Irradiation and Trade in Food and Agricultural Products - Nuclear ...

Irradiation and Trade inFood and Agricultural ProductsInternational Consultative Group on Food Irradiation(ICGFI)The ICGFI SecretariatJoint FAO/IAEA Division of Nuclear Techniquesin Food and Agriculture,Wagramerstrasse 5,P.O.Box 100,A-1400 Vienna, Austria

ContentsForeword 5Executive Summary 6Introduction 8Problems in Trade in Food and Agricultural Commodities 9Food safety and foodborne illness issues 9Presence of pests 9Availability and seasonality issues 9Market access 9Assessing Irradiation and Other Technologies Available to ResolveTrade Issues Concerning Food and Agricultural Products 10The Place of Irradiation in the Food Distribution Chain 11The Future for Trade in Irradiated Food 12Regulations that Affect Trade in Food and Agricultural Products 13International 13Regional 14National 14Conclusions and Recommendations 15Bibliography 16

Irradiation and Trade in Food and Agricultural ProductsForewordThe International Consultative Group onFood Irradiation (ICGFI) was established on9 May 1984 under the aegis of FAO, IAEA andWHO. ICGFI is composed of experts andother representatives designated by governmentswhich have accepted the terms of the“Declaration” establishing ICGFI and havepledged to make voluntary contributions, incash or in kind, to carry out the activities ofICGFI.The functions of ICGFI are as follows:❐ to evaluate global developments in thefield of food irradiation;❐ to provide a focal point of advice onthe application of food irradiation toMember States and the Organizations;and❐ to furnish information as required,through the Organizations, to the JointFAO/IAEA/WHO Expert Committeeon the Wholesomeness of IrradiatedFood, and the Codex AlimentariusCommission.As of May 1998, the following countriesare members of ICGFI:Argentina, Australia, Bangladesh, Belgium,Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica,Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Czech Republic,Ecuador, Egypt, France, Germany, Ghana,Greece, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Israel,Italy, Republic of Korea, Malaysia, Mexico,Morocco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Pakistan,People’s Republic of China, Peru, Philippines,Poland, Portugal, South Africa, Syrian ArabRepublic, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine,United Kingdom, United States of America,Viet Nam, and Yugoslavia.The 11th Annual Meeting of ICGFI heldin Bali, Indonesia, November 1994 requestedthat a comprehensive Programme of Workand Budget of ICGFI for 1996-98 be developedto facilitate the consideration of ICGFImember governments on the extension of itsmandate. A Working Group was thereforeconvened for this purpose in Vienna in April1995 which recommended, among otherthings, that urgent consideration be given tothe development of ICGFI documents whichwould clearly define the role that irradiationcan play in achieving the general policy goalsendorsed by Member States of various UNOrganizations. Five such policy documents inthe areas of Food Safety, Food Security, TradeDevelopment, Environment, and EnergyConservation were recommended by theWorking Group. However, in view of thefinancial constraints, the 12th ICGFI AnnualMeeting held in Vienna, November 1995,decided to prepare only the first three suchdocuments.This document was prepared by Ms.Michelle Marcotte, a freelance consultant onfood irradiation based in Ottawa, Canada, onbehalf of ICGFI. It explains the comparativeadvantages of irradiation as a method to meetsanitary and phytosanitary requirements ininternational trade in food and agriculturalcommodities. After undergoing peer reviewand comments by national contact points ofICGFI and subsequent revisions by theauthor, this document was approved for publicationas one of the information documentsby the 14th ICGFI Meeting. The ICGFISecretariat gratefully acknowledge the valuablecontribution of Ms. Marcotte and thosewho were involved in reviewing this document.This document was professionallyedited by Mr. R. Peniston-Bird, a former editorof IAEA.5

