Last Chance to Register - Summer Academy in Global Food Law and Policy

The Summer Academy in Global Food Law and Policy is an established one-week summer program that brings together practitioners, policymakers, industry representatives, and leading academics working in the field of food law and policy. It offers intensive training on the most innovative developments in global food regulation and provides a unique opportunity for professional development and networking in an informal and interdisciplinary setting. By talking, studying, and interacting with food experts from all over the world, participants are able to gain new perspectives into both their own sectors and international regulatory issues. This is achieved by combining traditional classroom instruction with experiential learning opportunities offered by dedicated and distinguished international experts.

The 5th edition of the Academy will take place from Monday, 22 July, to Friday, 26 July, 2013 in Granada, Spain. The choice of this vibrant city will enable participants to benefit from the distinctive beauty of the town’s Unesco World Heritage environment and its privileged geographical location adjacent to the Sierra Nevada. For more information, please visit here.

The Summer Academy may be taken as a 2 or 3 credit, graduate-level course from Michigan State University.  Contact IFLR@msu.edu if you are interested in enrolling for graduate credit. If you wish only to attend as a seminar, enroll here.

Foundations of EU Food Law and Policy

The introductory chapter to Alberto Alemanno’s forthcoming book, “Foundations of EU Food Law and Policy,” is available here on SSRN. The book gathers the viewpoints of academics, policymakers, industry representatives, and food practitioners on the first ten years of the European Food Safety Authority.

“Despite the celebratory mood, the book provides forward-looking views on the future scientific and regulatory challenges facing the Authority. Overall, the Authority emerges as belonging to a balanced, yet improvable, food legal system that deserves permanent scrutiny, guidance and judgment. That is the expectation of 500 million EU citizens, the daily clients of this very system.” Foundations of EU Food Law and Policy - Ten Years of European Food Safety Authority by Alberto Alemanno

Australian infographic on the horsemeat scandal

Infographic provided by Australian Food Safety News

EAACI issues European Food Allergy & Anaphylaxis Public Declaration

The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology’s (EAACI) calls on European and national health policy makers to take up the cause of food allergy. Public Declaration forms part of EAACI’s 2012-2013 Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Campaign. The goal of the campaign is to enhance knowledge of food allergy in the European community, as well as awareness on the sharp increase of food allergy and the triggers of anaphylaxis among policy makers and to educate the public on how to react in case of emergency. Throughout 2013, EAACI, Europe’s largest allergy medical association, will be reaching out to EU officials, providing recommendations and asking them to take concrete actions to improve the management and treatment of food allergies and anaphylaxis.  In part - EAACI aims to challenge certain aspects of current EU food labelling directives, which it feels, are insufficient in preventing the accidental consumption of allergens. Currently, some foods have the label “may contain peanuts” or “may contain milk” but this type of labelling (precautionary labelling) is not sufficiently regulated at the EU level. Labelling is an essential part of food allergy management for the sufferer and has an important impact on how they manage their diets. EAACI believes that the EU should set clear guidelines for labelling foodstuffs for allergens. This includes products which may contain allergen derivatives and should be clearly linked to the name of the allergen to avoid confusion. Additionally, to facilitate readability, EAACI advises that the typeset used to flag allergens should differ from the one used for other ingredients Read more here. Also available in French, Spanish, Italian and German.

The Summer Academy in Global Food Law & Policy is an established one-week summer program that brings together practitioners, policymakers, industry representatives, and leading academics working in the field of food law and policy. It offers intensive training on the most innovative developments in global food regulation and provides a unique opportunity for professional development and networking in an informal and interdisciplinary setting. By talking, studying, and interacting with food experts from all over the world, participants are able to gain new perspectives into both their own sectors and international regulatory issues. This is achieved by combining traditional classroom instruction with experiential learning opportunities offered by dedicated and distinguished international experts.

 

The 5th edition of the Academy will take place from Monday, 22 July, to Friday, 26 July, 2013 in Granada, Spain. The choice of this vibrant city will enable participants to benefit from the distinctive beauty of the town’s Unesco World Heritage environment and its privileged geographical location adjacent to the Sierra Nevada. For more information, please visit here.

 

The Summer Academy may be taken as a 2 or 3 credit, graduate-level course from Michigan State University.  Contact IFLR@msu.edu if you are interested in enrolling for graduate credit. If you wish only to attend as a seminar, enroll here.

