(DG JRC/IPTS) - agrilife - Europa

Research Team: 

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

DIRECTORATE-GENERAL JRC 

JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE 

Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (Seville) 

Sustainability in Agriculture, Food and Health 

Food supply chain dynamics and quality certification 

Review report 

Prof. M. Aragrande Dipartimento di Economia ed Ingegneria Agrarie (DEIAgra) 

(Coordinator) 

– Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna (Italy) 

Prof. A. Segré DEIAgra – Bologna (Italy) 

Dr. E. Gentile DEIAgra – Bologna (Italy) 

Prof. G. Malorgio DEIAgra – Bologna (Italy) 

Dr. E. Giraud Heraud INRA – Paris (France) 

Prof. R. Robles Robles 

Departamento de Ingenierìa Agraria - Universita de Leon – 

Leon (Espana) 

Prof. E. Halicka Warsaw Agricultural University – Warsaw (Poland) 

Dr. A. Loi Areté s.r.l. – Bologna (Italy) 

Dr. M. Bruni Areté s.r.l. – Bologna (Italy) 

(DG JRC/IPTS) 

31th May 2005 

1

Table of contents 

1. Introduction .................................................................................................................. 4 

2. Bibliographical review of documents focussing on quality assurance/sustainability 

labels and certification schemes in the agro-food sector.................................................. 5 

2.1 Relevant scientific literature................................................................................... 6 

Belgium..................................................................................................................... 7 

Germany ................................................................................................................... 9 

Italy......................................................................................................................... 13 

Latvia...................................................................................................................... 17 

United Kingdom...................................................................................................... 18 

The Netherlands...................................................................................................... 23 

2.2 Miscellaneous relevant literature.......................................................................... 25 

Belgium................................................................................................................... 25 

Germany ................................................................................................................. 26 

Italy......................................................................................................................... 26 

Latvia...................................................................................................................... 28 



2.3 Relevant websites. ................................................................................................ 30 

Belgium................................................................................................................... 30 

Germany ................................................................................................................. 30 

Italy......................................................................................................................... 31 

Latvia...................................................................................................................... 32 



3. List of Quality assurance/sustainability labels and certification schemes.................. 34 

3.1 Belgium ................................................................................................................ 34 

3.1.1 Quality Assurance Schemes........................................................................... 34 

3.1.2 Large scale retailers...................................................................................... 36 

3.2 Germany ............................................................................................................... 38 

3.2.1 Quality assurance schemes............................................................................ 38 


3.3 Italy....................................................................................................................... 41 



3.3.3 Large scale retailers – regional brands ........................................................ 44 

3.4 Latvia.................................................................................................................... 45 



3.5 The Netherlands.................................................................................................... 47 



3.6 United Kingdom ................................................................................................... 49 



ANNEX A – DESCRIPTION OF QUALITY ASSURANCE/SUSTAINABILITY 

LABELS AND CERTIFICATION SCHEMES............................................................. 52 

2

QUALITY ASSURANCE SCHEMES ...................................................................... 52 

Common quality assurance schemes ...................................................................... 52 

Belgium................................................................................................................... 58 

Germany ................................................................................................................. 62 

Italy......................................................................................................................... 66 

Latvia...................................................................................................................... 69 



LARGE SCALE RETAILERS................................................................................... 79 

Belgium................................................................................................................... 79 

Germany ................................................................................................................. 80 

Italy......................................................................................................................... 81 

Latvia...................................................................................................................... 82 



ANNEX B - QUALITY ASSURANCE/SUSTAINABILITY LABELS AND 

CERTIFICATION SCHEMES IN LATVIA ................................................................. 89 

3

1. Introduction 

The following document contains the results of Task 1 of the study “Food Supply Chain 

Dynamics and Quality Certification”. Said task features a bibliographic review 

regarding six EU member countries (Belgium, Germany, Italy, Latvia, United Kingdom 

and the Netherlands) in reference to quality assurance and labelling schemes within the 

agro food sector. 

The report consists of two sections. The first section features a list of relevant 

documents identified for each analysed country regarding the subjects of concern. 

Within said section the documents are listed by typology (i.e. scientific literature, 

miscellaneous relevant literature, relevant websites), and by country of reference. The 

contents and the criteria adopted for the research of each typology of documents are 

described at the beginning of the related chapters. 

The second section of the report contains the results of the analysis of the quality 

assurance and labelling schemes within the agro food sector currently in use in the 

aforementioned countries and deemed to be relevant to the study. 

For each country, a list of all the relevant schemes is provided, as well as a number of 

profiles compiled for the schemes deemed of particular interest, on the grounds of the 

information gathered. 

In said profiles, most space is devoted to schemes and protocols applicable to 

agricultural production. Also regularly featured for each country are: 

- Profiles of the internationally relevant and most frequently adopted schemes. 

- A profile describing a scheme promoted by a large scale retailer. 

Regarding the typology of schemes considered for the study, all the schemes are 

included that can be applied to the agro food sector, regardless of supply chain level, but 

with special attention paid to the schemes that can be applied to agricultural production 

and aimed at product differentiation. 

The analysis does not include: 

- All the schemes regarding organic products. 

- All the schemes regulated at EU level (PDO, PGI, EMAS, etc). 

- All the schemes in connection with EU regulations. 

4

2. Bibliographical review of documents focussing on quality 

assurance/sustainability labels and certification schemes in the agro-food sector 

This section reports the results of a bibliographical review of documents focussing on 

quality assurance and labels and certification schemes in: Belgium, Germany, Italy, 

Latvia, United Kingdom, The Netherlands. 

The relevant documents are listed by author(s), in alphabetical order (first key) and in 

chronological order (second key). 

BOOKS: all available information is given according to the format below: 

Author(s) (ed. or eds., if relevant) (YEAR), Title, Publisher, Location. Abstract. 

PARTS OF BOOKS: all available information is given according to the format below: 

Author(s) (YEAR), “Title”, in Author(s) (ed. or eds.), Title of the book, Publisher, Location. 

Abstract. 

ARTICLES: all available information is given according to the format below: 

Author(s) (YEAR), “Title of the article”, Title of the periodical, issue, pages. Abstract. 

WORKING PAPERS: all available information is given according to the format below: 

Author(s) (YEAR), Title of the working paper, other information. Abstract. 

OTHER DOCUMENTS: all available information is given according to the format below: 

Author(s) and/or Institution in charge of the publication, (YEAR), Title, (other information, 

abstract). 

5

2.1 Relevant scientific literature. 

Documents focussing on quality assurance and labelling systems are considered part of 

the relevant scientific literature when they are the result of studies made by academic 

institutions. These documents are: 

• books (or parts of them); 

• articles; 

• working papers; 

• other documents (e.g. documents presented at workshops, seminars etc.) 

The literature dealing with the following subjects is considered relevant for the purposes 

of this bibliographical review: 

• supply chain economics; 

• strategy and organisation of agribusiness firms and agribusiness systems; 

• agribusiness marketing; 

• food consumption economics; 

• food legislation. 

6

BOOKS 

Belgium 

Mormont M. and Van Huylenbroeck G. (2001), A la Recherche de la Qualité; analyses 

socioéconomiques sur les nouvelles filiéres agro-alimentaires, Editions de 

l’Universitè de Liége, Liége. This book reports on a major survey undertaken 

in Belgium into innovative approaches for generating high quality farm 

products. Over 300 projects promoting quality production are explored; half of 

them are analysed in some detail. Empirical evidence is presented about 

dairying, quality beef production, organic fruit growing and numerous forms 

of marketing. 

Vuylsteke A., Collet E., Haynes I., Van Huylenbroeck G. and Mormont M. (2003), 

Effecten van normering op bedrijfsorganisatie en structur in de landbouw. Effets 

de la normalisation sur la structure et l’organisation des entreprises dans 

l’agriculture, Academia Press, Gent. 

ARTICLES 

Gellynck X. and Verbeke W. (2001), “Consumer perception of traceability in the meat 

chain”, Agrarwirtschaft, vol. 50, n. 6-2001, pp. 368-374. A study on consumer 

perception of meat traceability in Belgium, based on cross-sectional data 

collected in June 2001. Respondents are segmented, based on their subjective 

perception of meat quality, and differences in the perceived need for 

traceability systems between the various segments are investigated. 

Tanner B. (2000), “Independent assessment by third party certification bodies”, Food 

Control, vol. 11, n. 5-2000, pp. 415-417. The importance of independent thirdparty 

involvement in achieving improved food safety and food law compliance 

is highlighted. 

Vannoppen J., Verbeke W., Van Huylenbroeck G. and Viaene J. (2001), “Motivational 

structures towards purchasing labeled beef and cheese in Belgium”, Journal of 

International Food and Agrobusiness Marketing, vol. 12, n. 2-2001, pp. 1-29. A 

study about motivational structures of consumers who purchase labeled food 

(beef from “Produits Qualité d’Autrefois” and cheese from “Fermière de 

Méan”) from short market channels in Belgium. 

Verbeke W. (2001), “The emerging role of traceability and information in demandoriented 

livestock production”, Outlook on Agriculture, vol. 30, n. 4-2001, pp. 

249-255. 

Verbeke W. and Viaene J. (1999), “Consumer attitude to beef quality labelling and 

associations with beef quality labelling”, Journal of International Food and 

Agribusiness Marketing, vol. 10, n. 3-1999, pp. 45-65. 

Viaene J. and Verbeke W. (1998), “Traceability as a key instrument towards supply 

chain and quality management in the Belgian poultry meat chain”, Supply Chain 

Management, vol. 3, n. 3-1998, pp. 139-142. 

7

WORKING PAPERS 

Griijp N.M. van der and Hond F. den (1999), Green supply chain initiatives in the 

European food and retailing industry, Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije 

Universiteit, Amsterdam. Belgium is among the European countries studied in 

this paper, whose focus is on corporate initiatives aimed at more sustainable 

agricultural practices. All agricultural food products - with the exception of 

meat - are dealt with in the study. 

Tunçer B. (2001), From Farm to Fork? Means of Assuring Food Quality – An analysis 

of the European food quality initiatives, IIIEE Reports 2001:14, The 

International Institute for Industrial Environmental Economics, Lund University, 

Lund, 

(http://www.iiiee.lu.se/Publication.nsf/$webAll/1E9E24A162052480C1256BE9 

002D8FFA/$FILE/Burcu-Tuncer.pdf) This paper analyses the organisation of 

many European food quality initiatives, highlighting their major strengths and 

weaknesses and categorizing them into eight groups. A number of case studies 

from Belgium is presented. 

OTHER DOCUMENTS 

Stassart P. (1998), Building a Quality Label (Communication to the ESRS Regional 

Development Summer University at Lodz, Poland, 

http://www.ful.ac.be/Recherche/SEED/pages/Equipe/textes/textestassart/public 

7 quality label.pdf. This paper analyses the development of the Ardenne Label 

project (beef production and marketing chain) and its subsequent extension in 

the Walloon Quality Label) 

Verbeke W. and Ward R.W. (2003), Importance of EU Label Requirements: An 

Application of Ordered Probit Models to Belgium Beef Labels 

(http://www.farmfoundation.org/projects/documents/ronwardpaper.pdf) 

Vuylsteke A., Collet E., Huylenbroeck van G. and Mormont M. (2003), Exclusion of 

farmers as a consequence of quality certification and standardisation (Paper 

presented at the 83 rd EAAE Seminar, Chania, Crete, Greece, 4-7 September, 

2003 

http://eaae.maich.gr/papers/Vuylsteke_Collet_Huylenbroeck_Mormont.zip. A 

study on a side effect of the diffusion of quality certification and 

standardisation, through a statistical analysis of data on farmers’ participation 

in certification initiatives. The survey is based on a sample of 320 Belgian 

farmers). 

8

BOOKS 

Germany 

Kretzschmar G. and Anders B.W. (2000), Agrarwirtschaft und Nahrungsmittelqualität - 

Stand und Tendenzen, Leipziger Universitätsverlag, Leipzig. Quality systems in 

the agrifood sector. 

Meyer R. (2004), Nahrungsmittelqualität der Zukunft - Handlungsfelder und Optionen, 

Deutscher Fachverlag. Quality systems in the food industry. 

PARTS OF BOOKS 

Brüggemann A. and Hinrichs A. (2003), “Supply Chain Management and Distributes 

own Brands (DOB) as a Method for the Quality Assurance in the Meat 

Industry”, in Schiefer G. and Rickert U. (eds.), Quality Assurance, Risk 

Management and Environmental Control in Agriculture and Food Supply 

Networks. Proceedings of the 82 nd EAAE Seminar,Bonn, ILB Press, Bonn. This 

paper focuses on the introduction of Distributes own Brands (DOB) as a 

method to promote quality assurance in the meat industry. 

Gampl B. (2003), “Traceability systems in the German food industry: towards a 

tipology”, in Schiefer G. and Rickert U. (eds.), Quality Assurance, Risk 


Networks. Proceedings of the 82 nd EAAE Seminar,Bonn, ILB Press, Bonn. In 

this paper a typology of traceability systems is proposed and subsequently 

applied to a sample of traceability systems in use in the German food industry. 

Moeller K. (2003), “ISO – Accreditated Benchmarking as a Tool to Assure Global 

Harmonization of Farm Assurance Schemes: the Example of EUREPGAP”, in 

Schiefer G. and Rickert U. (eds.), Quality Assurance, Risk Management and 

Environmental Control in Agriculture and Food Supply Networks. Proceedings 

of the 82 nd EAAE Seminar,Bonn, ILB Press, Bonn. This paper describes the 

EUREPGAP quality assurance scheme, identifies the remaining barriers to 

harmonization of schemes and standards and develops proposals for schemes 

and standards to find their optimal strategy in the span beteween sector 

harmonization and market differentiation. 

Recke G. and Wirthgen B. (2003), “Direct Marketing in Germany – Quality Assurance 

strategies”, in Schiefer G. and Rickert U. (eds.), Quality Assurance, Risk 



paper highlights the main findings from surveys and studies about the 

implementation of quality assurance strategies by German farmers involved in 

the direct marketing of farm products. 

Schulze Althoff G., Zandbergen J., Schimtz Th. and Petersen B. (2003), “Cross borders 

– Integrated Quality Assurance Systems in Pork Production Chains along the 

Dutch German Border”, in Schiefer G. and Rickert U. (eds.), Quality Assurance, 

Risk Management and Environmental Control in Agriculture and Food Supply 


paper describes the GIQS Dutch-German initiative, concerning the 

9

ARTICLES 

development of a cross-border integrated quality assurance system in the pork 

production chain. 

Fearne A., Hornibrook S. and Dedman S., (2001), “The management of perceived risk 

in the food supply chain: a comparative study of retailer-led beef quality 

assurance schemes in Italy and Germany”, International Food and Agribusiness 

Management Review, n. 4–2001, pp. 19-36. This article reports the findings 

from two case studies of retailer-led quality assurance schemes (QAS) for beef 

in Germany and Italy. The focus is on the potential for QAS to reduce risks 

associated with fresh beef, as perceived by consumers. 

Herrmann R., Krischik-Bautz Z. and Anders Z. (2002), “Evaluating the success of 

generic promotion for beef: the case of Quality from Bavaria – Guaranteed 

Origin”, Berichte uber Landwirtschaft, vol. 80, n. 1-2002, pp. 53-84. The 

objective of this study is to evaluate the success of the program "Quality from 

Bavaria - Guaranteed Origin", in terms of effects on Bavarian beef demand. 

The analysis is based on a partial analysis of the Bavarian beef market; 

markets of substitutive and complementary products are not separately 

modeled. 

Herrmann R., Thompson S. and Krischik-Bautz Z. (2002), “Bovine Spongiform 

Encephalopathy and Generic Promotion of Beef: An Analysis for Quality from 

Bavaria”, Agribusiness, vol. 18, n. 3-2002, pp. 369-385. This article examines 

the impact of generic promotion on Bavarian beef demand during the BSE 

crisis, investigating the potential offsetting effects of advertising and 

promotion (positive) and heightened food safety awareness (negative). 

Econometric estimates of both effects are provided and a model proposed to 

asess the corresponding economic welfare implications. 

Röhr A., Lüddecke K., Drusch S., Müller M.J. and Alvensleben R.V. (2005), ”Food 

quality and safety – consumer perception and public health concern”, Food 

Control, vol. 16, n. 8-2005, pp. 649-655. This article illustrates the findings 

from a consumer survey conducted with 449 subjects in Kiel in 2002 to 

determine actual consumer perceptions to food quality and safety. These 

findings are compared with those of former consumer surveys conducted in 

Kiel on the same subject. 

Roosen J., Lusk J. and Fox J. (2003), “Consumer demand for and attitudes toward 

alternative beef labelling strategies in France, Germany and the UK”, 

Agribusiness, vol. 19, n. 1-2003, pp. 77-90. Using data from mail surveys in 

France, Germany and the United Kingdom, this study analyses consumer 

preferences for alternative beef labeling strategies: brands, origin labels, and 

mandatory labeling of beef from cattle fed with genetically modified feed. 

Wirthgen A. (2004), “Willingness to pay for food produced in accordance with nature 

conservation criteria, a survey throughout the whole food chain”, Journal of 

Chain and Network Science, n. 4-2004, pp. 45-54. 

Wirthgen A. (2005), “Consumer, Retailer and Producer Assessments of Product 

Differentiation According to Regional Origin and Process Quality”, 

Agribusiness, vol. 21, n. 2-2005, pp. 191-211. 

10




Universiteit, Amsterdam. Germany is among the European countries studied in 

this paper, whose focus is on corporate initiatives aimed at more sustainable 






Lund, 


002D8FFA/$FILE/Burcu-Tuncer.pdf). This paper analyses the organisation of 



from Germany is presented. 

Velthuis A.G.J., Walle van der K. and Saatkamp H.W. (2004), Quality Control Systems 

in German and Dutch pig production: the differences between QS and IKB, 

Business Economics, Wageningen University, Wageningen, 

(http://www.giqs.org/pdf/Fleisch/GIQS_report_IKB_QS_final.pdf). 


Giebel A. (2000), Implications of changing general market conditions on product 

quality and quality assurance in the German pork production (Document 

presented at the Virtual Conference on Sustainable Animal Production on 

31/03/2000; http://www.agriculture.de/discus/messages/34/giebel.pdf. The 

purpose of this paper is to derive suggestions for product quality and quality 

assurance in German pig production from general market conditions). 

Jahn G., Schramm M. and Spiller A. (2004), “The trade-off between generality and 

effectiveness in certification systems: A conceptual framework”, in: Bremmers, 

H. J. et al. (eds.) Dynamics in Chains and Networks, Proceedings of the sixth 

International Conference on Chain and Network Managment in Agribusiness 

and the Food Industry, Wageningen, (http://www.qs-systems.de/Texte/Tradeoff-paper.pdf. 

This study designs a conceptual framework explaining 

certification trends in the food sector. Key elements regarding the history of 

quality assurance (with special reference to the German situation) are picked 

up and interpreted). 

Schiefer G. (2002), Traceability and certification in food quality production – a critical 

view, (Proceedings of the Frontis workshop on New approaches to food-safety 

economics, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 14-17 April 2002, 

http://library.wur.nl/frontis/food_safety/toc.html.). 

Schulze Althoff G. (2003), “Making profit with traceability and improved quality 

management in agro–food chains along the Dutch German border”, (Foodtrace 

11

Conference Proceedings: Managing the Complexity of Traceability for Quality 

Safety and Profit. Second International Food Trace Conference, Barcelona. This 



production chain). 

12

BOOKS 

Italy 

Barone G., Ferrara L. and Improta C. (eds.) (2003), Acque minerali della Campania: 

alle radici della certificazione della qualità, CIRAM - Centro 

interdipartimentale ricerche ambiente, Università di Napoli Federico II, Napoli. 

Quality assurance in the Italian mineral water subsector. 

Cristoferi G. and Rotondi A. (2002), Tracciabilità e caratterizzazione degli oli 

extravergini di oliva della Romagna, Tipografia Moderna, Ravenna. 

Traceability in the olive oil subsector in the Romagna area of Italy. 

Mannino S. and Schleining G. (2001), Practical tasks for food quality assurance, 

Tecnos, Milano. 

Mariani A. (ed.) (2001), Sviluppo dei sistemi di qualità nelle filiere agroalimentari del 

Mezzogiorno: progetto operativo multiregionale A/28 misura 2, S.Giorgio, 

Campobasso. Quality assurance schemes in the food supply chains of the 

Mezzogiorno (southern) regions of Italy. 

Peri C., Lavelli V. and Mariani A. (2004), Qualità nelle aziende e nelle filiere 

agroalimentari: gestione e certificazione dei sistemi per la qualità, per la 

rintracciabilità e per l’igiene, Hoepli, Milano. Management and certification of 

quality assurance systems and traceability systems in Italy. 

Visconti A. (ed.) (1999), Adozione di Sistemi Qualità dei Prodotti Alimentari - Atti 

dell’incontro conclusivo del Progetto Speciale del Comitato Nazionale Scienze 

Agrarie, 9 Luglio 1998, Facoltà di Agraria, Università degli Studi di Firenze, 

CNR–Istituto Nazionale di Coordinamento Agro-Industria. Food quality 

assurance systems in Italy. 


Arfini F. and Mancini M.C. (2003), “British Retail Consortium (BRC) Standard: a New 

Challenge for Firms Involved in the Food Chain. Analysis of Economic and 

Managerial Aspects”, in Schiefer G. and Rickert U. (eds.), Quality Assurance, 


Networks. Proceedings of the 82 nd EAAE Seminar,Bonn, ILB Press, Bonn. The 

aim of this paper is to study the economic and managerial consequences met 

by producing, processing and trading firms in implementing BRC Standard. It 

describes the origin and the contents of the standard, together with the related 

certification and accreditation system. It also analyses the level of 

implementation of the standard in Italy and illustrates a case study. 