Irradiation and Trade in Food and Agricultural ProductsExecutive SummaryTrade in food and agricultural productsis important to all countries; the economiesof many developing countries would be significantlyimproved if they were able to exportmore food and agricultural products.Unfortunately, many products can not betraded because they are infested with, or hoststo, harmful pests, contaminated with microorganisms,or spoil quickly. As a result, manydeveloping countries cannot build strongeconomies and consumers do not have accessto the wealth of foods and products that couldcontribute to health and enjoyment of life.Foods contaminated with microorganismscause economic losses, widespread illness anddeath.Several technologies and products havebeen developed to resolve problems in tradingfood and to improve food safety, but none canprovide all the solutions. Some chemical fumigantscurrently in use are harmful to peopleand/or the environment. Other technologies,such as controlled atmospheres, may requirespecial equipment or storage facilities andmay be expensive. Regulatory approval is alsoan issue when controlled atmospheres areused for pest control. Heat treatments suchas canning are commonly used to resolveproblems such as bacterial contamination orshort shelf-life. Canned foods are very differentfrom the original product; some haveexcellent consumer acceptance, others maynot be rated as highly as fresh products.Certain heat treatments sometimes damagefruit.Irradiation is an effective technology toresolve technical problems in trade of manyfood and agricultural products, either as astand-alone technology or in combinationwith others. As a disinfestation treatment itallows different levels of quarantine security tobe targeted and it is one of few methods tocontrol internal pests. As a disinfection treatmentit offers good, broad spectrum control ofmany pathogenic and spoilage organismswith minimal change to the food.The ability of irradiation virtually to eliminatekey pathogenic organisms from meat,poultry and spices is an important publichealth advantage. The huge number of casesof illness and death from pathogenic bacteriain meats and poultry represents a terriblewaste of human and economic potential, particularlywhen a technology that could preventa large percentage of such cases isavailable. Irradiation also offers clear advantagesover chemical and heat treatments forspices, in terms of bacterial control and maintenanceof organoleptic properties. Since spicesare so widely used in processed foods, thisbeneficial effect of irradiation is multiplied.In addition to controlling pests and eliminatingharmful bacteria, irradiation alsoextends the storage life of many foods; thiseffect makes irradiation particularly useful fortropical fruits, commonly infested and alsorequiring extended shelf-life to reach consumermarkets in good quality. Although irradiationis often clearly a superior technology,there are constraints that restrict its use, includinglack of regulatory approvals, labellingissues and lack of consumer information andunderstanding.Harmonization of sanitary and phytosanitarymeasures was negotiated intenselyunder the Uruguay Round of the GeneralAgreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), anddetailed in two technical trade agreements:on the Application of Sanitary andPhytosanitary Measures (SPS), and onTechnical Barriers to Trade (TBT). An importantprinciple, that of equivalence, was agreed6

Irradiation and Trade in Food and Agricultural Productsto in these negotiations. Within the SPSAgreement, the principle of equivalencyrelates to recognizing the validity of alternativesfor achieving an equivalent outcome.Equivalence will be key to moving regulatoryagencies from prescriptive treatments towardsstandards and towards a focus on outcomesrather than specific processes. Governmentswill be obliged to accept any measures whichcan achieve the same results. This principleshould result in greater acceptance of irradiatedfoods in international trade.In summary, measures to handle technicalor pest problems should not be more traderestrictive than necessary to achieve a legitimateprotection objective. To ensure nationalregulations can withstand the inevitable courtchallenges, efforts should be made to ensurethat no discrimination against irradiated food,processed according to the principle of theCodex Standard, is introduced into nationalregulations.Regulations on food irradiation vary widely- from broad acceptance of several food classesto limited acceptance of a few food items, andfrom prohibition to complete silence on thesubject. Such disharmonious regulations arebarriers to trade in irradiated foods.7

