencies outside ofMARD

4. GAP and otherstandards reviewedannually and revised tomeet user concerns andany changes in marketrequirements5. Phasing out ofsubsidies to certifiedbodies over the courseof the Project

Risks1. High global foodprices might retard the

emphasis on food safetyand quality2. Rent seekingbehavior might resultfrom an empoweredinspection system3. Resistance toseparate monitoringagency fromimplementation agency

Output 2Strengthenedcapacity ofstate agencies,certificationbodies, andlaboratoriesinvolved in theimplementationof quality andsafe foodproduction,processing, and

1. About 130 staff fromMARD and 140 staff fromDARD trained in regulationsand policy formulation,certification, GAP, standards,monitoring, inspection,information, communication,planning, and risk analysis2. Staff from 100certified/certifying bodiestrained3. Staff from 20laboratories trained

1. CPMU reportsand documentrecords2. Reports of themonitoring unitunder MARD,includingProvincial FoodSafety Index3. Number ofcertified bodies byDCP4. Area of SZA

Assumptions

1. Sustainedcommitment of MARD tocapacity strengthening ofstate organizations,laboratories, andcertified bodies2. Coordination withother projects involved incapacity strengtheningactivities for food qualityand safety


25/167

Quality and Safety Enhancement of Agricultural Products. Institutional Analysis Background Paper

25

Output Targets Data Sources andMonitoring

Assumptions andRisks

trading of fruit,vegetables, andtea.

4. Staff from 16 DARDprovinces trained in planningSAZ

established byDARD5. Quality ofservice surveys

conducted byindependentorganization

3. Food safety reflectedin new degree programsat education institutionsand research programs

at researchorganizations

Risks1. Scheduling oftraining activities mightconflict with otheractivities

Output 3:Establishmentof a pilot CropFood Safety

ManagementSystem(CFSMS) fromthe central levelof MARD to thecommune levelfor fruit,vegetables, andtea.

1. Standing Committee forFood Safety established byfirst half of 20092. Pilot units for Food

Safety Monitoringestablished by second half of2009 at NAFIQAD3. Pilot units for FoodSafety established at DCPand DARDs in 16 provincesby second half of 20094. Job descriptions,reassignment of staff, andidentification of staff for thepositions of Food SafetySpecialists and Food SafetySpecialists (at district andcommune level) completed

by second half of 2009.

1. CPMU reportsand documentrecords2. Minutes of

StandingCommittee forFood Safety andattendance lists3. Records ofstaff fully devotedto food safetyactivities in theproject4. Quality ofservice surveysconducted byindependentorganization

Assumptions1. Sustainedcommitment of MARD topilot the crop food safety

management system.

Risks1. The piloted systemdoes not lead toreplicable outcome inother provinces.


26/167


26

2 Introduction

82. This Working Paper1 is the joint output of the Institutional Consultants Francesco

Goletti and Nguyen Thi Minh Hai.

83. The scope of work includes an assessment of food safety regulations andinstitutional capacity related to food safety for three commodity groups, namely vegetables,fruit, and tea.

84. The objective of the Working Paper for the Institutional component of the QSIAP is toreview the current legislation related to food safety, provide an analysis of the keyinstitutional issues, assess capacity of institutions related to food safety, and makerecommendations for the design monitoring framework (DMF) of the project.

85. The Working Paper is organized as follows:

Chapter 1 provides the Executive Summary

Chapter 2 contains the Introduction

Chapter 3 provides the conceptual framework used in the analysis of foodquality and safety issues

Chapter 4 gives an overview of the key institutions involved in food quality andsafety

Chapter 5 provides a review of the key legislation on food quality and safety

Chapter 6 analyzes the current situation and issues related to food quality andsafety

Chapter 7 presents experience of other countries

Chapter 8 presents recommendations, including the outcomes, outputs,activities, inputs, and costs necessary to achieve the outputs; the indicators ofoutputs, the monitoring methods, the expected benefits, and the risks

Chapter 9 contains various Annexes including:

1. Codex Alimentarius Commission2. Introduction to SPS and TBT Agreements

3. The SPS Agreement4. The TBT Agreement5. Risk Analysis6. Standards and Trade Development Facility7. Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP)

1 To be cited as Goletti, Francesco, and Nguyen Thi Minh Hai, Institutional Analysis and CapacityBuilding, Working Paper, Quality and Safety Improvement in Agricultural Products Project, ADB TA4972-VIE, NIRAS in association with Agrifood Consulting International and VICA, Hanoi, Viet Nam,September 2008.


