Food supply players ‘must not cut corners’, warns France’s Cryostar | Gases | Gas News – gasworld

Enhancing Food Safety Standards in Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals

Addressing Regulatory Gaps and Their Impact on Sustainable Development

A critical analysis of current food safety regulations reveals a framework that may permit participants to self-regulate and declare compliance without the backing of systematic, granular testing. This approach presents significant risks to public health and undermines key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). A failure to ensure verifiable safety standards directly compromises SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) by potentially exposing consumers to harmful substances. Furthermore, it conflicts with the principles of SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), which demands integrity and safety throughout the entire production lifecycle.

Industry Leadership in Upholding SDG 3 and SDG 12

In response to these regulatory shortcomings, industry leaders such as gas equipment specialist Cryostar are advocating for and implementing standards that significantly exceed mandated obligations. This proactive stance demonstrates a commitment to consumer safety and responsible production, directly supporting the achievement of multiple SDGs. The company’s strategy is built on a culture of continuous improvement and rigorous verification.

• Commitment to Consumer Safety: By going beyond standard industry approaches, the company aims to provide a higher level of assurance, directly contributing to SDG 3 by protecting human health.
• Supply Chain Integrity: A focus on maintaining the integrity of every step in the food production chain ensures that processes align with the objectives of SDG 12.
• Proactive Risk Mitigation: The company actively educates customers and certifies each internal pump component that comes into direct contact with process liquids, systematically identifying and removing risks from the food environment.

Analysis of the Regulatory Framework and the Need for Deeper Integration with SDGs

The European Union has established a harmonised legal framework for food contact materials to safeguard consumers. This framework is founded on general principles of safety that are essential but can be interpreted with a minimalist approach if not supported by mandatory, detailed verification.

1. Protection of Human Health: The primary requirement is that materials must not endanger human health.
2. Preservation of Food Composition: Materials must not alter the composition of the food product.
3. Maintenance of Organoleptic Characteristics: Materials must not adversely affect the taste or smell of the food.

These regulations apply across the entire supply chain for food-grade gases, including all equipment such as tanks, pipelines, valves, seals, and cryogenic pumps. However, stating compliance without granular testing fails to provide the robust assurance needed to fully support the global health and sustainability agenda.

A Call for System-Wide Commitment to Sustainable and Safe Food Production

Achieving comprehensive food safety requires a collective commitment from all stakeholders in the supply chain. This holistic approach is crucial for building resilient systems and advancing the SDGs. Moving beyond baseline compliance to a model of continuous, verifiable testing represents a significant advancement in industrial practice, aligning with SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure) by fostering innovation and upgrading industrial capabilities. Ultimately, ensuring that the entire food supply chain is robust necessitates strong collaboration, reflecting the spirit of SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals), to establish and uphold new benchmarks for safety and sustainability.

Analysis of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

1. SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

   • The article’s central theme is food safety and the prevention of health risks to consumers. It explicitly mentions the EU’s legal framework, whose “key requirement is that materials must not endanger human health.” The entire discussion revolves around preventing equipment from releasing “harmful substances” into food, directly linking to the goal of ensuring healthy lives.

2. SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

   • The article scrutinizes the entire food production supply chain, from “production, purification, liquefaction, storage, distribution, bulk transfer, transport, or cylinder filling.” It critiques a “minimalist approach” to safety and advocates for a more responsible production culture, where companies like Cryostar “go well beyond [their] mandated obligations.” This focus on robust, safe, and responsible practices throughout the supply chain aligns directly with SDG 12.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 3.9 (under SDG 3)

   • This target aims to “substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil pollution and contamination.” The article’s concern is precisely this: that equipment in the food supply chain might “release harmful substances or alter the composition of the food,” leading to potential illness and endangering human health. The call for more rigorous testing is a direct measure to prevent such contamination.

2. Target 12.4 (under SDG 12)

   • This target calls for the “environmentally sound management of chemicals and all wastes throughout their life cycle… to minimize their adverse impacts on human health.” The article discusses the management of materials and equipment (“tanks, pipelines, valves, seals, and, critically, cryogenic pumps”) that come into contact with food-grade gases. The effort to ensure these materials do not release harmful substances is a clear example of managing materials to minimize adverse impacts on human health, as specified in this target.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• The article does not mention official SDG indicators but implies several practical measures that can serve as indicators of progress:
• Systematic and Granular Testing: The article contrasts the practice of simply stating compliance with the need for “truly systematic, granular testing.” The implementation and frequency of such testing can be a direct indicator of a company’s commitment to safety.
• Component Certification: Cryostar’s practice of certifying “each internal pump component that comes into direct contact with process liquids” is a specific, measurable action. The percentage of certified components in the supply chain could serve as an indicator.
• Adherence to and Exceeding Regulatory Frameworks: Compliance with regulations like the EU’s “harmonised legal framework for food contact materials” is a baseline indicator. The article further suggests going “well beyond… mandated obligations” as a higher benchmark for safety and responsibility.
• Adoption of a Continuous Improvement Culture: The article highlights fostering a “culture of continuous testing, development and improvement that sets new benchmarks for safety.” The existence and documentation of such internal company policies and practices can be an indicator of progress towards responsible production.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: gasworld.com