Camele M.A. and Lanini L. (2004), “Traceability and EurepGap: implications for 

vertical relationships in the Italian Fresh food Supply Chain”, in Acts of the 88 th 

EAAE Seminar on ‘Retailing and Producer-Retailer Relationships in the Food 

Chains’, INRA, Paris. 

Canavari M., Centonze R., Rotondi A. and Spadoni R. (2004), “Creating a traceability 

model through the analysis of information and relationships between the agents 

13

of a fruit supply chain”, in Acts of the 88 th EAAE Seminar on ‘Retailing and 

Producer-Retailer Relationships in the Food Chains’, INRA, Paris. 

Canavari M., Spadoni R. and Regazzi D. (1998), “Evaluation of quality assurance 

systems in the agri-food sector”, in Tempesta T. and Thiene M. (eds.), 

Proceedings of the 6 th Joint Conference on Food, Agriculture, and the 

Environment, University of Padova – University of Minnesota, Padova/St. Paul. 

This paper illustrates the findings of a survey conducted in the Emilia- 

Romagna region of Italy on the implementation of quality assurance systems 

in the fruit and vegetable, meal/pasta and wine subsectors. It also focuses on 

the economic analysis of the costs related to the implementation of quality 

assurance systems. 

Canavari M., Spadoni R., Regazzi D. and Giacomazzi F. (2002), “Large scale retailers 

and diffusion in the agri-food system of the ISO 9000 certified quality 

management system”, in Canavari M., Caggiati P. and Easter W. (eds.), 

Economic Studies on Food, Agriculture, and the Environment, Kluwer 

Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York, pp. 47-56. 

Canavari M. and Spadoni R. (2003), “Costo del sistema qualità a norma ISO 

nell’agroalimentare: il caso Granarolo-Felsinea”, in Casati D. (ed.), La 

competitività dei sistemi agricoli italiani, Franco Angeli, Milano, pp. 533-556. A 

case study about the costs of implementing an ISO 9000 certified quality 

management system in a great Italian milk processing firm. 

Canavari M. and Spadoni R. (2004), “Performance of ISO 9000 certified quality 

management systems in the agri-food sector: a questionnaire-based study in 

Emilia – Romagna and Veneto”, in Schiefer G. and Rickert U. (eds.), Quality 

Assurance, Risk Management and Environmental Control in Agriculture and 

Food Supply Networks, Proceedings of the 82 nd EAAE Seminar,Bonn, ILB Press, 

Bonn. This paper illustrates the results of a survey aimed at evaluating the 

performance of ISO9000 certified quality management systems in the Emilia- 

Romagna and Veneto regions of Italy. The survey was conducted with a 

questionnaire-based approach. 

Milone P. (2000), “Il caso Bovinmarche”, in Miele M. and Parisi V. (eds.), 

Atteggiamento dei consumatori e politiche di qualità della carne in Italia e in 

Europa negli anni ’90, Franco Angeli, Milano. The quality assurance scheme 

for beef by Italian “Bovinmarche” cattle producers’ organisation is illustrated 

in this paper. 

Mora C. and Menozzi D. (2003), “Traceability costs components for meat”, in Schiefer 

G. and Rickert U. (eds.), Quality Assurance, Risk Management and 

Environmental Control in Agriculture and Food Supply Networks. Proceedings 

of the 82 nd EAAE Seminar, Bonn, ILB Press, Bonn. This paper presents the 

main results of a research on the cost components and cost drivers throughout 

the supply chain connected with traceability of beef products. The study was 

conducted on a sample of 15 companies, representing about 20% of the total 

meat processing sector in Italy. 

14

ARTICLES 

Agabiti M.F. and Gregori F. (1998), “La certificazione di qualità secondo le norme ISO 

9000 nell’industria alimentare italiana”, Rivista di Politica Agraria n. 6 – 1998. 

This article illustrates the situation in the Italian food industry as far as ISO 

9000 certification is concerned. 

Fearne A., Hornibrook S. and Dedman S. (2001), “The management of perceived risk in 

the food supply chain: a comparativestudy of retailer-led beef quality assurance 

schemes in Italy and Germany”, International Food and Agribusiness 

Management Review, n. 4–2001, pp. 19-36. This article reports the findings 

from two case studies of retailer-led quality assurance schemes (QAS) for beef 

in Germany and Italy. The focus is on the potential for QAS to reduce risks 

associated with fresh beef, as perceived by consumers. 




Universiteit, Amsterdam. Italy is among the European countries studied in this 

paper, whose focus is on corporate initiatives aimed at more sustainable 



Sodano V. and Verneau F. (2003), Traceability and food safety: public choice and 

private incentives, Collana Working Paper, n. 5-2003, Università degli Studi di 

Napoli Federico II, Napoli. This paper aims at demonstrating that traceability 

strongly affects the organisation of the food system, the structures and 

strategies of the firms operating within it, and the nature of relationships 

along the food supply chain. These statements are tested using a case study on 

the Italian processed tomato sector. 




Lund, 





from Italy is presented. 


Iacoponi L., Brunori G., Colosimo V., Loi A., Miele M., Moruzzo R., Parisi V., Rovai 

M. and Ventura F. (1997), Meat Quality Policy in Italy, Report for the EU DGV- 

1 Fair project Quality Policy and Consumer Behaviour, Department of 

Agricultural Economics, University of Pisa. 

15

Regazzi D., Canavari M., Spadoni R. and Manfredini R. (2001), Linee guida per la 

certificazione di prodotto in agricoltura, (document presented at the kick-off 

meeting for the project “Certificazione di prodotto” sponsored by the 

Confederazione Nazionale Coltivatori Diretti, Rome, 13/03/2001; guidelines for 

the certification of farm products in Italy). 

16


Latvia 

Melece L. (2003), “Food Safety and Quality Assurance in Latvia”, in Schiefer G. and 

Rickert U. (eds.), Quality Assurance, Risk Management and Environmental 

Control in Agriculture and Food Supply Networks. Proceedings of the 82 nd 

EAAE Seminar, Bonn, ILB Press, Bonn. This paper illustrates the 

establishment, improvement and implementation of food quality and safety 

assurance systems in Latvia, including those based on ISO 9000 standards. 

Melngaile A. (2001) “Safety assurance in food supply chains”, in Scientific Articles of 

Riga Technical University, Volume 6, Section K. 

ARTICLES 

Melece L. (2003), “Paškontroles sistēmas un HACCP”, Agropols, n. 13-2003, pp. 8-10. 

17

BOOKS 

United Kingdom 

Lees M. (2003), Food authenticity and traceability, Woodhead, Cambridge. 


Boecker A., Bredhal M.E. and Northen J.R. (2003), “ISO 9000 certification in British 

agribusiness: motivations and performance impacts”, in Schiefer G. and Rickert 

U. (eds.), Quality Assurance, Risk Management and Environmental Control in 

Agriculture and Food Supply Networks. Proceedings of the 82 nd EAAE 

Seminar,Bonn, ILB Press, Bonn. This paper aims at gaining insight in the 

motivation for a firm’s decision to seek ISO 9000 certification. The analysis is 

based on a survey conducted on a sample of 27 British agribusiness firms. 

Bredhal M.E., Northen J.R., Boecker A. and Normile M.A. (2001), “Consumer demand 

sparks the growth of quality assurance schemes in the European food sector”, in 

Regmi A. (ed.), Changing structures of global food consumption and trade, 

Economic Research Service-USDA, Agricultural and Trade Report n. WRS-01- 

1, Washington DC, pp. 90-102. 

Hobbs J., Spriggs J. and Fearne A. (2001), “Institutional Arrangements and Incentive 

Structures for Food Safety and Quality Assurance in the Food Chain”, in Hooker 

N. and Murano E. (eds.), Interdisciplinary Food Safety Research, CRC Press, 

pp. 43-68. The different approaches to food safety in the UK, Canada and 

Australia are highlighted in this paper, and the attitudes of beef producers in 

Canada and the UK towards quality assurance schemes are compared. 

ARTICLES 

Calder R. and Marr P. (1998), “A beef producer initiative in traceability: Scottish 

Borders TAG”, Supply Chain Management: an International Journal, vol. 3, n. 

3-1998, pp. 123–126. This article asserts that a full traceability system for beef 

is possible using EID technology, which allows for increased accuracy of data 

loaded, comprehensive information on each animal, reliability and speed of 

access to data. The system set up by the Borders TAG Initiative in Scotland 

provides a system of traceability with proven credibility through each stage of 

the meat chain. 

Early R. (1998), “Farm assurance – Benefit or Burden”, Journal of the RASE, vol. 159- 

1998, pp. 32-43. 

Fearne A. (1998), “The evolution of partnerships in the meat supply chain: insights 

from the British beef industry”, International Journal of Supply Chain 

Management, vol. 3, n. 4-1998, pp. 214-231. This case study describes the 

evolution of supply chain partnerships in the British beef industry, driven by 

changing consumer demand, food safety legislation, a concentrated and highly 

competitive retail sector and the BSE crisis. The case examples demonstrate 

18

the importance of establishing trust in supply chain partnerships and of 

focusing explicitly on value added initiatives as a source of differentiation and 

competitive advantage. 

Fearne A. and Garcia M. (1999), “The Assured Combinable Crop Scheme in England 

and Wales: Carrot or Stick?”, Farm Management Journal, vol.10, n.5–1999, pp. 

243-261. This article presents the results of two surveys, of growers and cereal 

users, which demonstrate a high level of support amongst the trade for the 

Assured Combinable Crops Scheme (ACCS) introduced in 1998, even with 

little evidence of price premiums for ACCS grain. 

Grigg N.P. and McAlinden C. (2001), “A new role for ISO 9000 in the food industry? 

Indicative data from UK and mainland Europe”, British Food Journal, vol. 103, 

n. 9-2001, pp. 644-656. This paper presents an analysis of food industry trends 

in relation to quality standards, and discusses the potential role of ISO 

9000:2000 within this sector based upon published data from ISO, industry 

survey data, and interviews with a major UK food certification body and with 

technical managers from food companies in the UK and overseas. 

Implications of such trends are presented in relation to the auditing of UK 

companies. 

Hobbs J.E, Fearne A. and Springs J. (2002), “Incentive structures for food safety and 

quality assurance: an international comparison”, Food Control, vol. 13, pp. 77- 

81. 

Holleran E., Bredahl M.E. and Zaibet L. (1999), “Private incentives for adopting food 

safety and quality assurance”, Food Policy, vol. 24, pp. 669-683. 

Holt G. and Henson S. (2000), “Quality assurance management in small meat 

manufacturers“, Food Control, vol. 11, n. 4-2000, pp. 319-326. This article 

highlights the main findings of a survey conducted on 24 small manufacturers 

of ready-to-eat meat, focusing on the implementation of quality assurance 

management solutions. 

Ilbery B. and Kneafsey M. (2000), “Producer constructions of quality in regional 

speciality food production: a case study from south west England”, Journal of 

Rural Studies, vol. 16, n. 2-2000, pp. 217-230. This article draws on evidence 

from a survey of small producers of regional speciality food products in the 

south west of England to demonstrate that producers usually define quality in 

terms of product specification and attraction rather than through official 

certification schemes or association with region of origin. 

Jack D., Pardoe T. and Ritchie C. (1998), “Scottish Quality Cereals and Coastal Grains 

– Combinable Crop Assurance in Action”, Supply Chain Management, vol.3, 

n.3-1998, pp. 134-138. This paper outlines the objectives and quality assurance 

arrangements of Scottish Quality Cereals (SQC), the first major assurance 

scheme to be implemented for combinable crops in the UK. The traceability 

arrangements of Coastal Grains, a farmer co-operative drawing grain from 

the English and Scottish Borders, are described. The Coastal Grains' system 

provides traceability, quality and treatment information from seed and farm of 

origin right through to the industrial customer. SQC and Coastal Grains 

provide clear examples of how quality assurance and traceability may be 

developed in the combinable crops sector. 

Jaffry S., Pickering H., Ghulam Y., Whitmarsh D. and Wattage P. (2004), “Consumer 

choices for quality and sustainability labelled seafood products in the UK”, Food 

19

Policy, vol. 29, n. 3-2004, pp. 215-228. This article draws on a study exploring 

the nature and extent of the response of UK consumers to the introduction of 

labelled seafood products and explores the potential of product differentiation 

to promote sustainable fisheries. 

Leat P., Marr P. and Ritchie C. (1998), “Quality assurance and traceability – The 

Scottish agri-food industry’s quest for competitive advantage”, Supply Chain 

Management, vol.3, n.3–1998, pp. 115-117. This paper summarises how the 

Scottish agri-food industry has been developing farm and quality assurance 

activities since the early 1990s as it seeks to strengthen its competitive position. 

It also outlines the European system of third party certification for quality 

assurance schemes. 

McEachern M. and Treager A. (2000), “Farm animal welfare in the UK: a comparison 

of assurance schemes”, Farm Management, vol.11, n.10–2000, pp. 685-708. 

McEachern M. and Warnaby G. (2004), “Retail ’Quality Assurance’ Labels as a 

Strategic Marketing Communication Mechanism for Fresh Meat”, The 

International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, vol. 14, n. 

2-2004, pp. 255-271. This paper identifies the meat purchasing behaviour of 

consumers and their perceptions, attitudes and knowledge towards the main 

quality assurance labels. Results indicate consumers’ purchase preferences to 

be more influenced by quality labels co-ordinated by producer-led 

organizations, and that recognition and knowledge of retail labels are low in 

comparison. This raises questions regarding the relevance and communication 

strategies of in-house retail “quality assurances” to consumers. 

Morris C. (2000), “Quality assurance schemes: a new way of delivering environmental 

benefits in food production?”, Journal of Environmental Planning and 

Management, vol. 43, n. 3-2000, pp. 433-448. 

Morris C. and Young C. (2000), “’Seed to shelf’, ‘teat to table’, ‘barley to beer’ and 

‘womb to tomb’: discourses of food quality and quality assurance schemes in the 

UK”, Journal of Rural Studies, vol. 16, n. 1-2000, pp. 103-115. The aim of this 

article is to critically examine the process of introducing quality through 

quality assurance schemes (QAS) in the UK. Drawing on “Farmers Weekly” 

as a data source, the key discourses in the farming and food industries 

surrounding this process are identified and analysed. The implications of these 

discourses for the development of QAS in the UK are also discussed. 

Mousavi A., Sarhadi M., Lenk A. and Fawcett S. (2002), “Tracking and traceability in 

the meat processing industry: a solution”, British Food Journal, vol. 104, n. 1- 

2002, pp. 17-19. This paper reviews research and development activities for 

traceability and trackability in the meat industry. Achievements of individuals 

and research groups developing tools and techniques to improve the 

production process in handling and cutting meat portions for end users are 

discussed. In addition software/hardware, logistics and technical requirements 

for tracking material in a production process are introduced. With the aid of 

such established tools and techniques coupled with novel proposals, the 

authors offer a practical solution for the development of a tracking and 

traceability system within the meat industry. 

Northen J.R. (2000), “Quality attributes and Quality cues effective communication in 

the UK meat supply chain”, British Food Journal, vol. 102, n. 3-2000, pp. 230- 

245. This paper develops a conceptual framework, based on quality attributes 

20

and quality cues, to demonstrate the necessary requirements for effective 

communication of quality cues to customers in the supply chain and 

consumers at place of purchase. The "perceived quality" approach to product 

quality is adopted and the links between intrinsic/extrinsic cues and 

experience/credence attributes of a product are developed. The framework is 

applied to the UK meat sector by considering which attributes/cues are altered 

by farm assurance schemes and, hence, which type of cue is needed to signal 

these attributes, and what elements are necessary for effective signalling of 

this type of cue. 

Northen J.R. (2001), “Using farm assurance schemes to signal food safety to multiple 

food retailers in the UK”, International Food and Agribusiness Management, 

vol. 4, n. 1-2001, pp. 37-50. A survey of abattoirs in the UK and a logistic 

regression to assess significance are used to test the following hypoteses: a) 

buying farm assured livestock is a highly significant positive factor in selling 

meat to large multiple retailers; b) industry-led farm assurance schemes are 

indeed used by large multiple retailers as a credible signal of food safety and 

other “credence” attributes. 

Pettitt R.G. (2001), “Traceability in the food animal industry and supermarket chains”, 

Revue Scientifique et Technique de l’Office Internacional des Epizooties, vol. 

20, n. 2-2001, pp. 584-597. This article examines the introduction of 

traceability systems in the food animal industry and supermarket chains in the 

UK after the BSE crisis. 

Roosen J., Lusk J. and Fox J. (2003), “Consumer demand for and attitudes toward 

alternative beef labelling strategies in France, Germany and the UK”, 

Agribusiness, vol. 19, n. 1-2003, pp. 77-90. Using data from mail surveys in 

France, Germany and the United Kingdom, this study analyses consumer 

preferences for alternative beef labeling strategies: brands, origin labels, and 

mandatory labeling of beef from cattle fed with genetically modified feed. 

Simpson B., Muggoch A. and Leat P. (1998), “Quality assurance in Scotland’s beef and 

lamb sector”, Supply Chain Management: an International Journal, vol. 3, n. 3- 

1998, pp. 118-122. This paper outlines the Scotch Quality Beef and Lamb 

Association (SQBLA) approach to quality assurance and product traceability 

in the beef and lamb sectors. The schemes employed have been extended to 

include other sectors in the meat supply chain. The paper also outlines the 

operation of one of the complementary but separate schemes which are run by 

some processor/retailer partnerships - Scotbeef's Beeftrack system. 

Spriggs J., Hobbs J. and Fearne A. (2000), “Beef producer attitudes to co-ordination and 

quality assurance in Canada and in the UK”, International Food and 

Agribusiness Management Review, vol.3, n.1–2000, pp. 95-110. The purpose of 

this article is to determine whether there are differences in the attitudes of beef 

producers in Canada and the UK to issues of horizontal and vertical 

coordination and quality assurance, through random sample surveys (by 

means of a mail questionnaire) of beef producers. 

Van Dorp K.J. (2003), “Beef Labelling: the emergence of transparency”, Supply Chain 

Management: an International Journal, vol. 8, n. 1-2003, pp. 32-40. This paper 

describes how the emergence of beef product information became relevant 

against the background of BSE. The paper describes the beef sector over time, 

through two case studies. From both studies, the emergence of product 

21

information exchange can be clearly noted. The first study describes the type 

of information exchanged, before the BSE outbreak. The second study 

describes the type of information exchanged after the BSE outbreak, prior to 

compulsory labelling. 

Zaibet L. and Bredahl M. (1997), “Gains from ISO certification in the UK meat sector”, 

Agribusiness, vol 13., n. 4-1997, pp. 375-384. 




Universiteit, Amsterdam. United Kingdom is among the European countries 

studied in this paper, whose focus is on corporate initiatives aimed at more 

sustainable agricultural practices. All agricultural food products - with the 

exception of meat - are dealt with in the study. 




Lund, 





from the United Kingdom is presented. 

22


The Netherlands 

Schulze Althoff G., Zandbergen J., Schimtz Th. and Petersen B. (2003), “Cross borders 

– Integrated Quality Assurance Systems in Pork Production Chains along the 

Dutch German Border”, in Schiefer G. and Rickert U. (eds.), Quality Assurance, 





production chain. 

Trijp H. van, Steenkamp J.B. and Candel M. (1997), “Quality labelling as instrument to 

create product equity: the case of IKB in the Netherlands”, in Wierenga B., van 

Tilburg A., Grunert K., Steenkamp J.B. and Wedel M. (eds.), Agricultural 

marketing and consumer behavior in a changing world, Kluwer Academic 

Publishers, Dordrecht. The purpose of this paper is to examine whether and, if 

so, how an IKB (integrated quality control) certification will add value to pork 

in the eyes of the consumer. The IKB certification was implemented by the 

Dutch Product Boards for Livestock, Meat and Eggs; it consists of a number 

of basic minimum requirements relating to traceability, feed, hygiene and the 

use of veterinary pharmaceuticals. 

Vorst, J.G.A.J. van der, (2004), “Traceability: state of the art in seven countries”, in 

Hofstede G.J., Spaans L., Schepers H., Trienekens J.H. and Beulens A.J.M. 

(eds.), Hide or Confide? The dilemma of transparency, Reed Business 

Information, Netherlands, p. 73 - 80. 

ARTICLES 

Ziggers G.W and Trienekens J. (1999), “Quality assurance in food and agribusiness 

supply chains: developing successful partnerships”, International Journal of 

Production Economics, vol. 60-61, pp. 271-279. 




Universiteit, Amsterdam. The Netherlands are among the European countries 

studied in this paper, whose focus is on corporate initiatives aimed at more 

sustainable agricultural practices. All agricultural food products - with the 

exception of meat - are dealt with in the study. 




Lund, 

23





from The Netherlands is presented. 

Velthuis A.G.J., Walle van der K. and Saatkamp H.W. (2004), Quality Control Systems 

in German and Dutch pig production: the differences between QS and IKB, 

Business Economics, Wageningen University, Wageningen. 