Irradiation and Trade in Food and Agricultural ProductsProblems in Trade in Food and AgriculturalCommoditiesFood safety and foodborneillness issuesBacterial contamination can and frequentlydoes cause human illness. According to theWorld Health Organization (WHO), illnessdue to contaminated food is perhaps the mostwidespread health problem in the contemporaryworld and an important cause of reducedeconomic productivity. Trade in many foodproducts, usually meat, poultry and marinefoods, is sometimes constrained because ofmicrobial contamination. These foods can becontaminated, even when processed usinggood manufacturing practices. Rapid spoilagecaused by microbial contaminants, enzymeand other chemical reactions is also an issue.Presence of pestsInsects and other pests can be present onand in many horticultural foods and agriculturalproducts. Pests of perishable foods mayentail quarantine, since these foods have ashort shelf-life. Pests of stored foods or agriculturalproducts are usually a cause for economicconcern since they can cause seriousstorage losses as well as damage to theimporting country. If pests are not alreadyknown or not established in the importingcountry, the host product may be prohibited,or may have to be disinfested before beingallowed entry.The agricultural fumigant most used forthis purpose, methyl bromide (MB), has beenlisted as an ozone depleting substance underthe United Nations Montreal Protocol and itsproduction must be phased out. Other chemicaltreatments applied as dips or sprays areincreasingly being viewed as not in the bestinterests of human or environmental health. Insome cases, governments are phasing outthese products, in other cases, consumersare demanding that chemical treatments bereplaced. The trend is towards the eliminationof many chemical treatments.Availability andseasonality issuesUnlike manufactured products, agriculturalcommodities are often only availableseasonally and harvest quantities may varyfrom year to year. These factors make trademore risky and often more expensive. Onthe other hand, continuing demand forsome products encourages their tradebetween growing regions. Often though,significant losses and quality downgradingof seasonal products occur because of theirshort shelf-life, the need to use inexpensivetransport systems and the long distancesthe product must travel.Market accessSeveral regulatory and technical barriersto trade exist for various reasons.Treatment regimens required or allowed byone country may not be available orallowed in another country. This is often theproblem with irradiation since regulationsgoverning the use of irradiation varywidely. Many trade barriers are not sufficientlywell grounded and may have beendevised to protect local growers from competition.Political influences commonlymake trade difficult, slowing or preventingtrade possibilities. Under the GeneralAgreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)these differences must be overcome andnational regulations adapted accordingly.9

Irradiation and Trade in Food and Agricultural ProductsAssessing Irradiation and Other TechnologiesAvailable to Resolve Trade Issues ConcerningFood and Agricultural ProductsIrradiation is an effective technology forresolving technical trade issues for many foodand agricultural products. As a disinfestationtreatment it allows the possibility of targetingdifferent levels of quarantine security and it isone of few methods to control internal pests.As a disinfection treatment it offers good broadspectrum control of many pathogenic andspoilage organisms with minimal change to thefood. Although it is often clearly a superiortechnology, there are constraints that restrict itsuse.One important constraint is lack of regulatoryapproval in importing countries, eventhough the same countries may allow the irradiationof the same product for export. Manycountries, particularly major importers, continueto require extensive and food-specificapproval petitions that are then reviewed atlength, with often no approvals resulting. Thisprocess, frequently based on bureaucratic interpretationof regulatory requirements, representsa key constraint to the implementation of irradiation,and a key discouragement to the foodindustry.Whilst labelling can assist consumers whoare interested in irradiation for the benefits itoffers in helping them find the foods they want,labelling requirements for irradiated foods areseen by the food industry in some countries asa handicap because it assumes that consumershold negative opinions concerning irradiation.Since labelling is not required for many competitivetreatments, such as chemical fumigation,the imposition of such requirements forirradiated food may be seen as an unfair technicaltrade barrier. Given the unfair marketingposition and additional expense of mandatorylabelling of irradiated foods when competitivechemical treatments do not require it, labellingof irradiated foods should be voluntary.Consumer attitudes, real or perceived,also constrain the use of irradiation. Oftenperceptions of consumer attitudes are basedon personal observations, or a political analysis,as opposed to consumer research or markettesting. This perception then affectsdecisions at regulatory and industry levels,sometimes to the detriment of overall healthand economic goals.For irradiation to be useful in resolving afood trade or technical problem, a countrymust have a sufficiently developed infrastructure.Food transport and distributionmechanisms must be in place as well as goodstorage, and sometimes refrigeration storage.Although available in many countries, irradiationequipment is sometimes not accessiblefor research or commercial treatments forfood products.Often the capital costs of irradiationequipment are seen as prohibitive, eventhough low operating costs make per unitcosts for most commodities very competitivewith other treatments. Fortunately, however,commercial contract multipurpose irradiatorsoperate in many countries offering irradiationservices at reasonable cost. Sinceirradiation gives the added economic benefitof prolonged fresh market life for manyfoods, decreased waste and increased marketpotential of the food should be consideredin a cost-benefit analysis.Tables I-IV provide a quick reference to themain food and agricultural products traded.Each table refers to a commodity group, thetrade problems often associated with the commodities,some current or potential technologiesto resolve the trade issues as well as theconstraints, effectiveness and relative costsassociated with the technologies.10

