meeting sps compliance requirements in the export of nile perch national experience
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
MEETING SPS COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS IN THE EXPORT OF NILE PERCH “ NATIONAL EXPERIENCE ”

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 16

meeting sps compliance requirements in the export of nile perch ... - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 199 Views
  • Uploaded on

MEETING SPS COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS IN THE EXPORT OF NILE PERCH “ NATIONAL EXPERIENCE ”. by Mr. Philip Borel (Chairman UFPEA/EAIFFPA) P.O. Box 24576, Kampala Tel/ Fax : 041-347835 Email: [email protected] Date : 11 th May, 2009. Executive Summary.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'meeting sps compliance requirements in the export of nile perch ...' - arleen


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
meeting sps compliance requirements in the export of nile perch national experience
MEETING SPS COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS IN THE EXPORT OF NILE PERCH“NATIONAL EXPERIENCE”

by

Mr. Philip Borel

(Chairman UFPEA/EAIFFPA)

P.O. Box 24576, Kampala

Tel/ Fax : 041-347835

Email: [email protected]

Date : 11th May, 2009

executive summary
Executive Summary

The fish processing / export was the first non-traditional export industry in Uganda. It was established in mid-eighties as a cottage fish processing industry. The first fish export was made in March 1989.

The infrastructure design / status was inadequate and thus fish quality/safety requirements could not easily be met. Initially, no quality management systems were in place and the Competent Authority Inspectors were not trained.

As a result of the above, there were quality related problems that led to EU Bans. The establishments were asked to meet minimum EU requirements in order to export fish products to the EU market.

executive summary cont d
Executive Summary Cont’d

Working towards harmonization was a huddle; it called for infrastructure improvement in terms of plant design / layout and implementation of the quality management systems like the Good Manufacturing Practices (GMPs) and the HACCP system.

There was urgent need for capacity building in terms of training the Competent Authority Inspectors on how to inspect and monitor establishments for compliance with EU and regulatory requirements and the establishment staff on how to develop, implement and maintain the quality management systems.

This required for substantial funds. Appreciations go to organizations like CDE, UNIDO and USAID for funding projects that helped meet the minimum requirements to pass the EU inspections and to qualify for harmonization.

partnerships stakeholders
Partnerships / Stakeholders

Donors

EU

EU Food Legislation

Government

-National Resource & Food Legislation

-FSP Project

Upstream Control

Competent Authority

-GMPs / HACCP

-QMS (ISO 9001)

-FSMS (ISO 22000)

-Standard Operating Procedures

-Quality Assurance Inspections

-SOPs for Fish Inspection & QA

Private Sector

Artisanal Fisheries

UFPEA

Goods Providers

Services Providers

-Establishments

-QAMA

-Compliance issues

  • Fishers
  • Fish Suppliers

-Laboratories

-Cold storage

-Freight Services

-Ice production

-Packaging materials

problems in the past
Problems in the past
  • Inadequate Infrastructure design / status
    • Fish quality/safety requirements not met
  • Initially, no quality management systems
  • Weak Competent Inspectors
  • Resultant quality problems – EU Ban
legislations
Legislations:

EU Legislations:

  • 178/2002 - General principles and requirements of Food Law
  • 852/2004 - Hygiene Rules of food stuffs
  • 853/2004 - Specific hygiene rules for food stuff of animal origin
  • 854/2004 - Official controls on animal products
  • 882/2004 - Official control to ensure verification of compliance with feed and food law

National Legislations:

  • Uganda Standards (US 201, US 28)
  • The Fish (Quality Assurance) Rules
  • SOPs for Fish Inspection & Quality Assurance
post ban interventions
Post Ban Interventions:
  • UFPEA formation 1992
  • Infrastructure Improvement
  • Donor Funding:
    • CDE
    • UNIDO
    • USAID
  • Capacity Building
    • External Support Programs;
    • Training of Fish Inspectors;
    • Implementing HACCP, GMP’s, traceability;
    • Quality Assurance Managers’ Association QAMA;
    • Traceability and Product recall procedure;
    • Common approach in addressing quality problems.
harmonization
Harmonization
  • Infrastructure up-grading - (1997)
  • Quality, Hygiene and Food Safety Standards:
    • External Support Programs (UNIDO);
    • Training of Fish Inspectors;
    • Implementing HACCP, GMP’s, traceability;
    • Establishment of QAMA.
  • Compliant EU Inspections
  • Periodic CA Compliant Inspections
addressing challenges
Addressing Challenges
  • Effective upstream control
    • Hygiene;
    • Fishing;
    • Handling & storage;
    • Transport;
    • Food safety training
  • Implementing / maintaining quality systems
    • Prerequisite programs (GMPs) – CDE + UNIDO
    • HACCP
    • ISO 9001:2000 (QMS) – USAID (SPEED PROJECT)
    • ISO 22000:2005 (FSMS) – UNIDO
  • Market competition – CDE
    • Value addition – UNIDO (COMPETE PROJECT)
addressing other challenges
Addressing other Challenges
  • Resource management
    • Self-monitoring & control program
    • Fish for Future campaign (FFF)
    • Formation of Regional Association

THANK YOU

THE END

ad