(http://www.giqs.org/pdf/Fleisch/GIQS_report_IKB_QS_final.pdf) 


Meuwissen M.P.M., Velthuis A.G.J., Hogeveen H. and Huirne R.B.M. (2002), 

Technical and economic considerations about traceability and certification in 

livestock production chains (Proceedings of the Frontis workshop on New 

approaches to food-safety economics, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 14-17 

April 2002, http://library.wur.nl/frontis/food_safety/toc.html. This paper 

analyses the status and perspectives of traceability systems and certification 

schemes in livestock production chains and aims at reviewing their potential 

costs and benefits, also drawing on evidence from the Dutch situation). 

Plaggenhoef W. van, Batterink M.H. and Trienekens J.H. (2003), Overview of food 

quality systems and legislation for the fruit, beef and fish chain in the 

Netherlands (Wageningen University Report, 

http://www.globalfoodnetwork.org/pdf/nether.pdf. This report is mainly based 

on literature and information resources available from the Internet) 

Schulze Althoff G. (2003), “Making profit with traceability and improved quality 

management in agro–food chains along the Dutch German border”, (Foodtrace 

Conference Proceedings: Managing the Complexity of Traceability for Quality 

Safety and Profit. Second International Food Trace Conference, Barcelona. This 



production chain). 

Trienekens J. and Beulens A. (2001), The implications of EU food safety legislation and 

consumer demands on supply chain information systems (Paper presented at the 

International Food and Agribusiness Management Association (IFAMA) 2001 

Agribusiness Forum and Symposium, Sydney, 27/06/2001; 

http://www.ifama.org/conferences/2001Conference/Papers/Area 

IV/Trienekens_Jacques.PDF. This paper explores the implications of EU food 

safety legislation and consumer demands on supply chain information 

systems, through the analysis of case studies also concerning the Dutch 

agrifood sector). 

24

2.2 Miscellaneous relevant literature. 

All the documents focussing on quality assurance and labelling systems that do not 

derive from academic research activities are considered part of the miscellaneous 

relevant literature. Among them: 

• documents deriving from research activities performed by public or private 

institutions (other than academic institutions); 

• articles for technical periodicals, corporate periodicals, etc.; 

• internal circulation documents by governmental institutions, private 

organisations, firms. 

The documents which are to be considered part of the miscellaneous relevant literature 

are listed separately in this section. 

ARTICLES 

Belgium 

Dagorn J. and Ferneij van J.P. (2003), “SANITEL – Le système belge pour 

l’identification et la traçabilité des porcs”, TechniPorc, vol. 26, n. 2-2003, pp. 

29-32 (http://www.itp.asso.fr/lirfor/techpor/article/tp2003/tp2dagorn03.pdf. 

Traceability in the Belgian pork sector) 


GS1 Belgium & Luxembourg (2003), EAN-UCC specification for the identification and 

traceability of meat and meat products (GS1 Belgium & Luxembourg, formerly 

EAN Belgium – Luxembourg, Brussels; 

http://www.gs1belu.org/traceability.htm). 

GS1 Belgium & Luxembourg (2004), EAN-UCC specification for the identification and 

traceability of fruit, vegetables and potatoes (GS1 Belgium & Luxembourg, 

formerly EAN Belgium – Luxembourg, Brussels; 

http://www.gs1belu.org/traceability.htm). 

Robijns J.M. (2001), La traçabilité en Belgique, (Paper presented at the 22me Colloque 

sur la Production Porcine Comment faire face au changement? - Centre de 

Référence en Agriculture et Agroalimentaire du Québec - 31-10-2001, Saint 

Hyacinthe; 

http://www.agrireseau.qc.ca/porc/Documents/Jean_Marie_Robjins.pdf. 

Traceability in the Belgian pork sector). 

25


Germany 

BBJ-Unternehmensgruppe (no date), Nahrungsmittelqualität und Sicherheit 

(http://www.bbj-unternehmensgruppe.de/bbj/docs/f+tkap33.pdf. Quality and 

safety in the food industry). 

BBJ-Unternehmensgruppe (no date), Qualitätssicherung und Verbrauchertrends 

(http://www.bbj-unternehmensgruppe.de/bbj/docs/f+tkap34.pdf. Food quality 

assurance and consumer trends). 

Miller J. (2004), Rahmenkonzept zur Qualitäts- und Herkunftssicherung (Document 

presented at the “Marktforum Qualitätssicherung in der Land- und 

Ernährungswirtschaft – von der Viefalt zum System“, Landshut, 25/11/2004; 

http://www.lfl.bayern.de/iem/qualitaetssicherung/10244/linkurl_0_4.pdf. Food 

quality and food origin certification). 

BOOKS 

Italy 

Conto F. (ed.) (2003), La nuova frontiera della politica agricola, della qualità e 

dell’ambiente: certificazioni, sicurezza alimentare, tracciabilità, marchi, 

marketing, associazionismo: nuove sfide per la filiera olivicola, Franco Angeli, 

Milano. Quality assurance systems and traceability systems in the olive oil 

subsector in Italy. 

Dongo D. (2005), Sicurezza alimentare e rintracciabilità: manuale operativo: Reg. 

(CE) n. 178/02, nuove regole in vigore dall’1.1.2005, Reg. (CE) n.1830/03, 

tracciabilità degli OGM, Linee guida di Federalimentare, Norme di settore e 

norme volontarie, Il Sole 24 Ore, Roma. Handbook about traceability in the 

food industry. 

Terra e Vita (2004), Tracciabilità nelle filiere agroalimentari: guida pratica, 

Edagricole, Bologna. Handbook about traceability in the food supply chains. 

ARTICLES 

Vannini L.and Brunetti M. (2003), “Tracciabilità e conservazione di cereali e sementi”, 

Molini d’Italia, n. 12, anno LIV, pp. 49-54. 

26


Agrisole (2003), Industria Alimentare – Certificazione (Special supplement to issue n° 

7-2003 of Agrisole magazine. Certification in the food industry). 

Agrisole (2004), Agroalimentare – Certificazione (Special supplement to issue n° 7- 

2004 of Agrisole magazine. Certification in the agrifood system). 

Agrisole (2005), Agroalimentare – Certificazione (Special supplement to issue n° 6- 

2005 of Agrisole magazine. Certification in the agrifood system). 

Federalimentare (2003), Linee guida per la rintracciabilità dei prodotti alimentari – 

Approvate dal Consiglio di Federalimentare il 12 dicembre 2003 (“Documenti” 

in Agrisole magazine, issue n° 3-2004. Guidelines by the Italian Food 

Processors’ Organisation FEDERALIMENTARE on food traceability). 

Federalimentare (2004), OGM – Tracciabilità, etichettatura – Linee guida per 

l’industria alimentare – Approvate dal Consiglio di federalimentare l’11 marzo 

2004 (“Documenti” in Agrisole magazine, issue n° 11-2004. Guidelines by the 

Italian Food Processors’ Organisation FEDERALIMENTARE on genetically 

modified food traceability and labelling). 

Federchimica, AISA, (2002), La sfida della tracciabilità: incontro con gli operatori 

della filiera, (Acts of a conference on traceability in the Italian food sector held 

at the Fair of Cremona). 

Largo Consumo (2004a), “Carni fresche suine: Certificazioni per crescere”, Mercato & 

Imprese 2004 (Special supplement to issue n. 2-2004 of Largo Consumo 

magazine, pp. 18-19. Quality assurance in the Italian pork sector). 

Largo Consumo (2004b), “Salumi: tracciabilità a servizio”, Mercato & Imprese 2004, 

(Special supplement to issue n. 2-2004 of Largo Consumo magazine, pp. 64-65. 

Traceability in the Italian pork sector). 

Thione L. (2004), Certificazione di conformità nel settore agro-alimentare, il ruolo di 

SINCERT, SINCERT (http://www.sincert.it/ITA/agroalimentare1.pdf. Quality 

certification in the Italian agrifood sector). 

27

ARTICLES 

Latvia 

Baltačs J. (2001), “HACCP Pārtikas nekaitīguma sistēma”, Kvalitāte, n. 4-2001, pp.10- 

11. 

Borbale M. (2002), “Ko apliecina ISO 9000 sertifikāts”, Kvalitāte, n. 4-2002, pp. 4-5. 

Bražinska L. (2004), “Efektīvas HACCP sistēmas apliecinājums”, Kvalitāte, n. 1, pp. 

10-11. 

Mauriņš J. (2003), “HACCP sistēmu sertifikācija”, Kvalitāte, n. 5, pp. 12-13. 

Miskārova G. (2003), “HACCP plāna izstrāde”, Kvalitāte, n. 6-2003, pp. 28-29. 

Rudzāte E. (2001), “ISO 9000 kvalitātes vadības sistēma”, Biznesa Partneri, n.2-2001, 

pp. 48-49. 



Kirk-Wilson R. (2002), Review of food assurance schemes (Food Standards Agency – 

June 2002). 

28

ARTICLES 


Dagorn J. (2003), “I et R: le système d’identification des porcs aux Pays-Bas”, 

TechniPorc, vol. 26, n. 4-2003, pp. 35-40. 

(http://www.itp.asso.fr/lirfor/techpor/article/tp2003/tp4dagorn03.pdf. 

Traceability in the Dutch pork sector). 


AgriHolland (2005), Dossier: Quality Marks in the Netherlands 

(http://www.agriholland.nl/dossiers/qualitymarks). 

29

2.3 Relevant websites. 

A number of websites focussing on quality assurance and labelling systems, or where 

documents focussing on quality assurance and labelling systems can be found, are 

listed in this section, in alphabetical order, according to the format below: 

Website name and/or other relevant information: link 

(QAS) = website about a particular quality assurance scheme. 

Belgium 

Belgische Accreditatieorganisatie – BELAC (Belgian Accreditation Organisation): 

http://www.beltest.fgov.be/ 

Centre de Recherche et d'Information des Organisations de Consommateurs (CRIOC) 

– 

“Securité Alimentaire” web portal: http://www.securitealimentaire.org/index.php 

Centre Wallon de Recherches Agronomiques de Gembloux – Département Qualité 

des Productions Agricoles: http://www.cra.wallonie.be/francais/dep7/index.html and 

http://www.cra.wallonie.be/produits/index.html 

Federaal Agentschap voor de Veiligheid van de Voedselketen – FAVV (Federal 

Agency for the safety of the Food Chain): 

http://www.favvafsca.fgov.be/portal/page?_pageid=34,49251&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL 

Federatie Voedingsindustrie – FEVIA (Belgian Federation of Food Processors) – 

“Quality from A to Z” web portal: http://www.qualityfood.be/en/pages/framen.htm 

Flandria (High quality marks for fruit and vegetables: the Green Arch) (QAS): 

http://www.vlam.be/index.php?item=kwaliteit&productid=3&page=& 

pagelock 

GS1 Belgium & Luxembourg (formerly EAN Belgium – Luxembourg): 

http://www.eanbelgilux.be/ 

Institut Belge de Normalisation (Belgian Organisation for Standardisation): 

http://www.ibn.be/ 

Germany 

Bayrischer BauernVerband Gütesiegel (QAS): 

http://www.bayerischerbauernverband.de/sro.php?redid=14060 

30

BQM-Programm (QAS): http://www.bqm-programm.de/ 

Centrale Marketing-Gesellschaft der deutschen Agrarwirtschaft mbH – CMA (QAS): 

http://www.cma.de/ and http://www.cma.de/profis_qualitaetssicherung.php 

Der Grüne Punkt (QAS): http://www.gruener-punkt.de/index_js.html 

DIN - Deutsches Institut für Normung (German Organisation for Standardisation): 

http://www2.din.de/ 

Deutsche Landwirtschafts Gesellschaft (DLG): http://www.dlg.org/de/index.html 

DLG Gütezeichen (QAS): 

http://www.dlg.org/de/landwirtschaft/testzentrum/betriebsmittel/index.html 

EUREPGAP (QAS): http://qrps.de/EUREP_GAP.htm 

Gaea Richtlinien (QAS): http://www.gaea.de/landwirtschaft_richtlinien.php4 

Geprüfte Qualität – Bayern (QAS): http://www.qualitaet.bayern.de/ 

Information über Qualität in der Landwirtschaft in Deutschland (information on 

quality in the agribusiness system in Germany): http://www.lfl.bayern.de/iem/ 

Institut Fresenius (Inspection / Certification Institute): 

http://www.fresenius.com/verbraucherinformationen/qualitaetssiegel_- 

_die_unabhaengige_kontrolle_7539.shtml 

Marktforum Qualitätssicherung in der Land- und Ernährungswirtschaft – von der 

Viefalt zum System (Forum on Quality Assurance), Landshut, 25/11/2004: 

http://www.lfl.bayern.de/iem/qualitaetssicherung/10244/ 

Qualität und Sicherheit – QS (QAS): http://www.q-s.info/ and http://www.tbverfurt.de/qs-info.htm 

QM-Milch (QAS): http://www.lkv-st.de/inhalt/qm-milch/index.html 

Rechtliche Grundlagen und Anforderungen der IVU-Richtlinie (QAS): 

http://www.ktbl.de/recht/ivu.htm#deutschland 

VDI-Richtlinie (QAS): http://www.vdi.de/vdi/vrp/richtliniendetails/index.php 

Italy 

Agriqualità (QAS): http://www.agriqualita.it/agriqualita.html 

Agroqualità (Inspection / Certification Body): http://www.agroqualita.it/ 

31

CDQ Italia - Certificazioni di Qualità (Inspection / Certification Body): 

http://www.cdqitalia.it/ 

CSQA Certificazioni (Inspection / Certification Body): http://www.csqa.it/ 

IS.ME.CERT - Istituto Mediterraneo di Certificazione dei prodotti e dei processi nel 

settore agroalimentare (Inspection / Certification Body): http://www.ismecert.it/ 

QeC, il Portale della qualità, sicurezza, ambiente (Web portal on quality, safety and 

environmental conservation): http://www.qec.it/qualita/qualita1.asp?IDCategoria=15 

SINCERT - Accreditamento Organismi di Certificazione (Italian Accreditation 

Organisation): http://www.sincert.it/ 

UNI - Ente Nazionale Italiano diUnificazione (Italian Organisation for 

Standardisation): http://www.uni.com/it/ 

Latvia 

Latvian Standard (Latvian Organisation for Standardisation): http://www.lvs.lv/ 


Assured British Chicken Production (QAS): 

http://www.assuredchicken.org.uk/chickens/ 

Assured British Meat (QAS): http://www.abm.org.uk/abmv2/ 

Assured British Pigs (QAS): http://www.assuredpigs.co.uk/pigs/ 

Assured Combinable Crops (QAS): http://www.assuredcrops.co.uk/ACCS2/ 

Assured Food Standards (QAS): http://www.redtractor.org.uk/site/rt_home.php 

Assured Produce (QAS): http://www.assuredproduce.co.uk/Aproduce/ 

British Standards Institution Group – BSI (Inspection / Certification Body): 

http://www.bsi-global.com/index.xalter# 

Cerafel. The Growers’ Organization – Prince De Bretagne (QAS): 

www.cerafel.com/en/pro/marketing-detail.html 

Farm Assured British Beef and Lamb (QAS): http://www.fabbl.co.uk/ 

Food Standards Agency: http://www.food.gov.uk/ 

32

Institute for Science and Technology: http://www.ifst.org/ 

National Dairy Farm Assured Scheme (QAS): http://www.ndfas.org.uk 

QA Register (The United Kingdom Register of Quality Assessed Company): 

http://www.quality-register.co.uk/ 

Quality Meat Scotland (QAS): http://www.qmscotland.co.uk/ 

Scottish Quality Cereals (QAS): http://www.sqcereals.co.uk/main.asp 

United Kingdom Accreditation Service: http://www.ukas.com/ 


Agro–Quality Support – AQS (Inspection / Certification Body): 

http://www.aqs.nl/engels/home.html 

Dutch Council for Accreditation (RvA): http://www.rva.nl/ 

Dutch Food And Non–Food Authority: http://www.vwa.nl/ 

GS1 Netherlands: http://www.ean.nl/ 

Milieukeur Organisation (QAS): http://www.milieukeur.nl/ 

Keumerkinstituut (Inspection / Certification Body): http://www.keurmerk.nl/ 

Product Board for Animal Feed (QAS): 

http://www.pdv.nl/english/kwaliteit/index.php 

Product Board for Livestock, Meat and Eggs (QAS): 

http://bedrijfsnet.pve.agro.nl/eng/ 

Quality Control Bureau (Inspection / Certification Body): http://www.kcb.nl/ 

Q–Point - Quality in agri-food (Web portal on quality in the agrifood sector): 

http://www.q-point-bv.nl/ 

Wageningen University- Department of Product Design and Quality Management: 

http://www.ftns.wau.nl/pdq/ 

33

3. List of Quality assurance/sustainability labels and certification schemes 

3.1 Belgium 

3.1.1 Quality Assurance Schemes 

1. UNI EN ISO 9001:2000 

o www.iso.org 

2. UNI EN ISO 14001:2004 

o www.iso.org 

3. EPD – Environmental Product Declaration 

o www.environdec.com/ 

4. ISO 14040 – LCA 

o www.iso-14001.org.uk/iso-14040.htm 

5. OHSAS 18001 

o www.ohsas-18001-occupational-health-and-safety.com/ 

6. SA 8000 

o www.cepaa.org/SA8000/SA8000.htm 

7. EurepGAP 

o www.eurep.org/Languages/English/index_html 

8. IFS 

o www.food-care.info 

9. BRC 

o www.brc.org.uk/ 

10. Coop'pass - Pass'por (Eqwalis) 

o http://www.apaqw.be/code/pages.asp?Page=3106 

11. Porc Fleuri (Eqwalis) 

o http://www.eqwalis.be/ 

12. Fruitnet (Eqwalis) 

o http://www.fruitnet.be/fr/concept.htm 

13. FILIERE BLEUE des PRES (Eqwalis) 

o http://www.proaniwal.com/documents/BDP_CahierdeCharge_04_2005 

.pdf 

14. Poulet «coq Ard» (Eqwalis) 

o http://www.proaniwal.com/documents/CahierdeChargesCoqArd.PDF 

34

15. Le poulet de chair (Eqwalis) 

o http://www.cra.wallonie.be/produits/poulet.htm 

16. Le Porc Plein Air (Eqwalis) 


17. Le Porc Fermier (Eqwalis) 


o http://www.cra.wallonie.be/produits/porc.htm 

18. Flandria (VLAM) 

o http://www.vlam.be 

o http://www.vlam.be/index.php?item=kwaliteit&productid=3 

19. Certus (VLAM) 

o http://www.mhr-viandes.com/fr/docu/docu/d0002734.htm 



20. Meritus (VLAM) 

o www.meritus.be 



21. Chemin vert – The Green Arch (VLAM) 



22. IQM Integral Quality Management for Milk (VLAM) 



23. BCV – Viande de veau - Belgian Controlled Veal (VLAM) 



o http://www.bcv-viandedeveau.be/ 

24. Pastorale Lamb (VLAM) 



o http://www.cra.wallonie.be/produits/agneau.htm 

25. IKB certified chicken (VLAM) 


26. Masterly: guarantee label for high quality meat products (VLAM) 



o http://www.cra.wallonie.be/produits/magistral.htm 

35

27. Potatoes: food safety through quality and traceability (VLAM) 


28. Coprosain 

o http://www.coprosain.be/ 

29. La Fermière de Méan 

o http://www.terroirwallon.be/FermiereMeanPRE.htm 

30. Westhoek Hoeveproducten 

o http://www.agromontpellier.fr/JAAM/files/Anne%20Vuylsteke%20universitaire%20be 

lge.pdf 

31. Agriculture Savoureuse 

o http://www.island.be/cuisine/herbe/cherbadresses.htm 

32. Stichting Streekproducten Vlaams-Brabant 

o http://www.streekproducten-vlaams-brabant.be/index.aspx 

33. Haspengouwse Streekproducten 

o http://www.streekproductenhaspengouw.be/streekproducten.htm 

34. Streekproducten provincie Oost-Vlaanderen 

o http://www.oostvlaanderen.be/economie/erov/content.cfm?doc_id=224 

35. Le Blanc Bleu Fermier 

o http://www.cra.wallonie.be/produits/BBF.htm 

36. Ambao'-label 

o www.mineco.fgov.be 

37. French fries - Quality label 'Bestfrit' 

o www.bestfrit.be 

3.1.2 Large scale retailers 

1. Carefour Belgium S.A. (Carrefour – GB) 

• Filières Qualité Carrefour 

o http://www.carrefourbelgium.be/Devdfilieresqualite.cfm?lang=fr 

o Link 

• Produit Carrefour 

o www.carrefourbelgium.be 

• Filières Qualité GB 

o www.gb.be 

o http://www.carrefourbelgium.be/Devdfilieresqualite.cfm?lang=fr 

2. Delhaize Group S.A. 

36

• Le marque Delhaize 

o www.delhaize.be 

3. ETN. FR. Colruyt NV 

• Boucherie – quality control 

o www.colruyt.be 

37

3.2 Germany 

3.2.1 Quality assurance schemes 

1. UNI EN ISO 9001:2000 

o www.iso.org 

2. UNI EN ISO 14001:2004 

o www.iso.org 



4. ISO 14040 – LCA 


5. OHSAS 18001 


6. SA 8000 


7. EurepGAP 


8. IFS 


9. QS Qualität und Sicherheit GmbH 

o http://www.q-s.info/en 

10. CMA-Gütezeichen Bestes vom Bauern 

o http://www.cma.de/index.php 

11. DLG Deutsche Landwirschafts Gesellschaft 

o http://www.dlg.org/de/index.html 

12. Sachsens Ährenwort 

o http://www.smul.sachsen.de/de/wu/sg/verbraucherservice/qualitaet_sac 

hsen/qualitaet_programm/aehrenwort/index.html 

13. Bergisch Pur 

o http://www.bergischpur.de/ 

14. Freisinger Land 

o http://www.freisinger-land.de/ 

15. Neuland - Verein für tiergerechte und umweltschonende Nutztierhaltung e.V. 

o http://www.neuland-fleisch.de/ 

38

16. Offene Stalltür 

o http://www.bayerischerbauernverband.de/sro.php?redid=6053 

o http://www.besh.de/html/produkte/rindgga.html 

17. Hohenloher Landgans 

o http://www.besh.de/html/produkte/hohenloher_landgans.html 

18. Sachsen Qualitätslammfleisch 

o http://www.smul.sachsen.de/de/wu/sg/verbraucherservice/qualitaet_sac 

hsen/qualitaet_herkunftszeichen/lammfleisch/index.html 

19. Obstland Sachsen Obst (Obstland Dürrweitzschen AG 

o http://www.obstland.de/Obstland_AG.htm 

20. Hohenloher Höfe 

o http://www.reginet.de/ri_daten/baw6.htm 

21. German Veal Quality Programme 

o http://www.maf.govt.nz/mafnet/rural-nz/sustainable-resource-use/bestmanagement-practices/on-farm-quality-assurance/saf983-15.htm 

22. HIPP 

o www.hipp.de 

23. Nestlé Alete 

o www.alete.de 

24. Bäuerliche Vermarktung Oberes Donautal e.G. (BODEG) 

o http://www.reginet.de/ri_daten/baw2.htm 

25. IGERO - Interessengemeinschaft Extensivrinderhaltung Osnabrück e.V. 

o http://www.igero.de/ 


1. Edeka 

• Backstube 

• Bancetto 

• Gemüse Küche 

• Gutfleisch 

• King’s Gold 

• Landgut 

• Mibell 

• Rio Grande 

• Schlemmer Küche 

39

o www.edeka.de 

o http://www.edeka.de/EDEKA/Content/DE/ForYou/EDEKAMarken/Q 

ualitaetsmarken/index.jsp 

2. Tengelmann 

o www.tengelmann.de 

• Birkenhof Deutsches Qualitätsrindfleisch Kaiser´s Tengelmann AG 

• A&P – Attraktiv und Preiswert 

o http://test.kaisers.de/exklusiv/aup_index.html 

3. Metro 

o www.metro-cc.com 

o http://www.metro24.de/ 

• METRO-Qualitätssicherung 

o http://www.metro24.de/cftemplates/lib/mcc24_get_page.cfm?CFID=2 

49300&CFTOKEN=22668553&START_PID=413&OpenLevel=413 

4. Rewe 

o www.rewe.de 

• Salto 

o http://www.rewe-salto.de/ 

• “ja!” 