Irradiation and Trade in Food and Agricultural ProductsThe Place of Irradiation in the FoodDistribution ChainThe purpose irradiation fulfils in the processingor handling of a food will dictatewhere irradiation fits in the food distributionchain. Fortunately, irradiation is reasonablyversatile and could fit in several,but not all, links of the chain.Irradiation is most often viewed as beingthe last process after packaging. In this way,foods such as meat, poultry and shellfishcan be irradiated to control pathogenic andspoilage organisms with a reasonable assurancethat the product will not be further contaminatedbefore purchase by the consumeror food service operator. Where these foodsare to be further processed in a HazardAnalysis Critical Control Points (HACCP)environment, and where control of specificpathogenic bacteria is required, there is alsoan argument for irradiation at the bulk productstage, for example irradiation of carcassesof beef before ground beef patties aremade.In other instances, irradiation is a pestdisinfestation method. Where irradiationfacilities exist, and where a sufficient level ofassurance can be given to the importingcountry about the exclusion of pests duringshipping and handling, irradiation disinfestationcan be done at the port of exit. Inother instances, some country inspection servicesmay require the assurance that irradiationfor pest control be carried out at theport of import. The product can either bepackaged in wholesale boxes, such as thosecommonly used for fruit, or the product maybe in bulk, such as grain or dry ingredients.In the case of packaged foods, the packagingmust exclude the re-entry of pests. In bulkproducts, the transport or storage containermust be free of pests, and it would be advisableto ensure that any pests that re-enterthe product do not survive. In theseinstances, the use of an effective diatomaceousearth to disinfest the transport or storagemechanism before the grain is added,or applying a very small amount of diatomaceousearth to the top of the carrier mightbe a good combination practice. Where storagefacilities are sufficiently airtight, storageunder carbon dioxide may also be apotential combination treatment. For someproducts, lower storage temperature mightalso work to exclude pests.Spices are commonly irradiated, mainlyto reduce bacterial and mold counts,although sometimes pests are an issue.Usually spices are irradiated in bulk bags orbarrels before further processing by the spiceblender, or before use as ingredients in foodproducts. In other instances, small spicepackets, included in packaged food mixes,are irradiated to ensure the consumerreceives clean spices.Irradiator ownership scenarios vary.Usually irradiators are owned by contractirradiation companies, but they could alsobe owned and operated by food processors,grower marketing co-operatives, portauthorities or governments. Contract irradiatorcompanies already own facilities inmany countries and specialize in the costeffective, safe operation of irradiators, sellingirradiation services to a wide range of companiesfor many product types.It is commonly asked whether irradiatorscould be built to process individual itemssuch as hamburgers in a restaurant, or packagesof food in a home kitchen, similar tomicrowave ovens. These scenarios are notpossible with current technology, and notever likely.11

