VENTAJAS PARA LAS EMPRESAS

Rapporteurs:

E. Rembialkowska and K. Ellis

Introduction

The three main points arising from discussion in this group were: 1. Food quality is hard to define;

2. Further research to define a common platform of understanding of the term ‘food quality’ is required; and

3. Further research on factors affecting livestock product quality at farm-level is required.

Discussion of points

All stakeholders in the organic livestock food chain have different priorities with respect to food quality. Stakeholders include producers, wholesalers, retailers, advisory bodies, certification groups, regulatory and inspection groups (such as environmental health officers & food microbiologists) and the consumer. Due to the wide range in requirements by these different groups, it is difficult to obtain a common consensus on the term ‘food quality’. For example, a wholesaler or retailer may require a good shelf-life for a product or an appealing looking product, whereas a consumer may want freshness and taste. Additionally, there are some aspects that could be termed objective, such as the absolute measurement of cell counts in milk or the presence or absence of Salmonella in chicken, and there are some areas of a more subjective nature, such as taste. However, there should be a drive to make all areas as objective as possible, and there are laboratory methods that can be used to investigate or assess factors, such as taste.

Some of the terms or areas that we suggested should be included in a definition of quality include:

- Absence of medicine and pesticide residues;

- Minimal risk of pathogenic bacterial contamination; - High standards of animal welfare during production; - Value for money – not the same as cheaper;

- Good taste; and - High nutritive content.

Currently in organic farming, regulations and standards only apply to the process quality and not the end product, therefore, certain minimum standards of product quality should perhaps be suggested to enable a product to be deemed organic. For example, a ‘zero tolerance’ approach to Salmonella in poultry. However, organic farming systems introduce different challenges in terms of food safety and quality when compared to conventional systems and it may not be possible to achieve microbiological zero-risk. So, should there be more consumer education as to the production process, so that ‘imperfect’ products are more acceptable? For example, should the consumer be able to make a choice between minimal pathogen risk foods

Sysyems development: quality and safety in organic livestock products

and extremely restrictive farming systems, such as intensive indoor poultry or pig production, or slightly higher risk of microbial contamination but a more extensive organic farming system? Is the consumer capable of making this choice? In many cases, the degree of risk to food safety due to organic production systems is not quantifiable and more basic research is needed.

There is also a consumer perception that organic food is healthier, which is also very hard to define. There should be a reduced risk of pesticide and veterinary medicinal residues as a result of the farming system, and there should also be fewer additives used in processed foods. However, there is less evidence that organic and conventional foods differ significantly in terms of their nutritive content, and even where there are some small differences, such as in vitamin or fatty acid content, there is even less evidence that this is significant in terms of human health, when placed in the context of a complete diet. More sustained or longer term research is required to address some of these points. In order to examine the impact of organic meat products on human health, wide cohort epidemiological studies on organically vs. conventionally eating consumers are necessary. Simultaneously, intervention dietary studies on the smaller well-defined groups of the consumers eating organically vs. conventionally are indispensable.

Due to the extreme variation in terms of geography and suitable production systems in different climates across Europe, it becomes even harder to generalise on product quality, as it would be predicted that there will be variation due to different feeding practices across countries, regions and seasons. It has already been shown that it is difficult to maintain product quality even on the same farm (see Albert Sundrum’s presentation on pork production in these proceedings).

Therefore, in terms of both the research needs and the organic standards, establishing a basic set of criteria that include a range of product and process aspects to define the term ‘food quality’ should be prioritised. A common platform that is applicable across countries and different stakeholders should be used and can then be applied to organic animal products. Further research is required in terms of comparative studies of organic and conventional animal products to determine the variability within the product. Also, importantly, studies must be conducted on both farming systems, looking at the factors that affect product quality. It is not sufficient just to compare organic with conventional without investigation of the effects of the management on each system. This should be prioritised on ‘raw’ products such as meat, eggs and milk, but should also look at the effects of processing on products.

Part C:

Veterinary medicinal inputs: Impact on product quality