• Erlenhof 

o http://www.rewe-erlenhof.de/ 

5. Spar 

• Private label 

o www.spar.de 

o http://www.spar.at/spar-at/angebote/sMarken/namen/lovely/index.html 

40

3.3 Italy 


1. UNI EN ISO 9001:2000 

o www.iso.org 

2. UNI EN ISO 14001:2004 

o www.iso.org 



4. ISO 14040 – LCA 


5. OHSAS 18001 


6. SA 8000 


7. EurepGAP 


8. IFS 


9. BRC 


10. UNI 10939:2001 

o www.uni.com 

11. UNI 11020:2002 

o www.uni.com 

12. Filiera controllata (DTP 035) 

o www.csqa.it/certificazioni/index.php?f_id=8&f_l1=2 

13. UNI 10854 - Linee guida per la progettazione e realizzazione sistema di 

autocontrollo basato sul metodo HACCP - 

o www.uni.com 

14. Documenti tecnici certificazione di prodotto accreditata 

o www.sincert.com 

41

15. QC Emilia Romagna L.R. 28/99 

o http://www.ermesagricoltura.it/wcm/ermesagricoltura/info_consumator 

i/sapori_valori/sezione_sapori_valori/s_qual_con.htm 

16. Agriqualità della Regione Toscana L.R.25/99 

o www.agriqualita.it/ 

17. VISA - Valutazione Igienica Stabilimenti Alimentari (AICQ ed. 2001) 

o www.aicq.it 

18. Q&S - Quality Safety Standard 

19. FAMI QS - Code of practice for FEED ADDITIVE 

o www.fami-qs.org 

20. I.P. (Identity Preserved) Program per Organismi non Geneticamente 

Modificati 

o http://fscs.clemson.edu/IP.html 

21. Codex Alimentarius - Principi Generali di Igiene degli Alimenti - CAC/RCP 

1-1969, Rev. 3 (1997) 

Recommended International Code Of Practice. General Principles Of Food 

Hygiene Hazard Analysis And Critical Control Point (Haccp) System And 

Guidelines For Its Application 

o www.codexalimentarius.net 

22. Melinda 

o www.melinda.it 

23. Carta qualità del Parco Nazionale delle Dolomiti Bellunesi 

o www.dolomitipark.it/italiano/carta_qualita.php 

24. Marchio di qualità per le aziende del Parco Nazionale del Pollino 

o www.parcopollino.it (Sezione “Ente di gestione”) 


1. Carrefour – GS 

a. Prodotto Carrefour 

i. Link_1 

b. Filiera Qualità Carrefour 

i. Link_2 

c. Viversano Filiera (GS) 

i. Link_3 

d. Scelto per voi GS (private label) 

i. Link_4 

42

2. Coop Italia 

a. Qualità sicura Coop (Fresh private label products) 

i. Link_5 

ii. Link_6 

b. Prodotti a marchio 

i. Link_7 

3. Conad 

a. P.Q.C. (Percorso Qualità Conad) 

i. Link_8 

b. Prodotti a marchio 

i. Link_9 

4. Auchan – Sma - Rinascente 

a. Prodotto Sma&Auchan 

i. Link_10 

b. Filiera Controllata 

i. Link_11 

5. Metro 

a. Selezione Metro 

i. Link_12 

b. Private labels for retailers, dealers and food shops 

i. Link_* 

6. Esselunga 

a. Linee Esselunga (private label) 

i. Esselunga 

o Link_13 

ii. Pronti in tavola 

o Link_14 

iii. Pronti da cuocere 

o Link_15 

b. Esselunga Naturama 

i. Link_16 

7. Sintesi/Despar 

a. Freschi e freschissimi (Despar) 

i. Link_17 

b. Prodotti Despar 

i. Link_18 

8. Crai 

a. Prodotti a marchio 

i. Link_19 

43

3.3.3 Large scale retailers – regional brands 

9. Carrefour 

a. Terre d’Italia 

i. Link_20 

44

3.4 Latvia 


1. UNI EN ISO 9001:2000 

o www.iso.org 

2. UNI EN ISO 14001:2004 

o www.iso.org 

3. ISO 14040 – LCA 


4. OHSAS 18001 


5. SA 8000 


6. EurepGAP 


7. IFS 


8. BRC 


9. SafetyCert® 

10. British Standard BS 8555:2003 

o www.bsi-global.com/Environmental/Management/bs8555.xalter 

11. Latvian Federation of Food Enterprises (LPUF) 

o www.lpuf.lv 

12. Latvian Traders Association 

o www.lta.lv 

13. Sea buckthorn growing 

14. Crayfish baby breeding 

15. Groats production Annele 

16. Regional dairy a/s Lazdonas piensaimnieks 

17. Mushroom production at individual enterprise Pārsla 

45

18. Medium size meat processing enterprise Ruks 

o www.ruks.lv/en 

19. Specialised cheese production by SIA “Franču gaume” 

More information about quality assurance/sustainability labels and certification 

schemes in Latvia is included in ANNEX B. 


1. Mego Chain 

2. Nelda 

3. Beta grocery 

4. Elvi 

5. Kesko 

6. RIMI Baltic 

www.ica.se 

www.kesko.fi 

www.rimi.no 

7. Vilnius Prekubos 

8. Sky supermarkets 

46

3.5 The Netherlands 


1. UNI EN ISO 9001:2000 

o www.iso.org 

2. UNI EN ISO 14001:2004 

o www.iso.org 



4. ISO 14040 – LCA 


5. OHSAS 18001 


6. SA 8000 


7. EUREPGAP 


8. IFS 


9. BRC 


10. Milieukeur 

o www.milieukeur.nl 

11. Peter’s Farm 

o www.petersfarm.com 

12. Rainbow Growers 

o www.rainbow-growers.nl 

13. The Green Nature Group 

o www.green-nature-group.nl/ 

14. Unilever, Sustainable Agriculture Initiative 

o http://www.unilever.com/Images/growing_tcm3-4579_tcm13-5333.pdf 

15. Green Heart Landshop co-operative U.A. 

o www.groenehartlandwinkel.nl 

o www.groenehartlandwinkel.nl/onzeproducten 

47

16. Waddengroep foundation 

o http://www.waddenproducten.nl/ 

17. Green Hat “gate between city and countryside” (Groene Hoed poort tussen 

stad en ommelanden) 

o http://www.groenehoed.nl/ 

18. KEMPER HOENDERS 

o http://www.kemperkip.com/ 

19. Gulpener (regional beer) 

o http://www.gulpener.nl/ 

20. Quality assurance farmdairy chain (Kwaliteitszorg Boerderijzuivelketen 

“KB”) 

o http://www.prodzuivel.nl/index.asp?frame=http%3A//www.prodzuivel 

.nl/pz/productschap/bestuur/benoemende%2520organisaties/subsidi%2 

5C3%25ABring.htm 


1. Albert Heijn BV (Ahold) 

a. AH Huismerk 

i. www.ah.nl/eigenmerken/ahhuismerk/ 

b. AH Excellent 

i. www.ah.nl/eigenmerken/ahexcellent/ 

c. AH Euro Shopper 

i. www.ah.nl/eigenmerken/euroshopper/ 

2. Super de Boer (Laurus) 

a. Super 

i. www.superdeboer.nl/Page/index.asp?ItemID=3691 

3. Edah (Laurus) 

a. Edah Huismerk 

i. www.edah.nl/Page/index.asp?ItemID=1010& 

4. C1000 

a. C1000 Selectie 

i. www.c1000.nl/default.asp?pd=2&pg=2&sp=0&rnd=6%2F6%2 

F2005+5%3A40%3A50+PM 

48

3.6 United Kingdom 


1. UNI EN ISO 9001:2000 

o www.iso.org 

2. UNI EN ISO 14001:2004 

o www.iso.org 

3. ISO 14040 – LCA 


4. OHSAS 18001 


5. SA 8000 


6. EurepGAP 


7. IFS 


8. BRC 


9. The Red Tractor (British Farm Standard) 

o www.redtractor.org.uk 

10. Scottish Quality Cereals (QAS) 

o http://www.sqcereals.co.uk/main.asp 

11. Assured Produce Scheme (APS) 

o http://www.assuredproduce.co.uk/Aproduce/ 

12. LEAF 

o www.leafuk.org/LEAF 

13. Assured British Meat 

o www.abm.org.uk 

14. Assured Chicken Production (ACP) 

o www.assuredchicken.org.uk 

15. Assured Combinable Crops Scheme (ACC) 

o www.assuredcrops.co.uk/ACCS 

49

16. Farm Assured British Beef and Lamb (FABBL) 

o http://www.fabbl.co.uk/ 

17. Farm Assured British Pigs(FABPIG) 

o http://www.assuredpigs.co.uk/pigs/ 

18. Farm Assured Welsh Livestock (FAWL) 

19. National Dairy Farm Assured Scheme (NDFAS) 

o www.ndfas.org.uk 

20. Scottish Borders in Traceability And Assurance Group (SBTAG) 

21. Scottish Quality Beef and Lamb Assurance (SQBLA) 

o www.sqbla.org.uk/frame.htm 

22. Scottish Pig Industry Initiative (SPII) 

o www.scottishqualitypork.com 

23. Food From Britain 

o www.foodfrombritain.com/speciality_food.html 

24. Frome Farmers’ Market 

25. Tastes of Anglia 

o www.tastesofanglia.com 

26. IGD ECR Scorecard 

o www.igd.com/homepage.asp 

27. LANTRA Skill Check 

o www.lantra.co.uk 

28. Quality Meat Scotland (QAS) 

o http://www.qmscotland.co.uk/ 


1. Tesco 

• TESCO Nature’s Choice 

o http://www.tescofarming.com/navigate.php?go=cop2&where=a 

2. Sainsbury’s Supermarket Ltd 

• Farm Biodiversity Action Plans 

o http://www.sainsbury.co.uk/biodiversity 

o http://www.fwag.org.uk 

o Farm Biodiversity Action Plans (Sainsbury).PDF 

50

• Animal welfare - Lloyd Maunders line ,Devonshire Chicken (produttore, 

prodotto) - RSPCA Freedom Food 

o http://www.j-sainsbury.co.uk/csr/index.asp?pageid=56 

o http://www.rspca.org.uk/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RSPCA/RSPCAR 

edirect&pg=FreedomFoodHomepage 

3. ASDA Stores Ltd 

http://www.asda.co.uk/asda_corp/scripts/homePage.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@202 

0181344.1115020977@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccceadddmefehlecfkfcfkjdgoodgjg.0 

&intCatOID=- 

8943&bodyNavPath=/scripts/allaboutasda/aaMainPage.jsp&imgName=http://graphic 

s.asda.com/ASDA_Corp/topNavImages/but004_off.gif&imgWelcome=http://graphics 

.asda.com/ASDA_Corp/topNavImages/welcome005.gif&NotToCache=0 

• ASDA Brand (a range of 'best in market' everyday food and general 

merchandise items at ASDA Price, satisfying our customers’ shopping needs) 

• Good for you! (a credible range of great tasting foods with lower fat content 

than standard ASDA Brand alternatives) 

• Extra Special (ASDA's premium food brand) 

• More For Kids (a range of healthier, fun products for kids across Food, Health 

& Beauty) 

4. Morrison plc – Safeway plc 

o http://www.morrisons.co.uk/129.asp 

List of private labels used to identify different typologies of products 

� Morrisons Quality and Value 

� Morrisons “The Best” 

� Eat smart 

� Free From 

51

ANNEX A – DESCRIPTION OF QUALITY ASSURANCE/SUSTAINABILITY 

LABELS AND CERTIFICATION SCHEMES 

Common quality assurance schemes 

QUALITY ASSURANCE SCHEMES 

UNI EN ISO 9001:2000 Quality management systems – Requirements 

Country of origin: International 

Diffusion of the scheme in the various countries: International 

Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: ISO/TC 176 “Quality 

management and quality assurance” 

Proposer typology: organisation for standardization 

Certification / inspection body typology: scheme requiring the compliance with EN 

45012, and the accreditation of the certification body by third-party subject 

Target: consumer and food-chain operator 

Relevant requirement typologies: 

- Plant-related requirements NO 

- HACCP plan NO 

- Quality management system YES 

- Environmental management system NO 

- Traceability system YES 

- Environmental impact control NO 

- Recommendations on good practices (GMP, GLP, GAP, BAT) NO 

- Occupational Health and Safety Management System NO 

- Product control YES 

- Process control YES 

- Personnel YES 

- Continual improvement YES 

- Management motivation YES 

UNI EN ISO 14001:2004 Environmental management systems – Requirements 

with guidance for use 



Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: ISO/TC 207 

“Environmental management” 



45012 and the accreditation of the certification body by third-party subject 





- Quality management system NO 

52

- Environmental management system YES 

- Traceability system NO 

- Environmental impact control YES 

- Recommendations on good practices (GMP, GLP, GAP, BAT) YES 


- Product control NO 



- Continual improvement YES 

- Management motivation YES 

Environmental Prouct Declarations (EPD) 

Country of origin: Sweden, 1997 

Diffusion of the scheme in the various countries: Belgium, Finland, Italy, Norway, 

Poland, Sweden 

Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: Swedish 

Environmental Management Council 

Proposer typology: Swedish industry 

Certification / inspection body typology: scheme requiring the accreditation of the 

certification body by third-party subject and the compliance with specific rule for the 

certification body 



An environmental product declaration, EPD, is defined as "quantified 

environmental data for a product with pre-set categories of parameters based 

on the ISO 14040 series of standards, but not excluding additional 

environmental information". 

The overall goals of an EPD is, "through communication of verifiable and 

accurate information, that is not misleading, on environmental aspects of 

products and services, to encourage the demand for and supply of those 

products and services that cause less stress on the environment, thereby 

stimulating the potential for market-driven continuous environmental 

improvement". 

The intent of an EPD is to provide the basis of a fair comparison of products 

by the products' environmental performance. They can reflect the continuous 

environmental improvement of products over time and are able to 

communicate and add up relevant environmental information along a product's 

value chain. 

UNI EN ISO 14040 – Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - 

Principles and framework 


Diffusion of the scheme in the various countries: EU 

53

Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: TC 207/SC 5/WG 6 

Cycle assessement 







ISO 14040 specifies the general framework, principles and requirements for 

conducting and reperting life cycle assessment studies. This international 

standard does not describe the life cycle assessment technique in detail. 

OHSAS 18001 Occupational Health and Safety Zone 



Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: OHSAS 18001 was 

created via a concerted effort from a number of the worlds leading national standards 

bodies, certification bodies, and specialist consultancies. 

Proposer typology: various relevant international subjects 






The OHSAS specification is applicable to any organisation that wishes to: 

• Establish an OH&S management system to eliminate or minimise risk to 

employees and other interested parties who may be exposed to OH&S 

risks associated with its activities 

• Assure itself of its conformance with its stated OH&S policy 

• Demonstrate such conformance to others 

• Implement, maintain and continually improve an OH&S management 

system 

• Make a self-determination and declaration of conformance with this 

OHSAS specification. 

• Seek certification/registration of its OH&S management system by an 

external organisation 

54

Social Accountability 8000 

Country of origin: U.S.A. 


Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: SAI – Social 

Accountability International 

Proposer typology: Nonprofit organization dedicated to the development, 

implementation and oversight of voluntary verifiable social accountability standards 






Social Accountability 8000 (SA8000) is a voluntary standard for workplaces 

based on ILO (International Labour Organization) and other human rights 

conventions. Its independent verification method draws many key elements 

from the widely accepted quality management system certification in the ISO 

programs. 

The official standard is based on the following requirements: 

1. Child Labor 

2. Forced Labor 

3. Health and Safety 

4. Freedom of Association and Right to Collective Bargaining 

5. Discrimination 

6. Discipline 

7. Working Hours 

8. Compensation 

9. Management Systems 

EurepGAP General regulations – Fruit and vegetables 

Country of origin: Europe 

Diffusion of the scheme in the various countries: UE 

Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: Euro Retailer 

Produce Working Group 

Proposer typology: european retailer organisation 


45011) and accreditation of the certification body by third-party subject. 

Target: food-chain operator 


The scope of Eurep GAP Standard – Fruit and vegetables – covers all those 

fresh, unprocessed agricultural products of plant origin grown for human 

consumption. 

The EurepGAP Standard has been developed to help farmers and growers to 

become more fully aware of the Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) in 

operation in the countries where the product will be or is likely to be sold. 

Growers can demonstrate that their produce meets these Country of 

Destination MRL requirements particularly if the regimes are stricter than 

those in the country of production. EurepGAP stresses the importance of 

55

esidue screening and it provides further re-assurance where the exact 

destination of the product is not known. 

International Food Standard – IFS version 4 

Country of origin: Germany 


Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: HDE (Hauptverband 

des Deutschen Einzelhandels). In 2003, French food retailers (and wholesalers) from 

the FCD (Fédération des entreprises du Commerce et de la Distribution) have joined 

the IFS Working Group and have contributed to development of IFS version 4. 

Proposer typology: German (2003 French) food retailers group 

Certification / inspection body typology: sheme requiring the compliance with EN 

45011 and accreditation of the certification body by third-party subject. 



IFS has been designed as an uniform tool to ensure food safety and to monitor 

the quality level of producers of retailer branded food products. The standard 

can apply for all steps of the processing of foods subsequent to their 

agricultural production. 

The list of requirements of the International Food Standard (IFS) deals with 

five main subjects: 

- Management of the Quality System 

- Management Responsibility 

- Resource Management 

- Product Realisation 

- Measurements, Analyses, Improvements 

BRC Global standard 

Country of origin: Great Britain 

Diffusion of the scheme in the various countries: UE 

Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: British Retail 

Consortium 

Proposer typology: British retailer organisation 


45011 and accreditation of the certification body by third-party subject. 



- Plant-related requirements YES 

- HACCP plan YES 

- Quality management system YES 



- Environmental impact control YES 

- Recommendations on good practices (GMP, GLP, GAP, BAT)YES 

- Occupational Health and Safety Management System YES NO 

56

- Product control YES 



- Continual improvement NO 

- Management motivation NO 

57

Belgium 

EQWALIS Produits de Wallonie (Coop'pass - Pass'por, Porc Fleuri, Fruitnet, La 

Bleue des Prés, Le Poulet 'CoqArd', Le Poulet de chair, Le Porc Plein Air, Le 

Porc Fermier). 

Country of origin: Belgium 

Diffusion of the scheme in the various countries: Belgium 

Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: Minister of 

Agriculture 

Proposer typology: Statal administration 

Certification / inspection body typology: scheme requiring with specific rule and the 

third party inspection by certification body 

Target: consumer 


Coop'pass - Pass'por 

The pigs all are produced by stockbreeders gathered within a co-operative 

named COOP' PASS. 

They follow a schedule of conditions which is the basic element of the safety 

and the traceability of the product. 