WTO rules against U.S. appeal on country-of-origin labeling

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)
The WTO Appellate Body that upheld an earlier WTO finding that mandatory country of origin labeling (COOL) for livestock violates U.S. WTO obligations. Under the U.S. COOL law in force since March 2009, food processors must identify the nations from which cattle, hogs, and some fresh produce originate. Canada and Mexico said the provisions impose unjust costs on their exports, reducing their competitiveness. WTO judges agreed on Nov. 18 that beef and pork from Canada and Mexico were treated less favorably than the same U.S. products. From the WTO summary:

In its analysis under Article 2.1 of the TBT Agreement, the Appellate Body agreed with the Panel that the COOL measure has a detrimental impact on imported livestock because its recordkeeping and verification requirements create an incentive for processors to use exclusively domestic livestock, and a disincentive against using like imported livestock.  The Appellate Body found, however, that the Panel's analysis was incomplete because the Panel did not go on to consider whether this de facto detrimental impact stems exclusively from a legitimate regulatory distinction, in which case it would not violate Article 2.1.  In its own analysis, the Appellate Body found that the COOL measure lacks even-handedness because its recordkeeping and verification requirements impose a disproportionate burden on upstream producers and processors of livestock as compared to the information conveyed to consumers through the mandatory labelling requirements for meat sold at the retail level.  That is, although a large amount of information must be tracked and transmitted by upstream producers for purposes of providing consumers with information on origin, only a small amount of this information is actually communicated to consumers in an understandable or accurate manner, including because a considerable proportion of meat sold in the United States is not subject to the COOL measure's labeling requirements at all.  Accordingly, the detrimental impact on imported livestock cannot be said to stem exclusively from a legitimate regulatory distinction, and instead reflects discrimination in violation of Article 2.1.  For these reasons, the Appellate Body upheld the Panel's finding under Article 2.1.

In its analysis under Article 2.2 of the TBT Agreement, the Appellate Body found that the Panel properly identified the objective of the COOL measure as being “to provide consumer information on origin”.  The Appellate Body found, however, that the Panel erred in its interpretation and application of Article 2.2.  This was because the Panel appeared to have considered, incorrectly, that a measure could be consistent with Article 2.2 only if it fulfilled its objective completely or exceeded some minimum level of fulfillment, and to have ignored its own findings, which demonstrated that the COOL measure does contribute, at least to some extent, to achieving its objective.  The Appellate Body therefore reversed the Panel's finding that the COOL measure is inconsistent with Article 2.2, but was unable to determine whether the COOL measure is more trade restrictive than necessary to fulfill a legitimate objective within the meaning of Article 2.2.

The appellate body ruling is available here.

CANADA Updates to the food labelling and advertising information

Updates made to the food labelling and advertising information / mises a jour apportées à l'information sur l'étiquetage et la publicité

 

There have been several updates made to the food labelling and advertising information.  Please refer to the Updates page at http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/fssa/labeti/amende.shtml for detailed information.

 

2012

Item	Nature of Changes	Date
Compliance and Enforcement of Gluten-Free Claims	Posted information on Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) Compliance and Enforcement of Gluten-Free Claims	June 2012
Consultation on the Guidelines for Highlighted Ingredients and Flavours	Posting of the Guidelines for Highlighted Ingredients and Flavours for public comments	June 2012
Origin Claims Information	Consolidated information on Origin Claims and provided additional information on the use of voluntary multiple country of origin statements	May 2012
Country of Origin Labelling Information	To provide information on country of origin labelling requirements, a new webpage on Country of Origin Labellinghas been added	May 2012
"Product of Canada" and "Made in Canada" Labelling Information	Consolidated information on "Product of Canada" and "Made in Canada" Labelling including the Guidelines for "Product of Canada" and "Made in Canada" Claims	May 2012
Labelling of Genetically Engineered Foods in Canada Factsheet	Consolidated the previous two factsheets on the labelling of genetically engineered foods and voluntary labelling of products of genetic engineereing into one factsheet called Labelling of Genetically Engineered Foods in Canada	May 2012
Food Irradiation Information	Consolidated information on Food Irradiation	May 2012
Method of Production Information	Consolidated information on claims and statements related toMethod of Production and provided additional guidance on the use of "Halal" claims	May 2012
Legibility and Location of Labelling Information	Consolidated information on Legibility and Location of Labelling Information and provided additional guidance on the legibility and location requirements for mandatory and voluntary labelling information on food labels	April 2012
Date Markings Information	Consolidated information on Date Markings and provided additional guidance on the date marking requirements for foods including shipping containers and modified atmosphere packaged foods	April 2012
Bilingual Labelling Information	Consolidated information on Bilingual Labelling and provided additional guidance on bilingual labelling of voluntary information and the exemption from bilingual labelling for local foods	April 2012
Results from Web Questionnaire	Posting of the Results from the Web Questionnaire	April 2012
Chapter 6 Guide to Food Labelling and Advertising	Addition of Barley Beta-Glucan Concentrate (partially hydrolysed) BarlivTM Barley Betafiber to Table 6-12	February 2012
Consultation on Wine Labelling	Posting of the Consultation on Wine Labelling for public comments	January 2012