27/167


27

8. Codex Standards, Code of Practice, Max Residue Limits, Guidelines9. Viet Nam Standards (TCVN) for Food and Agriculture10. Examples of some Vietnamese Standards related to VIETGAP11. Implications of Food Safety Regulations for Different Actors along the

Value Chain12. Preliminary Estimation of Costs for the Project Component: Policy and

Institutional Development for Food Safety at the central level13. Design and Monitoring Framework14. Thailand Food Safety System


28/167


28

3 Approach and Methodology

3.1 Definition of Food Safety and Quality

86. Quality: Compliance with predefined standards

87. Food Safety: Protection from chemical or biological substances that lead to illness ordeath

88. Improving food quality and safety depends on actions taken all along the valuechain2, from supply of inputs to final consumption. At each stage of the value chain, there areinstitutional issues that need to be addressed. While in the past, the emphasis of regulationsand institutions was on reactive measures to control food quality and safety, currently theemphasis is on preventive measures.

3.2 Institutional Dimensions of Food Quality and Safety

89. The development of a food quality and safety system starts with the awareness offood quality and safety as an issue that has critical relevance to society. The awareness offood quality and safety in Viet Nam is rapidly increasing as the outcome of more informationavailable through the media, various regulations introduced by the Government, integrationwith the world economy and the WTO Agreements on SPS and TBT, and increasingconcerns for health in a population that is moving rapidly towards mid-income status.

90. In order to establish a food quality and safety system able to assure quality and safetyof food, standards and practices have to be developed and adhered to ensure thestandards are achieved in production, processing, marketing, distribution, trade, and service

delivery. The development of food standards and practices has received a great boost overthe most recent years in Viet Nam as cases of food born diseases, and zoonotic diseaseshave been reported in the media.

91. To ensure that good practices (at the production, processing, and distribution levels)are followed, systems of certification have arisen. GAP, GMP, GHP, HACCP, and RiskAnalysis have become common words in the regulatory body that is rapidly development inViet Nam.

92. Certification usually refers to individual organizations. It could however also apply toentire communities and areas (for example SAZ or safe agricultural zones, and PFZ or pestfree zones) or to market places. In the latter case, certification involves regional planning

93. Both certified organizations and non-certified ones need to be inspected or auditedin order to take action in the case of violations of the law and also to ensure that quality andsafety standards are followed.

94. Regular monitoring and reporting about food quality and safety provides the basisto assess the current situation, identify problems, and take decisions to improve the system.

2See Annex 9.11.


29/167


30/167


30

Figure 1: Approach and Methodology of Report

Overview of

Institutions

Review of

Regulations

Institutional

Issues

Strategic

Analysis

Recommend

ations

MARD

MOH

MOST

Ordinances

Directives

Decrees

Circulars

Laws

Standards

Practices

Certification

Inspection

Labs

Monitoring

Information

Education

Extension

Communication

Regulation

Policies

Strategies

Research

Capacity

SWOT

Problem Tree

Framework

DMF

Outcomes

Outputs

Activities

Inputs

Indicators

Monitoring

Risks


31/167


31

4 The Institutions Involved in Food Quality and Safety

4.1 Introduction

105. Several institutional players are involved in food quality and safety, includingministries, government agencies at the central and local levels, research organizations,international agencies, the private sector, associations, and mass organizations.

106. The objective of this chapter is to provide a brief overview of these institutionalplayers and indicate their roles along the food safety and

thuat ngu luật

Documents

Transcript of thuat ngu luật