Thanks to this schedule, it is possible to follow in an effective way all the 

history of the animals: birthplace, parents, place of breeding, but also with 

which food they were nourished, which possible treatments they received, etc 

Porc Fleuri 

The meat must come from an animal of the Piétrain type, characterized by 

spots on the dress made up of black hairs, with in periphery of the spot a 

mixture of black hair and white hairs, and small drawn up ears. 

All the animals are resistant to the stress. 

In addition to a control and a total traceability, the characters of the Piétrain 

race allow also the visual follow-up of the animals. 

This pig is produced in natural conditions controlled, nonintensive, preserving 

its wellbeing and its comfort. The food is containing minimum 70% of local 

cereals, without additive, growth promoter, lubricates or animal flour. 

Fruitnet 

They are apples and pears resulting from the Walloon soil, obtained according 

to a way of production integrated privileging the respect of the environment. 

The integrated fruit-bearing production implements specific farming 

techniques making it possible to obtain fruits of quality: 

− Limited and regulated use insecticidal, acaricide, fungicidal products and 

weedkillers; 

− Reintroduction of useful auxiliary fauna (birds, insects,…); 

− Adjustment of the environment (late nesting boxes, hedges, mowings,…) 

to support the presence of auxiliary fauna in the orchard. 

The fruits are cultivated according to the schedule of conditions relating to the 

integrated fruit-bearing production, approved by the Walloon Area (Decree of 

58

VLAM 

the Walloon Government of the 29/04/2004). They also meet the Eurep-Gap 

standards defined by the sector of the great distribution at the European level. 

A specific system of traceability and labelling makes possible to find for each 

batch of fruit all information relating to the product, from the production to 

marketing. 

La Bleue des Prés 

They are animals of Belgian Blue Blanc race of sex female born in Belgium, 

old at least of 30 and to the 72 months the maximum at the time of demolition 

and having profited from at least 2 seasons from pasture. 

These conditions of breeding lead to a meat more spotted (fattier) and more 

sunk with a very rich taste. 

All the elements and events “are traced” in the optics of total quality. 

Le Poulet 'CoqArd' 

It is the fruit of the union of the expertise veterinary surgeon and the tradition 

of the Walloon soil. 

Ardennes race chickens are bred in freedom during 84 days in a natural, 

comfortable environment and undergo permanent and rigorous control. 

Le Poulet de chair 

It is about a farm chicken resulting from a stock with slow growth, nourished 

naturally with cereals, without animal flours and fats, without antibiotic, nor 

another growth promoter. 

The conditions of breeding have as a consequence a firm flesh and an 

incomparable savor. 

Le Porc Plein Air 

The “Porc Plein Air” of Ardenne results from the traditional races resistant to 

the stress and rigorously selected for the tasty meat. 

Its diet is composed of a positive food list GMO free” and is exclusively 

vegetable, with minimum 75% of cereals. 

These conditions of breeding make the meat tasty and tender. 

Le Porc Fermier 

The breeding of the farm pig is characterized by a particular attention with the 

wellbeing of the animals, ensured by: 

− a cattle shed quite ventilated and with natural light 

− a minimal surface per pig 

− a good bed surface (clean and dry) 

A healthy and controlled food, composed mainly of cereals and GMO free 

food, ensures slow growth that guarantees a tasty meat. 

Animal and fish flours, animal fats, hormones and antibiotics are forbidden. 

Country of origin: Belgium 

Diffusion of the scheme in the various countries: Belgium 

Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: VLAM 

59

Proposer typology: Vlam is a non-profit organisation promoting the sale, the added 

value, the consumption and the image of products and services of the Flemish 

agriculture, horticulture, fishery and agro-alimentary sector in Belgium and abroad. It 

is commissioned by the business community and by the Flemish government and 

cooperates actively with as many links in the food chain as possible. 

Certification / inspection body typology: NA 



Flandria: Quality Vegetables Approved by Nature 

FLANDRIA vegetables are of impeccable quality and taste delicious. 

Furthermore they are grown with respect for the environment and are 

perfectly traceable from consumer to grower. 

Certus – Meritus – BCV – Pastorale – Masterly 

In Belgium, the monitoring to food safety is managed by an umbrella 

organisation, The Federal Agency for the Safety of the Food Chain (FAVV). 

This ensures integrated statutory checks from raw materials to consumers, and 

provides a general basic guarantee for all products. 

The meat sector puts a great deal of effort into guaranteeing the quality of its 

products applying: 

• Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) 

• Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) 

• Quality schemes 

The Green Arch: Fruit and Vegetables in Harmony with Nature 

The Green Arch is a leading brand for planet-friendly fruit and vegetables. 

All products with this label are grown by producers who comply with strict 

regulations about natural production methods. 

Requirements: 

• Production specifications: Each grower meticulously registers all 

conditions in which its fruit and vegetables are produced. If the 

specifications and the growing process are not consistent, the products are 

no longer eligible for the 'Green Arch' quality label. 

• External inspection by independent approved laboratories 

• Full traceability. 

IQM – Integral Quality Management for Milk 

IQM, Integral Quality Assurance Milk, is a guarantee system for quality and 

food safety in the dairy chains. 

The IQM certificate guarantees good agricultural practice in dairy farming. 

The specifications describe more than 100 guarantee points in five essential 

components of the milk production method: 

• animal health 

• animal welfare 

• milk extraction 

• purification 

• environment. 

60

Milk extraction, milk transport, milk collection, purification, the procedure for 

drivers and identification of suppliers is guaranteed in the transport, 

traceability, safety and hygiene link in a good transport practice manual. 

Control is effected by an independent accredited organization. 

IKB certified chicken 

Requirements not available. 

Potatoes 

Requirements not available. 

61

Germany 

QS Qualität und Sicherheit GmbH 


Diffusion of the scheme in the various countries: Germany, Italy, Luxemburg, Poland, 

Denmark 

Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: 

Deutscher Raiffeisenverband e. V. (Stufe Futtermittel) 

Deutscher Bauernverband e. V. (Stufe Landwirtschaft) 

Verband der Fleischwirtschaft e. V. (Stufe Schlachtung und Zerlegung) 

Bundesverband der Deutschen Fleischwarenindustrie e. V. (Stufe 

Fleischwarenindustrie) 

Handelsvereinigung für Marktwirtschaft (Stufe Lebensmitteleinzelhandel) 

CMA Centrale Marketing-Gesellschaft der deutschen Agrarwirtschaft mbH 

(für die Kommunikation mit dem Verbraucher) 

Proposer typology: Feed industry, Farms, Agricultural Coordinator, Meat industry, 

Retail Food Trade, Processing Companies, Wholesale Companies 

Certification / inspection body typology: Scheme requiring the compliance of the 

certification body with EN 45011; certification and ispection can be done by third– 

party subjects and QS. 



QS is a quality assurance system for food products which covers all stages of the 

product lifetime, starting with meat and meat products. Only joint implementation at 

all stages make it possible to create an effective system covering all areas which will 

secure quality and safety at all levels of the meat production and processing chain. 

QS is a comprehensive system, not only in terms of the stages which it covers, but 

also with regard to the range of products examined. It is the quality assurance and 

control system for the total range of meat and meat products and applies for veal and 

beef products in exactly the same way as for pork and mutton and their derivatives. 

The QS standards apply for both domestic and imported products. QS specifies that 

there should be reliable documentation and self-assessment at all stages of the 

production and distribution process. The effectiveness of the self-testing is then 

checked by means of independent controls. QS includes all process levels in the 

monitoring and testing process and this results in a convincing system of controls 

which extend from the stable to the shop counter. The system is built on fixed and 

uniform standards. 

CMA-Gütezeichen Bestes vom Bauern 


Diffusion of the scheme in the various countries: Germany 

Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: CMA 

Proposer typology: Organization of German agricultural industries 

Certification / inspection body typology: Scheme requiring the compliance of the 

certification body with specific rules; certification and ispection can be done by third– 

party subjects and CMA. 

62



More then 40 umbrella organisations representing the German food and agricultural 

industry and the retail and processing sectors are shareholders in CMA. These cover 

the entire food chain from the farm to the plate. CMA is a private limited company. 

Its articles of association prohibit it from conducting transactions of its own involving 

commodities. CMA's official bodies are: 

• the shareholder board 

• the supervisory board 

• the board of management 

These are advised by the coordinating advisory council and 17 committees (14 

products, 3 specialists), which ensure that in all its activities CMA benefits from the 

experience and expertise of the entire food and agricultural industry. 

CMA is mainly financed by German agriculture through the Sales Promotion Fund. 

DLG Deutsche Landwirschafts Gesellschaft 



Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: Deutsche 

Landwirschafts Gesellschaft 

Proposer typology: Accreditation/certification body 

Certification / inspection body typology: self-referential scheme 



The DLG promotes the product quality of foods on the basis of impartial and binding 

quality standards. Its quality understanding is based on current scientific findings and 

self-developed, recognised methods. With its international competitions the DLG is 

Europe’s leader in quality assessment. 

The DLG tests compound feed, ensiling agents, cleaning, disinfecting and udder 

hygiene agents, as well as disinfecting agents for animal housing and lime fertilisers. 

Following successful testing in accordance with the high DLG standards, a DLG 

quality label is awarded. The quality specifications are geared to requirements from 

practice and are in line with the latest scientific findings. 

Sachsens Ährenwort 


Diffusion of the scheme in the various countries: Germany –Sachsen Region 

Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: NA 

Proposer typology: Association of agricultural producers 

Certification / inspection body typology: Scheme requiring the compliance with 

specific rules and inspection by third-party subjects 



The scheme requires. 

• the implementation of a traceability system of the supply chain from field 

to table 

63

Bergisch Pur 

• a quality system 

• the control of the impact of products and activities on the environment. 



Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: Bergisch Pur 

Proposer typology: Association of agricultural mountain producers 


specific rules and inspection by third-party subjects 


Relevant requirement typologies: Certification regarding agri-food products produced 

in the region of “Bergischen Landes”. 

Requirements: 

• All the steps of the production process take place in the region of 

Bergischen Landes; 

• Extensive livestock farming; 

• Minimum guaranteed room for livestock; 

• Over 70% feedstuffs produced in the farm; 

• Environmental impact control. 

Freisinger Land 




Proposer typology: Group of five different subjects: 

Church 

Consumers 

Environmental association 

Agricultural producers 

Bakery and mill operators 


specific rules; certification and ispection can be done by Freisinger Land auditors 

and/or third–party subjects. 


Relevant requirement typologies: Certification regarding agri-food products produced 

in the region of Freisinger Land. 

Requirements: 

• All the steps of the production process take place in the region of 

Freisinger Land 

• Extensive livestock farming; 

• 100% of cattle feed produced in the region; 

• Minimum guaranteed room for livestock; 

• Limited number of hens per farm; 

• Environmental impact control. 

64

Neuland 

Country 

of origin: Germany 

Diffusion of the scheme in the 

various countries: Germany 

Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: 

Arbeitsgemeinschaft 

Bäuerliche Landwirtschaft e.V. (ABL), Deutscher Tierschutzbund (DTschB), BUKO- 

Agrar Koordination Bundeskongreß Entwicklungspolitischer Aktionsgruppen, BUND 

Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz Deutschland 

Proposer typology: Association of different kinds of subjects 

Certification / inspection body typology: Scheme requiring 

the compliance with 

specific rules; certification and ispection by Neuland e.V. 



The schemes includes a quality management system based on controls 

regarding animal welfare, feed, breeding system, transport and slaughter 

methods. 

Other requirements: 

- maximum number of animals for each farm and typology; 

- environmental impact control. 

65

Italy 

UNI 10939 – Sistema di rintracciabilità nelle filiere agroalimentari – Prinicipi 

generali per la progettazioene e l’attuazione 

Country of origin: Italy 

Diffusion of the scheme in the various countries: Italy 

Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: UNI – Commissione 

“Alimenti e bevande” 








- Quality management system NO 



- Environmental impact control NO 

- Recommendations on good practices (GMP, GLP, GAP, BAT) NO 


- Product control NO 


- Personnel NO 

- Continual improvement NO 

- Management motivation NO 

UNI 11020:2002 Sistema di rintracciabilità nelle aziende agroalimentari - 

Principi e requisiti per l'attuazione 



Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: UNI – Ente 

Nazionale Italiano di Unificazione 






The scheme is appliable to all the agro-food chain levels. It regulates 

requirements for an internal traceability system for farms and agro-food 

industries. 

The most important elements of the scheme can be summed up as follows: 

- The identification of the products for which the traceability is guaranteed. 

- The way of identification and registration of raw materials and suppliers. 

- The registration of the physical flow of products and materials. 

66

- The registration of the materials used for each product batch and of the 

destination of each product batch. 

DTP 035 – Filera controllata 



Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: CSQA 


Certification / inspection body typology: sheme requiring the accreditation of the 

certification body by third-party subject. 



The Italian certification institute specialised in the food and agriculture sector, 

originated in 2000 the voluntary standard (DTP 035) for companies that want 

to offer their customers safety guarantees going beyond the limits enforced by 

the law. Products bearing this certification respect two fundamental 

requirements: 

− product traceability, guaranteed and documented throughout the 

production chain, “from the farm to the table”, in a stricter fashion 

compared to the standards established in EC regulation 178/02; 

− hygienic-sanitary requirements, managed and controlled according to 

HACCP criteria, in all stages of production chain. 

L.R. 28 ottobre 1999, n.28 Valorizzazione dei prodotti agricoli ed alimentari 

ottenuti con tecniche rispettose dell’ambiente e della salute dei consumatori. 

Abrogazione delle leggi regionali N. 29/92 e N.51/95 (QC – Qualità Controllata) 


Diffusion of the scheme in the various countries : Italy 

Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: Giunta regionale 

Emilia Romagna 

Proposer typology: Regional government 


45011 



- Integrated pest management (IPM), based on environmental respect, low 

residues, limited use of pesticides, fertilizers and water. 

- The label can be used by farms, agro-food industries and retailers 

complying with the IPM rules provided by Emilia Romagna Region. 

L.R. 15 aprile 1999, n.25 Norme per la valorizzazione dei prodotti agricoli ed 

alimentari ottenuti con tecniche di produzione integrata e tutela contro la 

pubblicità ingannevole. 


67


Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: Regione Toscana 

Proposer typology: Regional government 

Certification / inspection body typology: scheme requiring the compliance with 45011 

Target: consmer 

Relevuant requirement typologies: 

Il marchio Agriqualità identifica, certifica e promuove i prodotti agroalimentari 

realizzati con le tecniche dell'agricoltura integrata e le più sicure pratiche di 

conservazione e confezionamento. 

È un marchio di filiera che segue, dalla terra alla tavola, l'intero processo produttivo; i 

controlli previsti dal marchio Agriqualità garantiscono la tracciabilità del prodotto, 

l'assenza totale di Organismi Geneticamente Modificati, il rispetto dell’ambiente e la 

sicurezza dei prodotti. 

Il marchio Agriqualità difende la biodiversità e la fertilità del territorio, toscano, 

valorizza e promuove un sistema di produzione di qualità ad alta sostenibilità, crea 

nuove opportunità per prodotti di largo consumo da commercializzare a prezzi non 

proibitivi ma remunerativi per chi li produce. 

68

Latvia 

SafetyCert®: 1998 (UK based schemes developed by BVQI itself for certification 

of Occupational Health & Safety Systems against the requirements of BS 8800 & 

OHSAS 18001). 

b) Country of origin: International 

c) Diffusion of the scheme in the various countries: International 

d) Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: Certification 

bodies also published their own standards: BVQI published SafetyCert in 

1998. 

e) Proposer typology: various relevant international subjects 

f) Certification / inspection body typology: scheme requiring the accreditation of 

the certification body by third-party subject 

g) Target: consumer and food-chain operator 

h) Relevant requirement typologies: 

• risk management planning and control planning 

• management of regulatory aspects 

• training, competency and awareness activities - probably the most 

important element in the long term 

• operational control measures; 

• subcontractors management 

• emergency and contingency management 

• OH&S management performance monitoring and evaluations 

• management of change 

British Standard BS 8555:2003 Environmental management systems. Guide to 

the phased implementation of an environmental management system including 

the use of environmental performance evaluation 

a) Country of origin: Great Britain 

b) Diffusion of the scheme in the various countries: International 

c) Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: BSI British 

Standard 

d) Proposer typology: organisation for standardisation 

e) Certification / inspection body typology: scheme requiring the certification 

body by third-party subject. 

f) Target: consumer and food-chain operator 

g) Relevant requirement typologies: 

- Environmental management system 

- Environmental impact control 

- Recommendations on good practices (GMP, GLP, GAP, BAT) 

- Process control 

- Personnel 

- Continual improvement 

- Management motivation 

- 

69

In Latvia most of the companies which have already implemented EMS 

(environmental management system), are large. The majority of Latvian industries are 

represented by small and medium size enterprises that generate a lot of pollution. 

Many small and medium size enterprises want to improve their environmental 

performance, but don’t know where to start or where to obtain reliable and good 

quality advice. Small and medium size enterprises also face certain difficulties while 

implementing a formal management system, such as limited human and financial 

resources, difficulty and effectively implementing the requirements of ISO 14001. 

The British standard BS 8555 makes particular reference to small and medium sized 

enterprises. It helps in reducing of bureaucracy and excessive documentation. 

BS 8555 breaks ISO 14001 implementation down into five individual phases 

(planning, legal compliance, development, implementation, auditing), each of which 

can be separately achieved and externally recognised as such. A sixth phase 

(certification) allows companies to seek certification to the ISO 14001 standard. 

Latvian Federation of Food Enterprises (LPUF) 

Country of origin: Latvia 

Diffusion of the scheme in the various countries: Latvia 

Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: The Latvian 

Federation of Food Enterprises is a union of multi-branched professional 

associations and enterprises. 

Propose typology: professional associations and enterprises 


specific rules for the certification 



• The Latvian Federation of Food Enterprises is the place where producers 

of food and beverages can obtain useful information for further 

development of the sphere of activities they are engaged into, as well as 

make themselves familiar with the state of affairs regarding the current 

situation in the food and beverage industry in Latvia and other European 

countries. 

• In order to represent and protect the interests of separate industries more 

properly, LPUF is organizing work groups, which discuss and take 

decisions on topical issues concerning food industry as well as tries to 

reach the best solutions for problematic situations. The decisions taken by 

the work groups are further on delivered to the decision-making 

institutions. 

The general functions of Latvian Federation of Food Enterprises are 

• To represent Latvian food producers in the European Confederation of the 

Food and Drink Industries; 

• To provide cooperation among Latvian food producers and governmental and 

nongovernmental organizations of the Republic of Latvia; 

• To ensure coordination of the collaboration activities among Food Industries 

and the Council of the Ministry of Agriculture, the Council of Experts of Food 

Industries and the Council of National economics of the Ministry of Economy 

70

of the Republic of Latvia as well as performs the function of the secretariat to 

ensure proper cooperation of the mentioned councils. 

• To manage implementation of all strategic and functional aims of the Latvian 

Federation of Food Enterprises. 

Latvian Traders Association 



Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: the members of 

Latvian Traders Association 

Proposer typology: producers, wholesalers and retail sellers, social catering 

establishments 

Certification/inspection body typology: Scheme requiring the compliance with 

specific rules for the certification 



• to have professional explanation and advice from specialists about 

laws’ implementation in practice and any other essential and actual 

issue connected with trade; 

• to be represented if unreasonable trade barriers are implemented and 

pressure was made and have assistance in resolving conflicts; 

• to discuss and propose changes in laws; 

• to gain support in provision of fair competition; 

• to use the representation of LTA in the consultative Councils and nongovernmental 

professional unions for the promotion of 

entrepreneurship; 

• to develop professional skills in seminars and courses organized by 

LTA; 

• to receive regular reports about the activities of LTA and other 

information useful for work purposes; 

• to take part in contests, sport festivities, and other extracurricular 

activities organized by LTA. 

Sea buckthorn growing 

Sea buckthorn (sbt) has been introduced in Baltics as a cultivated plant in 1984. 

Observations of trial plantations in Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania allowed determining 

sbt climatypes suitable for growing in moderate maritime climatic conditions. There 

are 550 ha of sbt commercial plantations in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Five new 

baltic sbt cultivars have been bred. Sea buckthorn varieties are developed in Dobele 

Horticultural Plant Breeding Experimental Station (www.ddsis.lv). Some of sea 

buckthorn growers are offered to different kind of sea buckthorn products, example, 

oil, etc. Dobele Horticultural Plant Breeding Experimental Station has experimental 

processing plant which specialists try to prepare different kind of new sea buckthorn 

products: juices, jams and jellies. Some of buckthorn growers sell sea buckthorn to 

pharmacy enterprises. Generally pharmacies prepared special medicine. 


71

Crayfish baby breeding 

One of non-traditional agricultural sector is crayfish breeding. From 1998 in Latvia 

was started to crayfish baby breeding. The breeding of crayfish is concentrated in 

three centres. One of biggest of them is situated near Liepāja (West part of Latvia). 

Every year totally are rearing more than 2-3 tons of crayfish. The crayfish baby 

breeding centres cooperate with private crayfish baby breeders. After crayfish 

breeder’s data, they will plan to start to export the crayfish to Finland in next year. 

Financing from the EU structural funds the aquaculture enterprises will attract 

financial means for modernisation of fish and crayfish breeding equipment and 

technologies. After date of Latvian Fishery Association, the crayfish breeding in 

Latvia has an initial stage. Target: consumer 

Groats production Annele 

Bread product production unit Annele is located in Aizkraukle (Aizkraukles district) 

and specialized in production of rye and wheat bread and confectionary. Annele was 

founded in 1988. The total number of employees in “Annele” is 40. Food and 

Veterinary Service recognize the bread production “Annele”, and the hygiene 

requirements in Annele correspond to Latvian legislation regarding to production of 

food. 


