Cargando…
Meat safety legislation and its opportunities and hurdles for innovative approaches: A review
Albert Einstein has been quoted “We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them”. Innovations are necessary to meet future challenges regarding sustainability, animal welfare, slaughter hygiene, meat safety and quality, not at least for optimal balance between these...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier Science
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9290325/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36329973 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2022.109160 |
_version_ | 1784748873159278592 |
---|---|
author | Nagel-Alne, Gunvor Elise Murphy, Emil McCauslin, Brittany Hauge, Sigrun J. Schrøder-Petersen, Dorte Lene Holthe, Janne Alvseike, Ole |
author_facet | Nagel-Alne, Gunvor Elise Murphy, Emil McCauslin, Brittany Hauge, Sigrun J. Schrøder-Petersen, Dorte Lene Holthe, Janne Alvseike, Ole |
author_sort | Nagel-Alne, Gunvor Elise |
collection | PubMed |
description | Albert Einstein has been quoted “We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them”. Innovations are necessary to meet future challenges regarding sustainability, animal welfare, slaughter hygiene, meat safety and quality, not at least for optimal balance between these dimensions. The red meat safety legislation texts from Europe, New Zealand, USA, and global guidelines, were analysed for normative formulations (“how it is or should be done”) that may create non-intentional hurdles to innovation and new technology. Detailed descriptions of slaughtering techniques and meat processes may hinder innovative processing from being investigated and implemented. The identified problematic normative phrases typically either conserve conventional technologies or organisation of the work, prescribe solutions where no established method, objective criteria or limits exits, or put forward visions impossible to obtain. The Codex Alimentarius was found to have less normative formulations and more functional demands (“what to achieve”) than the national and regional regulations. European, New Zealand's and US′ legislation share many similarities and challenges, and they all reflect the prevailing processing methods. Consequences are briefly commented, and alternative objective functional demands suggested. Normative legislation texts provide familiar context easier to understand, but also make legislation voluminous. This review underlines the mutual dependency between risk-based legislation and conditional flexibility, and between functional demands and control activities targeted on measurable objective criteria. The legislation does not have to be either or. Objective normative phrases in legislation can function as a least common multiple if alternative methods are allowed on condition that they fulfil objective criteria. Context and practical advice should mainly come from textbooks, consultants, white papers and in Food Business Operator's own guidelines, among others. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9290325 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Elsevier Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92903252022-11-01 Meat safety legislation and its opportunities and hurdles for innovative approaches: A review Nagel-Alne, Gunvor Elise Murphy, Emil McCauslin, Brittany Hauge, Sigrun J. Schrøder-Petersen, Dorte Lene Holthe, Janne Alvseike, Ole Food Control Article Albert Einstein has been quoted “We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them”. Innovations are necessary to meet future challenges regarding sustainability, animal welfare, slaughter hygiene, meat safety and quality, not at least for optimal balance between these dimensions. The red meat safety legislation texts from Europe, New Zealand, USA, and global guidelines, were analysed for normative formulations (“how it is or should be done”) that may create non-intentional hurdles to innovation and new technology. Detailed descriptions of slaughtering techniques and meat processes may hinder innovative processing from being investigated and implemented. The identified problematic normative phrases typically either conserve conventional technologies or organisation of the work, prescribe solutions where no established method, objective criteria or limits exits, or put forward visions impossible to obtain. The Codex Alimentarius was found to have less normative formulations and more functional demands (“what to achieve”) than the national and regional regulations. European, New Zealand's and US′ legislation share many similarities and challenges, and they all reflect the prevailing processing methods. Consequences are briefly commented, and alternative objective functional demands suggested. Normative legislation texts provide familiar context easier to understand, but also make legislation voluminous. This review underlines the mutual dependency between risk-based legislation and conditional flexibility, and between functional demands and control activities targeted on measurable objective criteria. The legislation does not have to be either or. Objective normative phrases in legislation can function as a least common multiple if alternative methods are allowed on condition that they fulfil objective criteria. Context and practical advice should mainly come from textbooks, consultants, white papers and in Food Business Operator's own guidelines, among others. Elsevier Science 2022-11 /pmc/articles/PMC9290325/ /pubmed/36329973 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2022.109160 Text en © 2022 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Nagel-Alne, Gunvor Elise Murphy, Emil McCauslin, Brittany Hauge, Sigrun J. Schrøder-Petersen, Dorte Lene Holthe, Janne Alvseike, Ole Meat safety legislation and its opportunities and hurdles for innovative approaches: A review |
title | Meat safety legislation and its opportunities and hurdles for innovative approaches: A review |
title_full | Meat safety legislation and its opportunities and hurdles for innovative approaches: A review |
title_fullStr | Meat safety legislation and its opportunities and hurdles for innovative approaches: A review |
title_full_unstemmed | Meat safety legislation and its opportunities and hurdles for innovative approaches: A review |
title_short | Meat safety legislation and its opportunities and hurdles for innovative approaches: A review |
title_sort | meat safety legislation and its opportunities and hurdles for innovative approaches: a review |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9290325/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36329973 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2022.109160 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT nagelalnegunvorelise meatsafetylegislationanditsopportunitiesandhurdlesforinnovativeapproachesareview AT murphyemil meatsafetylegislationanditsopportunitiesandhurdlesforinnovativeapproachesareview AT mccauslinbrittany meatsafetylegislationanditsopportunitiesandhurdlesforinnovativeapproachesareview AT haugesigrunj meatsafetylegislationanditsopportunitiesandhurdlesforinnovativeapproachesareview AT schrøderpetersendortelene meatsafetylegislationanditsopportunitiesandhurdlesforinnovativeapproachesareview AT holthejanne meatsafetylegislationanditsopportunitiesandhurdlesforinnovativeapproachesareview AT alvseikeole meatsafetylegislationanditsopportunitiesandhurdlesforinnovativeapproachesareview |