Irradiation and Trade in Food and Agricultural ProductsThe Future for Trade in Irradiated FoodIrradiation will be increasingly used, providedthe trend towards increased regulatoryapproval of irradiation continues. Recenttrade agreements will reduce the ability ofimporting countries arbitrarily to decide thatirradiation may not be used. The 1996 USDepartment of Agriculture/Animal PlantHealth Inspection Service quarantine policystatement is a positive step towards greateruse of this technology.As the economies of developing countriesimprove, and as their infrastructure elementsare further developed, their ability to exportfoods will increase. The desire to increasefood trade will promote the necessity foreffective technologies to resolve problemssuch as pest infestation, microbial contaminationand food spoilage. On the other hand,the desire to export food for the foreign currencyvalue should not come at the expense ofmeeting the domestic food needs of developingcountries. Food irradiation should alsobe seen as a technology to improve the quantityand quality of food available for domesticconsumption.The international phasing out of MB as anozone-depleting substance will most criticallyaffect the need for alternative technologies forpest control. Production was frozen at 1995 levelsand in some countries reductions in usehave begun. Quarantine and pre-shipment usesof MB are currently exempt internationally,although there is no exemption for these usesunder the Clean Air Act in the USA. Developingcountries are on a delayed time schedule for thephase-out of MB. There are many foods andagricultural commodities that will require newtreatments and approval for the use of newtreatments.Irradiation is one of the most ready andeffective pest control treatments. If regulatoryapprovals by leading importing countries suchas the USA continue, irradiation has the potentialto become a very important alternative toMB. On the other hand, the poor level of officialregulatory acceptance of irradiation by othermajor importing nations such as Australia,Canada and Japan negatively affects its use formany exports.It is important to ensure harmful bacteriaare eliminated from meat, poultry and marineproducts. Irradiation is already used as a meansto eliminate harmful bacteria in these foods,enhancing trade and reducing economic riskwith these commodities. However, there is anurgent need for many countries to acknowledgethat irradiation is either needed or already usedfor these foods and to improve their regulatoryacceptance.Ethylene oxide (ETO), an important fumigantfor the disinfection of spices, herbs and dryingredients, has come under increasing pressurefrom regulatory authorities on both humanhealth and environmental grounds. It wasbanned in the European Union in 1991 and isunder review in the USA. Irradiation is the mostlikely and effective alternative to ETO, althoughheat treatments are in use for some products.Irradiation is already widely used to disinfectspices. Globally, the volume of irradiated spicesand dried vegetable seasonings increased from10 000 tonnes in 1990 to 60 000 tonnes in 1995.There is a need for improved availability of irradiationequipment in spice producing countries.Over the past five years, irradiation equipmenthas become more readily available forresearch and commercial use. Equipment mustbe available for food industry applicationsresearch for irradiation to be better used. Newequipment designs will be needed to better fitirradiation into some commodity and infrastructureapplications as other competitive technologiessuch as chemical fumigants are phasedout.12