Regional dairy a/s Lazdonas piensaimnieks 

Joint-Stock company “Lazdonas piensaimnieks” is located near Madona (Madonas 

district), and specialize to production more than 30 milk products: whole milk 

products, cottage cheese, butter, sour and sweet cream, soft cheeses, and milk 

desserts. Lazdonas piensaimnieks was founded in 1993 as independent dairy factory 

in Latvia. According to Latvian legislation, HACCP system is implemented and 

certificate in JSC Lazdonas piensaimnieks. 


Mushroom production at individual enterprise Pārsla 

The enterprise Pārsla is located in district Preiļi (Eastern part of Latvia). The 

enterprise specialized in production of products of organic agriculture. The 

specialisation of enterprise is freeze berries, mushrooms and snails (screws). The 

production of previous mentioned products based on the requirements of EU 

legislation 2092/91/EEC. The products produce in Pārsla is label “Latvian 

Ecoproduct". The label ”Latvian Ecoproduct” is competent to be used only by the 

producers certified according to organic agriculture demands. Production, processing, 

packaging, transporting and marketing of the “Latvian Ecoproduct” is under strict 

control. 


72

Medium size meat processing enterprise Ruks 

Joint-Stock Company “RUKS – Cēsu Gaļas Kombināts” was founded in 1927 and has 

still remained its location and some external walls. In 2003, with the help of SAPARD 

Programme, Company launched new slaughterhouse and cutting department, which is 

built in correspondence with all European Union regulations and requirements. 

Slaughterhouse has gained EU certification, which allows exporting to the other EU 

member countries. 

Quality verification is done electronically; therefore it eliminates the possibility of 

human error, when setting the category of carcasses and later on making the payment 

for the corresponding meat. 

Thanks to the professional personnel, amount of meat sales are increasing monthly. 

This is due to the fact that the company, can offer for every client individually cut and 

pre-packed meat products. 

In order to successfully operate in the market and keep up with the newest trends, 

RUKS – Cēsu Gaļas Kombināts is continuously working on developing new product 

segments. One of the latest innovations was ostrich meat, which is obtained from the 

slaughtering in Latvia grown ostriches. For this purpose, it was necessary to achieve 

specific licence, which was successfully settled in June 2004. 

Ruks specialize in production of different kind of meat products from beef and pork, 

example, fillet, collar, ham, brisket without ribs, and also specialize in production of 

different kind of sausages, example, emulsion type, smoked sausages, salami, etc. 

According to Latvian legislation, HACCP system is implemented in JSC RUKS and 

third part authority realized certification process. 


Specialised cheese production by SIA “Franču gaume” 

Cheese production unit is located in Eleja (Bauskas district), which specialized in 

production of soft cheeses “Saint Marcelin”. The owner of SIA “Franču gaumē” is 

French (Lusjen Eriber). Owner sells the cheese to small retail shops (in Eleja, Bauskas 

distric) and in different restaurants located in Rig). The amount of cheese production 

is still small and do not exceed more that 50 kg per day. Food and Veterinary Service 

recognize the cheese production SI “Franču gaumē”, and the hygiene requirements in 

production correspond to Latvian legislation regarding to production of food. 


73


Peter’s farm 

Country of origin: The Netherlands 

Diffusion of the scheme in the various countries: The Netherlands 


Proposer typology: Consortium of agricultural producers 


specific rules and the third-party inspection by certification body 



High animal welfare, rest and the freedom for the calves result in the high quality and 

delicious taste of the Peter`s Farm ® veal. Maximum Food Safety is guaranteed and the 

openness of Peter`s Farm offers you traceability of the products back to the farm. 

The scheme is based on five requirments: 

• Quality 

• Animal welfare 

• Traceability 

• Security 

• Open Information. 

Rainbow growers 



Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: Rainbow Growers 

Group 

Proposer typology: Group of agricultural producers 

Certification / inspection body typology: NA 



The Rainbow Growers Group is an ambitious growers' association with 24 members 

who grow bell peppers, aubergines, tomatoes, sweet pointed peppers, chilli peppers 

and radishes. The aim of the Rainbow Growers Group is to strive for the shortest line 

between grower and consumer. Quickly taking account of the wishes of the client 

ensures that costs are kept as low as possible and that the quality is high. 

The growers grow their crops on a growing media (substrate) that was specially 

selected by the Rainbow Growers Group. In addition, they register all data about 

fertiliser usage, biological crop protection and energy use on the internal Rainbow 

system. This information is very detailed: in fact, every path in every greenhouse can 

be tracked with this system. 

Green Nature 



74

Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: Green Nature Group 

Proposer typology: Dutch association of cultivators 


specific rules the supervision of an external control organisation which audits the 

members of the Green Nature group annually on the EUREP-GAP guideline. 



The Green Nature Group improves the production quality of Dutch beef tomatoes by 

working in a chain-like market concept. The product cultivated by the association is 

put on the market under the brand name of Skyline and Sky Classic. 

The Green Nature Group objective is to use natural agents in keeping the crop free 

from pests and diseases instead of using pesticides. 

The production of the fruit-vegetables at the greenhouses of the Green Nature Group 

is conducted in a very clean and environmentally friendly way. Hygiene and food 

safety are the core issues in the operations of the several companies of the Green 

Nature Group. 

The Green Nature Group stands for 100% traceability and identification of the 

product from the customer back to the nursery. When requested the Green Nature 

Group is able to show the customer detailed information about nursery origin, harvest 

and packing time and proof of the food safety of the product. 

The Green Nature Group's efforts in the areas of food-safety, hygiene and 

environmentally and energy efficient production processes are rewarded with Nature's 

Choice certificates by Tesco and with EUREP-GAP certificates by C.M.I.. 

75


The Red Tractor 

Country of origin: U.K. 

Diffusion of the scheme in the various countries: U.K. 

Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: The Red Tractor was 

launched by the Prime Minister on 13 June 2000 and developed by Assured Food 

Standards (AFS) 

Proposer typology: Independent organisation 

Certification / inspection body typology: Schemes requiring the compliance with EN 

45011 for the certification and the accreditation of the ispection bodies by third-party 

subjects. 



The Red Tractor declares that food is produced to independently inspected standards 

right across the food chain, from the farm on which it is produced until it goes into the 

pack. It provides shoppers with cast-iron assurance that those standards have been 

upheld every step of the way. 

The Red Tractor can only be used on food that has been produced, packed, stored and 

transported to Red Tractor standards. The standards in all farming sectors (such as 

chicken, dairy or vegetables) have been agreed by a panel of experts to ensure that 

food is safe and that animals are well treated. 

The Assured Produce Scheme (APS) 



Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: Independently 

chaired management board that includes producers, processors and supermarket 

representatives. 

Proposer typology: Producers, processors and supermarket representatives. 

Certification / inspection body typology: Sheme requiring the compliance with 

specific rules for the certification and accreditation of the certification body by thirdparty 

subject. 



This assurance scheme promotes the progressive and sustainable development of 

integrated crop management (ICM) techniques in the fresh produce sector. These 

techniques represent good horticultural practices with emphasis on reducing whenever 

possible the use of pesticides, optimum use of fertilisers and improved protection of 

the environment. 

Assured British Meat 

Country of origin: UK 

Diffusion of the scheme in the various countries: UK 

76

Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: ABM Company 

Proposer typology: Representative members of beef and lamb Industry 


45011. 



ABM standard is based on the following principles: 

o Setting beef and lamb assurance standards throughout the whole chain 

(farm, transport, markets and abattoirs) 

o Licencing standards to various Certification Bodies (who will inspect 

and certify against them) and ensuring consistent delivery of assurance 

across all providers 

o Maintaining a central database of all procedures and businesses 

certified against the ABM standards 

o Promoting the benefits of assurance to both producers and businesses 

within the beef and lamb supply chain (including speaking 

engagements) to external bodies such as Government, NGO’s, 

Consumer organisations, etc 

o Encouraging producers and businesses to participate in assurance by 

applying to a Certification Body 

o Working with Assured Food Standards (AFS) and the devolved beef 

and lamb bodies to develop a commonly accepted set of standards 

o Dealing with general enquiries relating to beef and lamb assurance 

National Dairy Farm Assured Scheme (NDFAS) 



Names of the subjects responsible for the drafting of the standard: 

o The National Farmers Union 

o The Federation of Milk Groups 

o The Dairy Industry Association Ltd 

o The British Cattle Veterinary Association 

Proposer typology: Board of different interested parties in the milk supply chain 

Certification / inspection body typology: Scheme requiring the accreditation of the 




Relevant requirement typologies: The "Standards" cover: 

o Hygiene and Food Safety 

� To provide reassurance for customers in terms of the safety and 

high quality of the milk processed. 

o Housing and Facilities 

� To ensure there is a comfortable environment and sufficient 

space for free movement without undue risk of injury. 

o Plant and Equipment 

� To ensure all mechanical and electrical installations are 

adequately serviced so that milk quality and herd health and 

welfare problems do not arise. 

77

o Feedingstuffs and Water 

� To ensure all stock receive water of an appropriate quality and 

a balanced diet. 

o Herd Health 

� To provide assurance about the level of health and welfare of 

the dairy herd with farmers demonstrating that they have the 

knowledge and practical skills to care for animals in an 

environment that minimises stress or injury. 

o Stockmanship and Training 

� To ensure that the person in overall charge of the dairy herd can 

demonstrate that they have the knowledge and practical skills to 

care for animals in an environment that minimises stress or 

injury. 

o Contingency Procedures 

� To be proactive in an effort to prevent potential hazards to 

humans, dairy cattle and milk quality. 

o Environmental Standards 

78

Belgium 

Filières Qualité Carrefour 

LARGE SCALE RETAILERS 

Country of origin: France 

Diffusion of the scheme in the various countries: Europe 

Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: Carrefour 

Proposer typology: Large-scale retailer 

Certification/inspection body typology: Certification and ispection by Carrefour 

and/or third–party subjects. 



Chain label signifies the existence of a lasting partnership guaranteeing 

products with a high level of quality at each stage in their life. 

Type, origin and traceability are the Quality Supply Chain principles, applied 

to the following sectors: 

• Cheese 

• Meat 

• Fruit and vegetables 

• Fish and seafood. 

79

Germany 

Edeka 

Country of origin: Germany - Berlin 

Diffusion of the scheme in the various countries: Germany (95%), France, Austria 

(ADEG), The Netherlands, Denmark, Russia, Czech Republic 

Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: EDEKA 

Proposer typology: Large scale retailer 


specific rules, and inspection by Edeka auditors in compliance with IFS standard. 



- EDEKA products are continuously controlled through analysis made at all 

levels of production; 

- Traceability is guaranteed for all products; 

- Raw materials are selected and controlled at all the production levels; 

- All suppliers are selected and controlled by EDEKA’s technical staff; 

- All products are checked before coming on the marked (panel test to check 

the consumers’ preferences); 

- Environmental impact and heltiness are guaranteed durng all the 

production process. 

80

Italy 

Prodotto Carrefour 

Country of origin: France 

Diffusion of the scheme in the various countries: France, Spain, Portugal, Italy, 

Poland, Turkey, Mexico, Brazil, Argentine, China, Southern Korea, Malaysia, 

Thailand, Taiwan. 

Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: Carrefour (UE) 


Certification / inspection body typology: Retailers’ technical staff 



- Raw materials are selected and checked at all the production levels. 

- Suppliers are closely selected and controlled by Carrefours’ technical staff. 

- Before the commercialization, products’s appreciability is checked through 

panel tests on consumers. 

- The use of colourings, artificial flavourings and additives in the production 

process is continously reduced. 

- Quality and salubrity are respected. 

- Analysis and controls are made at all production levels. 

- Traceability is guaranteed for all the products. 

- The absence of GMO is guaranteed. 

- Labels contain detailed information about elements and raw materials. 

- As far as possible, packaging are used giving guarantees of safety and 

inviolability, as well as high capacity to preserve freshness of the products. 

81

Latvia 

The food retail sector in Latvia 

The relevant product market should include all sources of supply of daily consumer 

goods, i.e. hypermarkets, self-service stores, discount outlets, specialized shops, 

neighbourhood stores, kiosks, petrol station shops, open and closed markets 

(particularly important in Latvia), i.e. all retail sales which fall under the national 

statistics of total market with food predominating. This would be due to special 

characteristics of the market structure in the Latvia with high number of open markets 

(functional all year around), small neighbourhood stores and specialised outlets. 

Beside there is a clear trend in the Baltic States towards an increase in shopping in 

supermarkets and hypermarkets. 

The consolidation process of the retail market and the rapid inflow of 

Scandinavian/European retailers has increased the competition and contributed to the 

growth of the sector. 

Since the Nordic investors entered the Latvian retail food market in the mid nineties. 

Swedish/Norwegian/Dutch ICA Ahold, with its daughter company ICA Baltic (Rimi 

chain), Lithuania’s Vilnius Prekybos and Finland’s Kesko have emerged as the 

leading newcomers. 

In Latvia Kesko is active in the retailing of daily consumer goods, whereas it does not 

operate as a wholesaler. Kesko operates in Latvia with 5 hypermarkets and 11 

discount stores, whereas ICA is the second largest operator in Latvia with 4 Rimi 

hypermarkets and 33 Rimi supermarkets. 

ICA is active in wholesaling and retailing of daily consumer goods mainly on the 

Swedish and Norwegian markets. Through a number of subsidiaries, ICA is also 

active in retail of daily consumer goods in Latvia and other Baltic states. However, 

ICA does not operate as a wholesaler in these countries. 

By the end of 2002, two Finnish companies Stockman plc. and Rautakirja Oyj built 

a multifunctional shopping centre in the central part of the capital, and opened a new 

supermarket. 

The German “Sky” chain is also present in the market. 

The largest Latvian owned chains are Mego, Nelda, Beta and Elvi. 

Mego Chain 



Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: Mego chain 

Proposer typology: small and medium size retailer and medium and large scale 

wholesaler 

82

Certification / inspection body typology: Self-referential scheme 



There are 32 stores in the Mego chain of supermarkets and smaller groceries. Some 

five or more stores are to be opened in the Riga, metropolitan area in 2003, after 

which the company will move to the largest cities throughout Latvia, offering 

franchise in addition to their own operations. The Mego warehouse outlet was opened 

to service medium and small-size retailers and catering business. By opening the first 

3 Mego Mini Markets, the Mego company has started a new concept. At present, the 

company holds a 15% market share. 

Mego is a Latvian company which owns 33 stores, mainly in Riga and is planning to 

expand further. Each store is responsible for guaranteein food safety by maintaining 

appropriate sanitary conditions and inspecting its food preparation routines and 

storage temperatures. 

Nelda 



Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: Nelda 

Proposer typology: meadium and large-scale retailer 




The Nelda (Latvian owners) grocery chain has grown significantly over the past five 

years, accounting for 5% of the retail sales. Nelda operates the stores that belong to 

the U.S. real estate company “A.P.of North America”. Its business now includes 18 

groceries, 13 fast food outlets, 4 bakeries and a meat processing line in the 

metropolitan area. Regarding other strong competitors, Nelda is one of the largest 

trading networks in Latvia, including supermarkets, shopping centres, cafes and 

restaurants. It was established in 1991 and owns 17 supermarkets all located in or 

around Riga. Nelda supermarket chain has grown significantly over the past five years 

and is planning to expand further. 

Each store is responsible for guaranteein food safety by maintaining appropriate 

sanitary conditions and inspecting its food preparation routines and storage 

temperatures. 

Beta grocery 



Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: Beta grocery 

Proposer typology: medium and large-scale retailer 




83

Beta Grocery (Latvian owners) chain was found 1998. The company have developed 

rapidly outside of Riga, and in 2002 the number of shops reached 34. The Beta chain 

as the fifth largest food retailer on the Latvian market. 

Beta is the fifth largest food retail in Latvia with 16 supermarkets and was established 

in 1998. 



temperatures. 

Elvi 



Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: Elvi 

Proposer typology: Medium-scale retailer 



Kesko 

Country of origin: Finlandia 

Diffusion of the scheme in the various countries: Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania 

Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: Kesko 





Kesko, a Finnish company, opened its first Citymarket in outskirts of Riga, the capital 

of Latvia, in September 2001. In November 2002, the second store was opened. The 

plans are to add 5 Citymarkets and 20 discount stores under the Supernetto format 

throughout Latvia in 2003, the company is aiming at a 25 % share of the Latvian retail 

food market. The City market’s products consist of 15.000 items which currently 

include a lot of fresh produce and a large assortment of wines. In Latvia Kesko has 

established a database of suppliers’quality guarantees to improve safety and quality 

control and facilitate product traceability. Each store is responsible for guaranteein 

food safety by maintaining appropriate sanitary conditions and inspecting its food 

preparation routines and storage temperatures. By demanding of that suppliers 

continuously make environmental improvements and expanding its eco-labelled 

product range. 

RIMI Baltic (the owners of RIMI Baltic are ICA AB (Sweden company) and Finish 

KESKO Group daughter company Kesko Food Ltd)) 

Country of origin: Sweden and Finland 

Diffusion of the scheme in the various countries: Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, etc. 

Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: ICA AB and Kesko 

Group 

84





Since the Nordic investors entered the Latvian retail food market in the mid-nineties 

of last century, Rimi Baltic has a strong position in Latvia. 

In 2003 RIMI (largest large-scale retailer) in Latvia added a rider to its annual 

agreements with suppliers containing detailed product quality demands. In Latvia 

RIMI has established a database of suppliers’ quality guarantees to improve safety 

and quality control and facilitate product traceability. Each store Rimi is responsible 

for guaranteeing food safety by maintaining appropriate sanitary conditions and 

inspecting its food preparation routines and storage temperatures. In Latvia and 

Lithuania ICA Baltic complies with HACCP using an established sanitary program 

and food handling routines. During the year ICA MENY and HACCP quality audits 

conducted at all its distribution units. 

By demanding of that suppliers continuously make environmental improvements and 

expanding its eco-labelled product range. ICA can help to reduce society’s overall 

impact on the environmental. 

Company Activity Brands 

VP Market Grocery retail chain MAXIMA, Saulite 

Rimi Baltic Grocery retail chain Rimi Hypermarket, Rimi, 

Kesko Food Grocery retail chain City market, Supernetto 

SKY Grocery retail chain Sky 

Beta groceries Grocery retail chain Beta 

Mego chain Grocery retail chain Mego, Mego Mini market 

Wholesaler 

Elvi Grocery retail chain Elvi 

Nelda Grocery retail chain Nelda 

Vilnius Prekubos 

Country of origin: Lithuania 

Diffusion of the scheme in the various countries: Latvia, Lithuania 

Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: Vilnius Prekybos 





The largest Lithuanian operator of supermarkets and trade centres the biggest 

competitors is the Lithuanian company. Vilnius Prekybos entered Latvia in 2000, and 

quickly acquired a 15% share of the retail food market. VP operates 23 T-Markets 

(now so-called Saulite), which are hard discount stores, and plans to grow to 86 

stores. VP opened its fourth MAXIMA hypermarket. Each store is responsible for 

guaranteein food safety by maintaining appropriate sanitary conditions and inspecting 

its food preparation routines and storage temperatures. 

85

Sky supermarkets 



Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: Company 

“Schleswig-Holstein” 





There are two SKY supermarkets in Riga that were opened through a franchise 

agreement with the German company Schleswig-Holstein. Five more are expected to 

be opened over the next 3 years. SKY aims at the higher income level buyers of Riga 

and its nearest suburb, the resort town of Jurmala. The company’s strategy is to attract 

customers through providing a wider selection. Some 50% of its assortment of 

products is supplied directly from Germany and the Netherlands. 



temperatures. By demanding of that suppliers continuously make environmental 

improvements and expanding its eco-labelled product range. 

86


AH Huismerk 



Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: Albert Heijn 


Certification / inspection body typology: Self-referential scheme with inspection by 

independent auditors 

Target: consumer or food-chain operator 


Traceability is guaranteed for all products from field to table; 

Raw materials are selected and controlled at all the production levels, transport, 

storage, cooling. 

Environmental impact and healthness are guaranteed during all the production 

process, using recycled and biodegradable materials for packaging. 

87


Tesco Nature’s Choice 


Diffusion of the scheme in the various countries: U.K., Ireland, Czech Republic, 

Slovakia, Hungary, Poland. 

Name of the subject responsible for the drafting of the standard: Tesco plc 





Tesco developed Nature’s Choice, which has been implemented through a Code of 

Practice since 1991. This Code identifies key principles and practices which when 

complied with by Tesco’s Producers and Suppliers of fresh fruit, vegetables and 

salads, will ensure that their production and produce handling systems are sustainable, 

environmentally sound and responsible. Tesco aims to have all their Producers and 

Suppliers meeting the requirements laid down in the Code of Practice by 2006. 

Nature’s Choice is about identifying and adopting sustainable farming systems and 

practices which will lessen this effect. It means devising and implementing ways of 

reducing the use of materials and energy, minimising waste and adopting the principle 

of recycling wherever it is practicable and environmentally beneficial to do so. 

88

ANNEX B - QUALITY ASSURANCE/SUSTAINABILITY LABELS AND 

CERTIFICATION SCHEMES IN LATVIA 

Overview of quality assurance/sustainability labels and certification schemes in Latvia 

Data research format – Task 1.B 

COUNTRY: LATVIA 

EXPERTS: Daina Karklina 

Inga Ciprovica 

Agro- food industry is one of the largest Latvian industries. Availability of a great 

range of agricultural and animal-breading products makes a great contribution to the 

efficiency and quality of food industry. 

Traditions of food industry in Latvia support usage of natural browning and 

ecologically clean products. Technological processes are constantly improving thanks 

to the co-operation with foreign companies, making food industry most efficient 

Latvian industry according to the productivity of labor. 

A safe and good quality product is the result of adequate control and quality assurance 

in all stages of the supply chain by food chain players: farmers, food processors, food 

distributors, food retails and food consumers and food chain influencers: government, 

environmental organizations, industry associations etc. [5; 6; 29; 30; 31] 

1. Quality assurance/ sustainability labels and certifications schemes in Latvia 

A) Agro-food sector 

B) Latvia 

C) Quality Assurance Systems are part of the Quality Management focused on 

providing confidence that quality requirements will be fulfilled. They are required at 

each step in food production chain to ensure safe and quality food to show compliance 

with regulatory and customer requirements [10; 11; 12; 32; 33; 34; 35] 

Latvian National System of Quality Assurance is shown in Figure 1. 

This system has several coordination levels: 

0 - Coordination in International level; 

1 - Coordination in Government level; 

2 - Quality assurance surveillance level; 

3 - Quality assurance level; 

4 - Conformity assessment level; 

5 - Production level; 

6 - Market level. 

The Quality Assurance National Programme was accepted in 1994 as one of the 

priority programmes for the development of the national economy of Latvia. The 

objective of the programme is to develop legislation and infrastructure for conformity 

assessment and quality assurance in Latvia according to the EU requirements. The 

Quality Assurance National programme includes training in Quality Assurance and 

89

Quality Management for all levels. The realisation of the programme will lead to the 

elimination of technical barriers to trade and increase competitiveness of the products 

and services produced in Latvia in local and international market. There is established 

the Co-ordination Council for the realisation of the Quality Assurance National 

Programme in which representatives from the ministries, associations, accreditations 

office, standardisation centre and other interested parties are involved. The Council’s 

main task is to evaluate the needs of Latvian economy and establish an appropriate 

legislative and institutional structure. 

Food legislation and enforcement in Latvia is the responsibility of two ministries – the 

Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Health [54; 55; 56]. 

The Ministry of Agriculture is responsible for developing agricultural policy and 

drafting legislation in phytosanitary, agriculture, veterinary and food sectors. 

The Ministry of Health together with its subordinating body Latvian Food Centre 

organises elaboration of scientifically grounded proposals concerning problem 

solution in the field of food safety and nutrition as well as deals with issues 

concerning food additives, food contaminants, drinking water, GMO and novel foods. 

The food circulation in Latvia is regulated by the Law “Supervision of handling of 

Food” (20.03.1998) and the ‘Law of Veterinary Medicine” (26.04.2001) and is 

harmonised with EU legislation. Number of national rules (regulations of the cabinet 

of Ministers) in food and veterinary sector are elaborated in accordance with these 

laws as well as harmonized with EU legislation. 

90

d) Standardisation in Latvia is carried out by the national standardisation institution 

(State non-profit limited liability company Latvijas Standards under the supervision of 

the Ministry of Economics), branch standardisation institutions, standardisation 

technical committees and other institutions, and enterprises. The main tasks of LVS are: 

• develop the national standards fund by organizing elaboration of the national 

standards of Latvia and adaptation of international and regional standards; 

• ensure dissemination of information on standardisation, issuing and publishing 

the national standards of Latvia and other related information; 

• participate in the work of international and regional standardization bodies. 

LVS was founded in 1999 and it is a successor of rights and liabilities in the field of 

standardisation of the state institution Latvian National Centre of Standardisation and 

Metrology. 

43 technical committees are working towards the implementation of standards in 

different branches of the Latvian economy. The principles of formation of these 

committees and the development of standards correspond to the European requirements. 

The national standardisation institution and standardisation institutions of branches have 

established standardisation technical committees in accordance to the international 

requirements. The task of the standardisation technical committees is to elaborate 

standards in defined areas. Stabilisation technical committees are responsible for 

standardisation in the relevant areas. 

The national programme informatics defines a separate section on standardisation in the 

field of the information technology. There are activities for adoption of standards as 

well as necessary financial means outlined in this programme. The programme has been 

accepted in the National Programmes Co-ordination Council and will be submitted to 

the cabinet of Ministers for acceptance. There is a standardisation technical committee 

already established for information technologies. The Latvian standards are: 

• The Latvian national standards that are registered in the National standardisation 

institution; 

• The standards of the international and regional organisations that are adapted as 

Latvian national standards and registered in the National standardisation 

institution; 

• Other standards. 

Application of standards: 

• Latvian standards shall be applied on a voluntary base; 

• The Cabinet of Ministers shall determine mandatory application of Latvian 

standards. 

Realisation and reproduction of the international and regional standards shall be carried 

out according to the procedure stated by the concluded agreements. Latvian institutions 

92

that are members of the relevant international and regional organisations will carry out 

realisation and reproduction. 

Since 1995, Latvia has been an affiliate member in the International Standardisation 

Organisation (ISO), International Electrotechnical Committee (IEC), the European 

Committee for Standardisation (CEN) and the European telecommunications Standards 

Institute (ETSI). 

In co-operation with experts of the standardisation institution of Italy (UNI) a structure 

of an operationally capable organisation has been prepared and introduced. On the basis 

of the standardisation procedures of the UNI, standardisation process, proceduresdocuments 

that regulate and adjust standardisation processes were prepared and 

introduced. 

In co-operation with experts of the standardisation institution of Germany (DIN) the 

specialists of Latvijas Standarts are prepared for work with technical committees 

according to European practice. Long-term standard adoption strategy and policy have 

been prepared. Work at LVS financing mechanism preparation is going on, envisaging 

diminishing dependence of LVS on state financing. A quality system corresponding to 

the ISO 9000: 2000 standard requirements is being introduced. 

Structure of LVS, www.lvs.lv 

The conception of the National standardisation was developed in 1995. It defines 

standardisation principles in Latvia and reflects the principles of standardisation of the 

European Union. This concept declares a new philosophy on standards – a voluntary 

93

use of standards and general provisions for organisation of standardisation activities, 

including technical committees. 

On 30 June 1998 the Cabinet of Ministers accepted the national programme the 

standardisation Development Programme. Its objective and task is to organise a process 

of standard preparation in Latvia in accordance with needs of the national economy of 

Latvia and requirements of the European Union, so that Latvia would incorporate into 

the unitary standardisation system of Europe. The programme focuses on the 

implementation of international and European standards and acceleration of the process 

of the implementation, so that the standards based on New Approach directives should 

be adopted together with the agenda of adoption of the corresponding directives. This 

programme covers all the harmonised New Approach sectors, and involves different 

methods of adoption. The realisation of the programme is proposed till 2002-2004, 

when all relevant European standards have to be adopted and the standardisation body 

will be able to carry standardisation activities. 

The Saeima accepted the Law On Standardisation on 14 October 1998. The objective of 

the Law is to define the tasks of the standardisation, the main principles and the 

organisation of the standardisation works. 

The Law specifies the main principles of the standardisation – transparency off the 

standardisation process, involvement of all interested parties, voluntary standardisation. 

The national standardisation institution, standardisation institutions of branches, 

standardisation technical committees, other institutions, organisations, and enterprises 

carry out the standardisation process. 

The Law specifies the main tasks of the national standardisation institution – the 

organisation of standardisation processes (development of national standards, adoption 

of international standards, etc.). 

e) 

Proposer typology - Large scale retails 

Since the Nordic investors entered the Latvian retail food market in the mid nineties, 

Swedish/Norwegian/Dutch ICA Ahold, with its daughter company ICA Baltic (Rimi 

chain), Lithuania’s Vilnius Prekyba and Finland’s Kesko have a strong position in 

Latvia. The German Sky” chain is also present in the market. The largest Latvian owned 

chains are Mego, Nelda, Beta and Elvi. 

f) 

Certification /Inspection [3;14;19; 21; 22; 38;39;43 – 46] 

A single administrative body – Food and Veterinary Service (FVS) that is subordinate 

to the Ministry of Agriculture since January 1 st , 2002, carries out the overall official 

food circulation control and surveillance, including food hygiene and pesticide residues. 

FVS was established by emerging State Sanitary Inspection, state Veterinary Service 

and State Plant Production Control Service in such a way developing unified food 

94

control system, improving the overall traceability of food products, simplifying 

administration and providing more efficient enforcement of legislation. The main goals 

of Food and veterinary Service are to assure circulation of safe and high-quality food, 

eliminating any risks, promoting trade and protecting the interests of consumers. 

The Law on Supervision of Handling Food lays down the main functions of FVS. The 

main functions are to supervise and control at all stages of the handling of food the 

conformity of food products (from farm to fork) with the requirements prescribed by 

regulatory enactments and to perform risk factor research and analysis. 

Food and Veterinary Service consists of several structural units: 

• Territorial structural units 

• Laboratories 

• Sanitary Border Inspection (SBI) – is responsible for veterinary border control as 

well as the checks on consignments subjected to sanitary (safety) and phytosanitary 

control. 

• State veterinary Medicine Diagnostic centre 

Latvia is divided into 26 districts and in every there are FVS territorial structural units 

that carry out the inspection inside the country. 

Sanitary Border inspection in accordance with the procedures prescribed by regulatory 

enactments supervise and control at State border control points, as well as free zones, 

free warehouses and customs warehouses the importation of food into the State, the 

exportation or the transit of products subject to veterinary supervision well as other 

goods and products. 

State Veterinary Medicine Diagnostic Centre (SVMDC) is accredited laboratory 

performing laboratory investigation in the diagnostics of animal diseases, circulation of 

veterinary drugs, veterinary pharmaceutical products, industrially produced animal feed 

and feed additives and food products. The SVMDC has also 12 regional laboratories. 

The laboratories of SVMDC have undergone and implemented quality assurance system 

in accordance with LVS EN ISO 17025. 

The Codex Point is at Veterinary and Food department of the Ministry of Agriculture of 

the Republic of Latvia. However, the reasonable and more efficient of the circulation of 

Codex documents to all concerned parties and compilation of received comments is still 

under preparation. 

The structure and functions of FVS are shown (www.pvd.gov.lv) 

The State Quality Control Service of Plant Products, which basic functions are as 

follows: Surveillance and control of the production and distribution chain of plant 

products; Conformity assessment of establishments; Attesting of the sectoral 

laboratories and interlaboratory testing. 

95

The State Plant Protection Service, which basic functions are as follows: Phytosanitary 

control in compliance with the EU requirements; Assessment and registration of plant 

protection products in compliance with the EU requirements; Seed quality control and 

certification of seeds; Comparing of plant varieties; Control of pesticide residues; 

Control of fertilizers. 

Conformity assessment 

Generally a conformity assessment is defined by the Law on the Conformity 

Assessment (adopted on 8 August 1996 with amendments adopted on 21 October 1999). 

The law has been developed in consideration with the Council Regulation of 21 

December 1989 on the Global Approach to Conformity Assessment and it partly 

incorporates the regulations of the European Union on conformity assessment 

procedures. Overall conformity assessment legislation structure is as follows (look 

Figure 2). 

In accordance with adopted legislation conformity assessment bodies harmonise their 

activities, procedures and performance with practices and requirements of the European 

Union. The third party bodies engaged in conformity assessment are performing 

according to the requirements of EN 45000 series standards. Bodies that are competent 

96

to provide testing, calibration, certification and inspection in Latvia predominantly are 

private bodies to operate according to the needs of industry. 

Accreditation 

The Latvian National Accreditation Bureau LATAK was established on August 30, 

1994 and operates in accordance with the Ministry of Economy Regulation No. 295, the 

approved By-laws, the provisions of the law “On Conformity Assessment”, and the 

provisions of the Cabinet regulation “Regulations for Accreditation of Testing and 

Calibration Laboratories and Certification and Inspection Bodies” of 04. 04. 2000, 

LATAK –D.007-02/05.2001 “Proficiency Testing within Latvian National 

Accreditation system”. 

It defines the accreditation system in Latvia and specifies the functions of the Latvian 

National Accreditation Bureau. The accreditation system is as follows (look in Figure 

3). 

The main functions of the National Accreditation Bureau in accordance with the Law 

On Conformity Assessment are as follows: 

97

• To assess, accredit and supervise certification and inspection bodies and testing 

and calibration laboratories in accordance with the requirements of Latvian 

National standards, normative acts, European and international standards; 

• To facilitate work of the Latvian National Accreditation Council; 

• To organise accreditation of technical committees; 

• To train accreditation experts and other specialists involved thereof; 

• To organise and co-ordinate inter-laboratory comparison testing in accordance 

with Latvian, European Union and international requirements; 

• To collaborate with national accreditation bodies from other countries; 

• To represent Latvia within international accreditation organisations; 

• To maintain and update information basis on accredited institutions; 

• On request of ministries, to provide them with information on accredited 

institutions and their competence area. 

LATAK perform accreditation of: 

• Testing and calibration laboratories to LVS EN ISO/IEC 17025:2000; 

• Inspection bodies to LVS EN 45004: 1995; 

• Product certification bodies to LVS EN 45011: 1998; 

• Quality system certification bodies to LVS EN 45012: 1998; 

• Certification bodies of personnel certification to LVS EN 45013:1989. 

Latvian National Accreditation Bureau LATAK signed a Multilateral Agreement MLA 

on November 27 2002 with European Accreditation Co-operation EA in following 

fields: 

• accreditation of testing laboratories; 

• accreditation of calibration laboratories; 

• accreditation of product certification bodies; 

• accreditation of quality system certification bodies; 

• accreditation of personnel certification bodies; 

Inspection bodies by third-party subject 

The State Ltd "Latvian certification centre" is an institution under the authority of the 

Ministry of Health of the Republic of Latvia established in 1996 as the first independent 

product certification body in Latvia. LATSERT offer qualitative services of production 

conformity assessment of international standard - certification and testing. The service 

results in issuing a LATSERT certificate of conformity - an independent statement that 

the product offered by you does not incur risk to human health and environment - 

consequently it is safe to the consumer. 

98

The main LATSERT operation is certification in compliance with the requirements of 

EN 45011 standard and testing in compliance with the requirements of LVS EN 

ISO/IEC 17025 standard respectively. 

The LATSERT customers are 500 most important importers and wholesalers of various 

products, foodstuff manufacturing enterprises, enterprises manufacturing cosmetic 

products from all over Latvia, as well as from Lithuania, Russia and Poland. LATSERT 

cooperates with the official market surveillance institutions in Latvia. 

LATSERT is accredited to the Latvian National accreditation system and is recognized 

as competent to perform certification of foodstuff, alcoholic drinks, cosmetic products, 

toys, tobacco products, fuel, textile products, chemicals and chemical products and 

fertilizers in compliance with the requirements of the standard LVS EN 45011 (LATAK 

- S1 - 081). 

Besides LATSERT is accredited to the German accreditation system (DAP) and thus 

has international recognition of competence to perform conformity assessment of 

foodstuff, alcoholic drinks, cosmetic products, toys, tobacco products, fuel and 

chemicals and chemical products in compliance with the requirements of ISO/IEC 

Guide 65 (DAP-ZE-0370.00). The LATSERT Inspection performs inspection of 

foodstuffs production, storage, distribution and public catering processes and 

enterprises. The LATSERT laboratory is accredited to the Latvian National 

accreditation system (LATAK-T-138- ) as well as to the German accreditation system 

(DAP-PL-3188.00) and is acknowledged as competent to perform testing of foodstuff, 

alcoholic drinks, tobacco products, fuel and toys. In the sphere of cigarette testing our 

laboratory is the only laboratory in the Baltic States accredited to the German 

accreditation system. 

Besides, access to and use of the information available at the register of the products 

certified by LATSERT it an extremely easy and quick way to ascertain whether the 

respective products comply with the safety and harmlessness requirements established 

in Latvia. In the event you are a qualitative result orientated enterprise, we offer you to 

use our wide range of qualitative services. 

For auditing it is essential to establish a procedure and audit criteria. Audit criteria are 

procedures, norms and/or requirements against which the auditor compares objective 

evidence about the specified process, management system, product and/or service and 

or/information about these matters. 

For auditing it is essential to establish a procedure and audit criteria. Audit criteria are 

procedures, norms and/or requirements against which the auditor compares objective 

evidence about the specified process, management system, product and/or service and 

or/information about these matters. 

Three types of audits are used in Latvia. 

99

• The first partly audit s an internal audit and is carried out by the company for 

management purposes such as improvement of the own quality system; 

• The second partly audit s an external audit and is carried out to a potential supplier 

against proposed requirements when a contract must be made. These requirements 

can be prescribed in supplier’s internal documents and they may include 

requirements established in a quality system standard; 

• The third party audit s an external audit and implies an independent auditor 

organisation (the third party) assessing organisation against a quality system 

standard. It provides a certificate, which records results of the audit the organisation 

at time of assessment had management system, which complied with standards. 

In Latvia, we have some international certification bodies: 

Det Norske Veritas (DNV) is one of the leading international management systems 

certification bodies. Today DNV has the largest market share in ISO 9001:2000 

certifications in Norway, Finland, Sweden, Italy, China and Thailand. It is the second 

largest in Latvia, Estonia, USA, India, Hong Kong and third largest in the world in 

general. Measured by market share in ISO 14001: 1996 certifications, DNV is number 

one in the world. 

Bureau Veritas Quality International 

BVQI is a leader in systems certification services in Latvia. BVQI is recognized by 

more than 30 national and international accreditation bodies across the world to deliver 

ISO 9001 certification. As a consequence, BVQI is a world leader with over 50,000 

certified companies in 100 countries. Our success is based upon a close working 

partnership, focused on driving your business forward. BVQI strength lies not only in 

its global presence, but the combined skills of our team of 2,800 specially trained 

auditors. BVQI offers the possibility of combined certifications to the largest range of 

recognized standards, bringing consistency, optimization and efficiency. Occupational 

Health and Safety Assessment Specification (OHSAS)is an international standard 

giving requirements related to health and safety management systems in order to enable 

an organization to control its risks and improve its performance. 

The BVQI certification network continues to grow in strength and presence. No 

competitor equals our coverage, BVQI is operational in most important geographies, 

and can achieve further coverage thanks to the presence of Bureau Veritas in more than 

140 countries. 

BVQI has issued over 4 000 safety related certificates in all major industry sectors. 

BVQI offers the possibility of combined certifications to the largest range of recognized 

standards, bringing consistency, optimization and efficiency [2; 8] 

Societe Generale Surveillance 

SGS is the world’s leading inspection, verification, testing and certification company. 

SGS is recognized as the global benchmark for quality and integrity. With 39’000 

100

employees, SGS operates a network of about 1’000 offices and laboratories around the 

world with a presence in well over 120 countries. Originally founded in 1878 in Rouen 

as French grain shipment inspection house, the Company was registered in Geneva as 

Société Générale de Surveillance in 1919. Shares of SGS were first listed on (SWX) 

Swiss Exchange in 1985. Since 2001, SGS has only one class of shares consisting of 

registered shares. The core services offered by SGS can be divided into three categories: 

Inspection services (SGS inspects and verifies the quantity, weight and quality of traded 

goods. Inspection typically takes place at transshipment); Testing services (SGS tests 

product quality and performance against various health, safety and regulatory standards. 

SGS operates state of the art laboratories on or close to customers' premises); 

Certification services (SGS certifies that systems or services meet the requirements of 

standards set by governments, standardization bodies (e.g.ISO 9000) or by SGS 

customers. SGS also develops and certifies its own standards). 

Lloyd’s Register Quality Assurance 

LRQA is one of the world’s foremost management system certification, business 

assurance and training organizations. LRQA provides certification of compliance with 

international management system standards and helps clients use management systems 

to reduce their risks and improve their business. Assessment criteria cover certification 

to national, international and industry sector management system standards in quality, 

environment, occupational health and safety management and information security. 

LRQA is also a notified body for a number of EC directives and offers validation and 

verification services. Institute of Quality Assurance and have significant industrial and 

commercial experience. Assessors audit an organization’s management systems to 

verify whether or not they comply with the requirements of national and internationally 

agreed standards and schemes – such as ISO 9001, ISO 14001, OHSAS 18001 and BS 

7799. An LRQA assessment combines the: 

• observation of work being undertaken 

• review of records 

• face-to-face questioning of staff at all levels in the company. 

It should be recognized that management system certification can only reduce the risk 

of a problem and does not guarantee problems are eliminated. Management system 

certification by accredited, third party certification bodies gives interested parties – such 

as customers, suppliers, trading partners, local communities, investors and other 

stakeholders – the assurance that top management are committed to systematic and 

sustainable improvement of their management systems which is supported with 

evidence of the way work is actually performed. 

• Bureau Veritas Quality International www.bv.lv or www.bvql.com 

• Societe Generale de Surveillance www.sgs.com 

101

• Lloyd’s Register Quality Assurance www.lrql.lv 

In order to ensure the competitiveness of Latvian enterprises, besides compulsory safety 

requirements, often certification of the compliance to the voluntary quality requirements 

in needed. Such certification schemes as ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 are widely used in 

Latvia, still the awareness of the enterprises regarding application of these and other 

means for strengthening their competitiveness remains low. In the first half of 2003, 

there were 273 Latvian enterprises certified according to the standard ISO 9001. One of 

the main problems hampering more rapid introduction of ISO 9001 standards are the 

high costs arising from introduction, certification and maintenance of the quality 

systems, especially for SMEs, as well as lack of awareness among the entrepreneurs 

about the advantages application of quality systems, product certification and 

standardisation offers for operations in the market of EU [9; 57; 58; 59; 60]. 