Irradiation and Trade in Food and Agricultural ProductsRegulations that Affect Trade in Food andAgricultural ProductsInternationalHarmonization of sanitary and phytosanitarymeasures was negotiated intenselyunder GATT, particularly during the UruguayRound. The subsequent establishment of theWorld Trade Organization (WTO) in 1995 andthe administering of the Agreements onSanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)and the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Agreement will eventually have a profoundinfluence on the flow of free trade in food andfood products.An important principle, that of equivalence,was agreed to in these negotiations. Theprinciple of equivalence in GATT relates torecognizing the validity of alternatives forachieving a desired outcome. Equivalence willbe key to moving regulatory agencies fromprescriptive treatments to standards and tofocusing on outcomes rather than on specificprocesses. Governments are bound to acceptany measures which can achieve the sameresults. This principle should result in greateracceptance of irradiated foods in internationaltrade.Under the SPS and TBT Agreements, thelevel of protection deemed appropriate by agovernment, if justified technically, cannot bechallenged. Measures taken to achieve the levelof protection can be challenged. Measuresshould not be more trade restrictive than necessaryto achieve a legitimate objective. Effortsshould be made to ensure that national regulationsdo not discriminate against irradiatedfoods, processed according to the principle ofthe Codex Standard.The SPS Agreement applies to all sanitaryand phytosanitary measures which maydirectly or indirectly affect international trade.Intended to guide harmonization, theAgreement encourages the recognition ofinternationally agreed treatments (includingirradiation) and only allows control measuresthat are scientifically justified. Economic riskassessments of potential harm resulting frominsufficient or ineffective pest control measuresare allowed, but the SPS Agreementdoes not allow arbitrary or unnecessarilyrestrictive control measures. The clauses ontransparency of control measures will result ina decreased ability to place unnecessaryrestrictions on food effectively treated withirradiation for pest or disease controlThe TBT Agreement was prepared toensure that technical regulations and standards,including those for packaging,labelling, inspection methods and standards,do not create unnecessary obstacles to internationaltrade. Like the SPS Agreement, it isintended to harmonize technical regulationsand standards so they do not become unnecessarybarriers to trade. Trade restrictions cannotbe more restrictive than necessary to fulfila legitimate objective. Legitimate objectivesare assessed on the basis of available scientificand technical information, related processingtechnology or intended end use ofproducts.The Codex Alimentarius Commission ofthe Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)and the WHO has issued its recommendedstandards for the irradiation of food. Codexhas prepared its General Standard for IrradiatedFoods and Recommended International Code ofPractice for the Operation of RadiationFacilities Used for Treatment of Food. Thesehave been recommended to all Codex membergovernments for acceptance since 1984.Provisions concerning labelling of pre-packagedirradiated food have been adopted byCodex in its General Standard for FoodLabelling since 1991. These standards statethat irradiated foods should be accompaniedby shipping documents identifying the13

Irradiation and Trade in Food and Agricultural Productsirradiator, date of treatment, lot identification,dose and other details of treatment. Countriesare encouraged to harmonize their regulationson Codex principles before the end of 1998.In summary, measures to handle technicalor pest problems shall not be more traderestrictive than necessary to achieve a legitimateprotection objective. To ensure thatnational regulations would withstand challenge,efforts should be made to ensure that nodiscrimination against irradiated food,processed according to the principle of theCodex Standard, is introduced into regulations.Governments that have introducedimport regulations stricter than recognizedinternational standards, guidelines and recommendationsmay be requested to furnishjustifications based on scientific principles andproper risk assessments to the WTO.The International Consultative Group onFood Irradiation (ICGFI), a joint group underthe aegis of FAO, WHO and the InternationalAtomic Energy Agency (IAEA), has issued anumber of guidelines and recommendationsto complement the Codex General Standardfor Irradiated Foods. They cover all aspectsof treatment, handling and distribution of irradiatedfoods and provide a good basis forpreparing the detailed protocols needed toimplement commercial irradiation.ICGFI has also established a registry ofirradiators that meet good operations standards.This registry is important becausemany domestic regulations for food irradiationdemand that a food irradiation facility meetinternational as well as domestic standards.Only those facilities which comply with establishedcriteria concerning proper operationunder appropriate supervision and regulatorycontrol are included in the ICGFI registry.RegionalRegulations on food irradiation varywidely among countries - from broad acceptanceof several food classed to limited acceptanceof a few food items, and from prohibitionto complete silence. Such disharmoniousregulations are in themselves barriers to tradein irradiated foods. Harmonization of traderegulations is an important step towardsresolving trade issues. As a result of aUNDP/IAEA/FAO Asian regional workshopheld in Australia in 1993, a model food irradiationregulation for the Asia-Pacific regionwas developed based on the principle of theCodex Standard and relevant recommendationof the ICGFI. The model regulationensures that food irradiation contributes toimproved public health, reduces post-harvestlosses and overcomes quarantine barrierswithout undue risk to safety, health or theenvironment. It covers definitions, generalrequirements, treatment of food, control procedures,labelling, re-irradiation, import andexport of irradiated food and sanctions.Through the efforts of ICGFI and the IAEAin the past few years, this model regulationhas also been widely accepted by representativesof regulatory authorities in Africa andLatin America. The Association of South-EastAsian Nations (ASEAN) and most countries inAsia and the Pacific are in the process of introducinga common regulation on food irradiationbased on this model regulation.Members of the Regional Plant ProtectionOrganization (RPPO), including the NorthAmerican Plant Protection Organization(NAPPO), recognized the effectiveness of irradiationas a broad spectrum quarantine treatmentof fresh fruits and vegetables. Theseendorsements are very important, given theleadership role played by regional plant protectionorganizations in the development ofdomestic plant phytosanitary regulations.NAPPO issued a standard on irradiation as aphytosanitary treatment in April 1997.NationalTrade differences have been created whencountries allow the irradiation of foods forexport only and not for domestic consumption.These differences should be viewed astrade barriers. Countries should be encouraged14