No accreditation by third party subjects 

The certification institutions (third party) should be accreditated or non-accredited for 

auditing the corresponding standards or systems in Latvia. The principle of audit did not 

distinguish for actions of accredited auditing company. In Latvia, if companies choose 

non-accredited institutions for certification of standards or systems, it would be cheaper 

and obtained certificate did not prestige. 

Self referential schemes 

Checks and inspection of the final product must therefore remain the responsibility of 

the competent authorities, even though the food operator may have HACCP and shelfchecks 

procedures in place. The competent authorities are also responsible for putting 

the correct legislation into effect and for ensuring that this legislation is faithfully 

implemented. 

Standard routines for suppliers 

Food safety is also a priority in the Baltic countries. Governmental authorities are 

setting stringent demands on how long a product may keep on display stories. In 2003 

RIMI (one of largest wholesalers) in Latvia added a rider to its annual agreements with 

suppliers containing detailed product quality demands. In Latvia RIMI has established a 

database of suppliers’ quality guarantees to improve safety and quality control and 

facilitate product traceability. 

In store quality 

Each store is responsible for guaranteeing food safety by maintaining appropriate 


temperatures. In Latvia and Lithuania ICA Baltic complies with HACCP using an 

102

established sanitary program and food handling routines. During the year ICA MENY 

and HACCP quality audits conducted at all its distribution units. 

Product range 

By demanding that suppliers continuously make environmental improvements and 

expanding its eco-labelled product range. ICA can help to reduce society’s overall 

impact on the environment [7] 

g) brief description of the schemes in terms of requirements typologies 

Agriculture Pretreatment Production Wholesale Retail sale 

EurepGAP 

Sertification of 

raw 

materials/food 

AG 9000 

BRC-IOP 

GMP 

QS 

BRC-GFS 

IFS 

GMP 

BRC-IOP 

General 

Standards 

Sertification 

of services 

Inspection of 

chain of 

suppliers 

General standards of management systems: 

HACCP standards and guidelines, ISO 9000, ISO 14000, OHSAS 18001, SA 8000 

Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) focus on the best practices to be used for 

producing agricultural products to ensure the quality and safety of the final product. 

GAP includes soil and water management, crop and fodder production, animal 

production and health harvesting and on farm processing and storage, on-farm energy 

and waste management, wildlife and landscape. 

[1; 13] National laws exist regarding Veterinary Medicine, Animal Protection, 

Fertilizers circulation as well regulations of the Cabinet of Ministers On well-being 

requirements of animals, Animal waste rendering 

103

The law On Animal protection lays down the minimum requirements to be observed by 

the man in relationship with animals establishes the basic principles for handling 

agricultural, domestic, pet animals, animals used for experiments. 

Good Manufacturing Practice means understanding, analyzing and controlling the 

manufacturing process. 

Good Hygiene practice forms an integral part of all food management systems, as for 

example within the HACCP system [15; 16]. The recognition was established in the 

hygiene of foodstuffs Directive 93/46/EEC. Since that time, Latvian authorities directly 

previous mentioned Directive and in accordance with Latvian’s rules „Law of food 

surveillance” and Regulation of Cabinet Ministers Nr.267/2004 ”Hygiene requirement 

in food chain” control to implementation previous mentioned documents in practice. 

The HACCP system was first presented in Latvia 1993. In 1993, the EU officially 

recognized the HACCP methodology as a standard production method for food 

manufactures to implement and maintain a production control system [19; 20; 36 - 41; 

47 – 53] 

Both HACCP standard DS 3027:2002 (Denmark) and Netherlands standard 

„Requirements to food safety system corresponding to HACCP” are often used to 

certify Latvian enterprises. 

The structure of HACCP in enterprise 

HACCP 

GMP 

GHP 

Hygiene 

Employers Raw materials 

Process of certification 

Equipment Methods 

Environment 

104

The enterprises developed and implemented HAACP system according to seven 

principles: 

1. Hazard analysis, i.e. potential hazards along the production chain must be identified 

and analysed; 

2. Critical control point (CCP) identification, i.e. CCP’s must be identified, which 

must be monitored to avoid or minimise occurrence of hazards; 

3. establishment of critical limits in order to control hazards at each CCP; 

4. Monitoring procedures, i.e. surveillance systems for regular monitoring or 

observation of critical control points; 

5. corrective action must be established including measures which should be which 

taken whenever an inadmissible deviation is recorded at critical control points; 

6. Verification procedures must established for verification of correct functioning of 

the HACCP system; 

7. Record-keeping and documentation relating to the HACCP plan must be developed 

for effective management. 

The HACCP system encourages the principle of self-checks and clarifies 

responsibility. 

It is however recognised that HACCP procedures might be difficult to implement in 

small establishments. To assist Codes of Good Practise could be developed by sector of 

activity. Food inspectors could have a key role in ensuring that carrying out, for 

example, regular routine audit and sampling closely follow these Codes. 

Like slaughterhouse and food processing facilities, food wholesalers, distributors, 

retailers as well as restaurants and catering business, must also follow Codes of good 

Practise and HACCP procedures. 

This is particular importance for food retail shops as experience indicates that crosscontamination 

often occurs there. Measures must therefore also be taken at this level to 

guarantee that the strictest hygiene rules are observed and that food is not contaminated 

by inappropriate action. This will involve licensing after inspection by the competent 

authorities and the proper training of staff. 

Procedure of inspection 

Inspections are carried out by specialised operators (Inspection Bodies) at the 

manufacturing site and on the market, through remarks and judgements based upon 

measurements, tests and verification methods. 

More specifically, projects, products, services, processes or plants (including personnel, 

facilities and technologies) are examined in order to establish their compliance with 

specific provisions or, on the basis of a "professional judgement", their conformity to 

general requirements. 

The accreditation of Inspection Bodies is issued in accordance with the EN 45004 

standards. 

105

Recommendations on good practices 

Unified FSM (Food safety management) system is originated (look figure) 

Environmental protection 

By introducing Law „On pollution” and its dependant normative acts, a new system of 

issuing permits for performance of polluting activities for industrial enterprises has been 

set up. The law prescribes that prior to initiating of polluting activity or for performing 

existing activities, Latvian enterprises hereinafter shall need environmental permit, 

where the enterprise is analysed throughout from the aspect of environmental impact it 

may create, assessing production technologies and techniques being used and setting 

conditions for emissions of pollution, noise and vibration. 

According to the Law “On Pollution” all Latvian enterprises are divided into categories 

A, B and C, considering the amount and effect or the risk of pollution caused to human 

health and the environment. Enterprises performing Category A activities have to apply 

the best available techniques (BAT). Enterprises falling into Category B have to 

introduce cleaner production principles. Category C enterprises have to operate 

according to the general legislation and regulations within the field of environmental 

protection. 

106

In April 2003, there were 62 Category A companies in Latvia, of which 7 had already 

received A Category permit for performance of polluting activities. The exact number 

of Category B enterprises has not been assessed yet. According to the estimations made 

by the State Environmental Impact Assessment Bureau (SEIAB), there are around 4000 

Category B enterprises operating in Latvia. 28 of them have already been provided with 

Category B permit. The exact number of Category C enterprises has not been assessed 

as well, but the estimations of SEIAB show that there are around 2000 such enterprises. 

By now, still no notifications regarding performing Category C polluting activities have 

been issued. 

Among the main problems linked with receiving integrated permits for performance of 

polluting activities, there should be mentioned lack of information among enterprises 

regarding BAT, as well as limited capacity of environmental institutions (SEIAB, 

Regional Environmental Boards) for ensuring examination of the submitted applications 

for the permits and for consulting enterprises (taking into account that there should be 

around 4000 Category B permits issued by 2007). 

Introduction of environmental management systems (ISO 14001, EMAS) is another 

important issue for the competitiveness of Latvian enterprises within the single market 

of EU. By now, ISO 14001 certificate has been issued to 38 Latvian enterprises. Since 

1999 several projects on introduction of environment management systems (EMS) in 

different sectors of Latvian industry have been implemented with support of Danish 

government. The basic goal of these projects was to familiarise companies with EMS, 

provide practical advice on introduction of ISO 14001 and to disseminate EMS 

practices among a wider range of companies. One of the main problems hampering 

more rapid introduction of ISO 14001 standards are the high costs arising from 

introduction, certification and maintenance of the quality systems, especially for SMEs. 

EMAS have not been implemented in Latvia yet. The Law “On Environmental 

Protection” prescribes that EMAS has to be introduced in Latvia by January1, 2004. 

The law prescribes that SEIAB is the institution responsible for establishing, 

maintaining and updating the register of enterprises involved in EMAS, accreditation 

system of environmental verifiers and register of environmental verifiers. SEIAB 

performs the registration of enterprises in the EMAS register, accreditation and 

monitoring of the environmental verifiers. Still there is lack of information regarding 

EMAS related issues in Latvia. 

Environmental Management System in Latvia 

The definition of EMS is, according to the ISO 14001 standard: the part of the overall 

management system that includes organizational structure, planning activities, 

responsibilities, practices, procedures, processes and resources for developing, 

implementing, achieving, reviewing and maintaining the environmental policy. 

107

The aim of an EMS is to manage, control and continuously improve a company’s 

environmental performance. EMS ensures a systematic and controlled approach. It is a 

management system, which implies that decision-making and allocation of resources is 

a management responsibility. 

Today, EMS is a useful tool for combination of business and environmental interests, 

because EMS is management of resources (materials, chemicals, fuel etc.) and 

emissions are also associated with costs for e.g. treatment and taxes. A reduction in 

emissions will be beneficial both economically and for the environment. 

Latvian companies implementing EMS may choose to have an informal (certifiable) 

management system, or to get a formal approval – a certified management system – in 

accordance with existing EMS standards, e.g. ISO 14001 (International standard) or 

Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) – European standard. 

EMS corresponds to quality management systems like ISO 9000, Good Manufacturing 

Practice (GMP) and Total Quality Management (TQM). 

Assertions about 

economic DATA 

AUDITOR 

Obtains and evaluates 

EVIDENCE 

To ascertain correspondence between 

and 

communicates 

RESULTS 

To interested 

users 

Established 

CRITERIA 

Figure 1. The schema of Auditing 

108

The main aspects of EMAS could be shown in a systematic way: 

Company 

Site 

Environmental 

Objectives 

1. Company Environmental Policy 

2. Initial Environmental Review 

Environmental Programme 

Audit Cycle 

Environmental 

Audit 

4. Environmental Statement 

Environmental 

management System 

The new EMAS regulation tries to harmonize EMAS with ISO certification, which 

is the favourite in many countries. Therefore, it provides easier accessibility to 

EMAS for such companies who already have ISO certification. In such cases, 

preliminary review is not required, whereas environmental statement and 

verification are necessary. That’s a big advantage for Latvia, because, at present 

moment, about 14 Latvian companies have received ISO 14000 certificates. But 

more and more Latvian companies are willing to integrate EMS and receive ISO 

14001 certificate. 

The companies had not been working with EMS before and there was no appointed 

specific environmental manager or other responsible person. Environmental 

management was new to all companies. 

109

The project introduced EMS in accordance with ISO 14001. The methodology was 

based on “train the trainer” principle, and on integration of both theoretical training and 

practical implementation at the enterprise level. 

Between training sessions, the companies were working with development and 

implementation o f their own EMS, beginning with establishment of an environmental 

review and continued through the EMS cycle from environmental policy, objectives, 

targets, action plans to the EMS handbook with all the required procedures and 

documentation. 

With the Danish Agency for Trade and Industry and the Latvian Ministry of Economy 

as initiators, 7 companies within the Latvian agricultural industry participated in a pilot 

project of introduction of environmental management in accordance with ISO 14001. 

The companies are Piebalgas alus(brewery), Putnu fabrika ķekava (chicken factory), 

Rīgas Piena kombintās (dairy), Aldaris (brewery), Brīvais Vilnis (fish industry), 

Salacgrīva 95 (fish industry), Tervete (brewery). 

During the period 1999 – 2001, top management, project managers and key employees 

have participated in a number of seminars, educational projects and audits. 

All companies have developed management procedures and organisational conditions, 

and have allocated responsibility to meet the requirements of ISO 14001. During the 

period, Piebalgas alus gained an ISO 14001 certificate via an internationally recognized 

certification body. 

Traceability system 

Once the food has been processed each single unit has to be identified by a lot or batch 

number so that each product can be traced back to its origin. Also all food-operators 

must be registered and individually identified to allow full traceability. 

Another key element of the integrated farm to fork approach is the concept of 

traceability, which means that it should be possible to trace and follow a food-producing 

animal, food, feed or any substance to be incorporated into a food or feed, through all 

stages of production, processing and distribution. Because unsafe food and feed will 

have to be withdrawn from the market, food businesses should have systems in place to 

identify their suppliers, as well as those they have supplied. 

Environmental Impact Assessment legislation 

Environmental impact assessment is carried out in accordance with the provisions 

stipulated in the Law "On Environmental impact assessment", passed on October 14, 

1998. 

Initially in the Law "On Environmental impact assessment" had been incorporated legal 

provisions resulting from Directives 85/337/EEC, 97/11/EC, Council Directive of 27 

110

June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the 

environment and Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997 amending Directive 

85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on 

the environment. 

In order to make the existing legislation in compliance on environmental impact 

assessment in Latvia with the corresponding European Union Directives since 14 

October 1998, amendments has been made in Law “On Environmental impact 

assessment”: 

• Amendments of 30 May 2001 corresponding Convention of 25 February 1991 

on Environmental Impact Assessment in a transboundary Context; 

• Amendments of 19 June 2003 in the Law incorporate legal provisions resulting 

from the Directives 92/43/EEC, 2001/42/EC, 

• Amendments of 26 February 2004 in the Law incorporate legal provisions 

resulting from the Directives 2003/35/EC and 92/43/EEC. 

Thereby in the Law “On Environmental impact assessment” incorporated legal 

provisions resulting from the Directives 85/337/EEC, 97/11/EC, 92/43/EEC, 

2001/42/EC, 2003/35/EC and 92/43/EEC. 

Based on the Law “On Environmental impact assessment”, stipulated Cabinet of 

Ministers regulations: 

• Cabinet of Ministers regulations No. 157 of March 23, 2004 “Procedures for 

Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment” regulating Procedures for 

Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment; 

• Cabinet of Ministers regulations No. 87 of February 17, 2004 “Procedures for 

Environmental Impact Assessment”, which prescribe in precise and detailed 

fashion the implementation procedures of the requirements stipulated in the Law 

"On Environmental impact assessment", 

• Cabinet of Ministers regulations No. 91 of February 17, 2004 “Procedures for 

Regional Environmental Board issues technical regulations for provided 

action which has no necessity for environmental impact assessment” 

regulating provided actions, which has no necessity for environmental impact 

assessment, but which need technical regulations, content of technical 

regulations and procedure for requirement, preparation and issuing technical 

regulations. 

The activities of the bureau in a transboundary context are prescribed by 1991 Espoo 

Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context, which 

Latvia had acceded on July 1, 1998 and the Agreement between the Government of 

111

the Republic of Latvia and the Government of the Republic of Estonia on 

Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context, signed in March 14, 

1997. 

Law “On Environmental impact assessment” and related Cabinet of Ministers 

regulations are available in Latvian. We apologize for inconvenience! 

Latvian IPPC System 

Latvia is currently preparing legislation covering IPPC installations among others. In 

the Environmental sector the legal strategy is to have in place the following legislation: 

Law on pollution will include a part on IPPC permitting. There will also be an IPPC 

Cabinet of Ministers regulation under the Law on pollution, which will include the 

details of the permitting of the IPPC permitting procedure etc. and (in annex) the IPPC 

application and IPPC permit form. 

The law on pollution and IPPC regulation will expectedly be adopted by Parliament and 

Cabinet of Ministers in 2000 and come into force from 1 January 2001. This has the 

following consequences: 

• All new Latvian IPPC installations must apply for an IPPC permit from 2001 

• In the case of significant changes or extensions, existing IPPC companies need 

to reapply for an IPPC permit from 2001. 

• All IPPC installations (new and existing) will have IPPC permits by 31 October 

2007 according to a transition scheme, which will be in annex to the IPPC 

regulation. 

The UK standard BS 8555:2003 implementation in Latvia 

112

Upcoming Latvia’s integration to EU will require a lot of changes of the current 

practices and regulations in different sectors of economy, including industries. 

Specifically in the protection of the environment the emphasis will be made on 

strengthening preventive approach and precautionary principle. 

Environmental management systems (EMS) provide enterprises with a systematic 

approach to solution of their environmental problems and implementation principles of 

sustainable development. 

In Latvia most of the companies, which have already implemented EMS, are large. In 

the same time, the majority of Latvian industries are represented by small and medium 

size companies (SMEs) that generate a lot of pollution. Many SMEs want to improve 

their environmental performance, but don't know where to start or where to obtain 

reliable and good quality advice. SMEs also face certain difficulties while implementing 

a formal environmental management system, such as: limited human and financial 

resources, difficulty in effectively implementing the requirements of ISO 14001 or 

EMAS. 

The British standard BS 8555 provides guidance to all organizations seeking to 

implement a formal environmental management system (EMS). In doing so, the 

standard makes particular reference to small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs). It 

helps in reducing bureaucracy and excessive documentation. 

BS 8555 breaks ISO 14001 implementation down into five individual phases, each 

of which can be separately achieved and externally recognised as such. A sixth 

phase allows companies to seek certification to the ISO 14001 standard. 

The project includes the following components: translation BS 8555 into Latvian 

language and it formal adoption by Latvian National Standardization Organization, 

training of local consultants in delivering consultancy support and conducting audits, 

testing the standard at 10 SMEs that should result in 10 EMS implemented. The results 

of the project will be summarized and disseminated among all interested parties. 

Adoption and application in Latvia the user-friendly standard BS 8555:2003 from the 

UK will allow: 

- to provide SMEs with a comprehensive and clear guide to the phased EMS 

implementation; 

-to increase number of companies seeking for development and implementation 

of their own EMS; 

- to improve quality of the local environment involving SME in EMS 

implementation; 

- to support integration process to EU at the state and company level, 

breaking down some existing in SMEs fears, fixed beliefs and far-fetched 

barriers regarding coming European legislation. 

113

The project sponsor is the DEFRA (Department for Environment Food and Rural 

Affairs) Environment for Europe Fund, UK [17, 18, and 42]. 

OHSAS 18001:1999 

In order to determine which labour protection requirements should be observed in 

enterprise it is necessary to get acquainted with and to evaluate all legislative acts in the 

field of labour protection. In this annex only the most important labour protection 

legislative acts are listed, which more or less corresponds to all enterprises. 

1. Labour Protection Law (adopted by the Saeima on 20 June 2001, coming 

into force on 1 January 2002.); 

2. Cabinet Regulations No.379 of 23 August 2001, Order of the Performance of 

Internal Supervision of the Work Environment (Coming into force on 1 

January 2002); 

3. Cabinet Regulations No.539 of 27 December 2001, Regulations Concerning 

Labour Protection Requirements when Working with Carcinogens 

Substances at Workplaces Order of the Performance of internal supervision 

of the work environment (Coming into force on 1 January 2002); 

4. Cabinet Regulation No. 153 of 3 April 2001, Regulations on Protection of 

Safety and Health at Work when Working with a Display Screen and Setting 

up a Workstation (Coming into force on 1 June 2001); 

5. Cabinet Regulation No. 72 of 13 February 2001, Requirements for Safety 

and Health protection at Work in Working with Chemical Substances and 

Chemical Products in the Workplace (Coming into force on 1 April 2001); 

6. Cabinet Regulation No. 318 of 19 September 2000, On the Requirements 

Regarding the Organising of Work Safety and Health Protection and the 

Equipping of Workplaces at Construction Sites (Coming into force on 1 

August 2001); 

7. Cabinet Regulation No. 159 of 25 April 2000, Use of Personal Protective 

Equipment at Work (Coming into force on 1 January 2001); 

8. Cabinet Regulation No. 44 of 8 February 2000, Minimum Requirements for 

Safety at Work and Protection of Health when Using Work Equipment 

(Coming into force on 1 July 2000); 

9. Cabinet Regulation No. 270 of 3 August 1999, Regulations regarding Work 

Safety and Health Protection Requirements when Moving Heavy Loads 

(Coming into force on 1 January 2001); 

10. Cabinet Regulation No. 470 of 22 December 1998, Procedures for the 

Investigation and Registration of Accidents at Work (Coming into force on 1 

January 1999); 

11. Cabinet Regulation No, 318 of 25 August 1998, Requirements for Use of 

Safety Signs in Workplaces (Coming into force on 1 January 1999); 

114

12. Cabinet Regulation No. 317 of 25 August 1998, Regulations regarding Work 

Safety and Health Protection of Employees in Work with Asbestos (Coming 

into force on 1 January 2000). 

OHSAS 18001 is applicable to any organization from all types of business sectors and 

activities. Certification against OHSAS 18001 is aimed at the way a company has 

control over, and knowledge of, all relevant risks resulting from normal operations and 

abnormal situations. 

OHSAS 18001 is focused on the management of Occupational Health and Safety and as 

such addresses the organizations continual improvement that can be used to provide 

stakeholders and others with assurances of conformance with its stated Occupational 

Health &Safety policy [23; 24; 25; 26; 27; 28]. If we compared the Latvian Labour 

Protection Law (adopted by the Saeima on 20 June 2001, Coming into force on 1 

January 2002.) with OHSAS (5.point) we could find the requirements similar to 

standard. 

115

(DG JRC/IPTS) - agrilife - Europa

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?