Irradiation and Trade in Food and Agricultural Productsto ensure they have sufficient domestic clearancesto allow both exportation and domesticuse of irradiated foods. Governments arerequested to accept irradiated food on thebasis of food classes and not require approvalprocesses for individual foods. ICGFI hasprepared a guideline to assist countries toreduce the non-tariff trade barriers createdwhen foods must be approved on an individualbasis as opposed to a general approval ofirradiation for a particular application, orapproval of a class of irradiated foods.Conclusions and RecommendationsFood imports and exports are importantto the health of nations and peoples, yet tradebarriers caused by pests, diseases and foodsafety issues continually threaten or inhibittrade. Several technologies work to removethese trade barriers; irradiation is a technologythat could assist to improve trade.Unfortunately, there are several constraintsto the use of irradiation, and therefore constraintsto improved food trade. Inadequateand disharmonious regulatory approvals forirradiation, labelling issues and lack of consumerand industry information constrain theuse of irradiation.The following recommendations are madeto improve trade in irradiated foods.❐ The agreement establishing the WTOand the two technical trade agreements,the SPS and the TBT, should be followed.Governments should not discriminateagainst irradiated foodsprocessed according to the CodexStandard.❐ Regulations approving irradiation varywidely, are often inadequate and aredisharmonious between trading partners.Actions to improve regulatoryapprovals of irradiation where it couldimprove trade are recommended.❐ Research that will provide regulatorswith information upon which to basepolicy decisions, and provide the foodindustry with information relating tocommercial issues, is needed to improveregulatory approvals and trade in irradiatedfoods.❐ The mandatory labelling of irradiatedfoods when competitive treatments(such as fumigation) do not requirelabelling is an unfair barrier to trade,increases costs and inhibits industry.Labelling for the consumer level shouldbe voluntary. Where irradiation is usedto resolve technical constraints to tradeits use should be notified in documentationavailable to industry and tradeofficials.❐ Providing good information to consumersis the responsibility of every linkof the marketing chain. Governmentsapproving irradiation to improve tradeshould defend their decision, discussingthe factors that led to approval, and thebenefits to the country, industry andpublic of improved trade measures.Industry should discuss more openlythe requirements of food handling soconsumers have a fuller understandingof the realities of agriculture and foodprocessing.15

Irradiation and Trade in Food and Agricultural ProductsBibliographyJoint FAO/IAEA Division of Nuclear Techniques in Food and Agriculture,Rep. UNDP/IAEA/FAO Regional (RCA) Workshop on Harmonization of Regulations toFacilitate Trade in Irradiated Foods, Lucas Heights, Australia, December 1993, IAEA,Vienna (Internal report).International Atomic Energy Agency, Trade Promotion of Irradiated Food, IAEA,Vienna (1985).International Consultative Group on Food Irradiation, Facts about FoodIrradiation, ICGFI/IAEA, Vienna (1995).International Consultative Group on Food Irradiation, Workshop on theImplications of GATT Agreements on Trade in Irradiated Food, Marseilles, November 1995,ICGFI/IAEA, Vienna (Internal report).International Consultative Group on Food Irradiation, Control of IrradiatedFood in Trade - A Compilation of Principles and International Recommendations forRegulatory Control Measures, ICGFI/IAEA, Vienna (1995).International Consultative Group on Food Irradiation, Guidelines for theAuthorization of Food Irradiation Generally or by Classes of Food, ICGFI/IAEA,Vienna(1994).Korunic, Z., et al., The effects of diatomaceous earth on grain quality, J. Postharvest Biol.Technol. (1995).Loaharanu, P., “Acceptance and application of irradiation as a quarantine treatment offresh fruit and vegetables”, Annu. Mtg North American Plant Protection Organization,Ottawa, ON, October 1994.Marcotte, M., Improving Food and Agriculture Productivity - and the Environment.Canadian Leadership in the Development of Methyl Bromide Alternatives and EmissionControl Technologies, Environment Canada, Ottawa, ON (1995).Marcotte, M., What Have We Learned About Consumer Acceptance of Irradiated Food,Nordion International Inc., Kanata, ON (1995).Mitchum, E., “Development of a carbon dioxide quarantine treatment for omnivorous16

Irradiation and Trade in Food and Agricultural ProductsMitchum, E., “Development of a carbon dioxide quarantine treatment for omnivorousleafroller, western flower thirp, pacific spider mite, and grape mealy bug on table grapes”,Annu. Int. Res. Conf. on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, SanDiego, CA, November 1995.Moy, J., Wong, L., “Irradiation as a quarantine treatment of tropical fruits”, Annu. Int.Res. Conf. on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductiions, San Diego, CA,November 1995.Neven K., “Combination treatments for pome fruit for quarantine”, Annu. Int. Res. Conf.on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, San Diego, CA, November1995.North American Plant Protection Organization, The Application of IrradiationTechnology as a Quarantine Treatment, Proc. NAPPO Colloq., Orlando, FL, October 1994.Protect - It, Ready to Use Insecticidal Dust for Insect Control in Stored Grain andWarehouses, Health Canada Label Registration No. 24259 Pest Control Products Act,Hedley Technologies, Vancouver (1995).Rhodes, A.A. (Ed.), Irradiation Disinfestation of Dried Fruit and Nuts, United StatesAgriculture Research Service and Economic Research Service, Washington, DC (1986).Sharp, J., “Mortality of blueberry maggot larvae to gamma irradiation”, Annu. Int. Res.Conf. on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, San Diego, CA,November 1995.Shellie, K., Mangan, R., “High temperature controlled atmosphere for disinfestinggrapefruit of Mexican fruit fly”, Annu. Int. Res. Conf. on Methyl Bromide Alternatives andEmissions Reductions, San Diego, CA, November 1995.World Health Organization, Food Technologies and Public Health, WHO,Geneva (1996).World Trade Organization, Agreement on the Application of Sanitary andPhytosanitary Measures, WHO, Geneva (1995).United Nations Environment Programme, Montreal Protocol on Substances thatDeplete the Ozone Layer: 1994 Report of the Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee,UNEP, New York (1994).17

Printed for theInternational Consultative Group on Food Irradiation (ICGFI)Vienna, Austria, 1998 byBhaba Atomic Research Centre (BARC)TrombayMumbai 400 085India

The ICGFI SecretariatJoint FAO/IAEA Division of Nuclear Techniquesin Food and Agriculture,Wagramerstrasse 5,P.O.Box 100,A-1400 Vienna, AustriaTel.:(+43 1) 2060 - 21638Fax.:(+43 1) 20607E-Mail:Official.Mail@IAEA.ORG