Risk factors affecting the food safety risk in food business operations for risk-based inspection: A systematic review

被引:1
|
作者
Ze, Y. [1 ,2 ]
van Asselt, E. D. [2 ]
Focker, M. [2 ]
van der Fels-klerx, H. J. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Wageningen Univ & Res, Business Econ Grp, Wageningen, Netherlands
[2] Wageningen Food Safety Res, Wageningen, Netherlands
关键词
food safety; inspections; risk factors; risk-based methods; FOODBORNE ILLNESS; CRITICAL VIOLATIONS; RESTAURANTS; IMPACT; MANAGEMENT; KNOWLEDGE; HYGIENE; HEALTH; ESTABLISHMENTS; CERTIFICATION;
D O I
10.1111/1541-4337.13403
中图分类号
TS2 [食品工业];
学科分类号
0832 ;
摘要
Foodborne illnesses result in a high disease burden worldwide, making food safety control of food business operations (FBOs) an urgent issue. With public agencies and FBOs facing challenges in monitoring the complex food supply chain with limited resources, scientific and objective insights into those factors that are related to food safety at FBOs are needed. These factors can be used as input for risk-based inspection. We conducted a systematic review to identify and analyze risk factors affecting the FBOs' food safety risk. We used a set of predefined search strings in Scopus and Web of Science to search for scientific manuscripts published in the English language between January 1 2003 and February 1 2023. The review identified 53 relevant studies and 43 risk factors. The presence of certified personnel turned out to be the most cited factor. Nearly half of the extracted factors had only been investigated in one study. Additional challenges were identified for developing a universal ready-to-use list of factors for the building of a risk-based inspection method, such as the limitation in the applicability of identified factors in different types of FBOs, and the variability in conclusions between publications for certain factors (e.g., FBO location and inspection history), stressing the need for additional research. Future studies should also prioritize standardizing definitions and measurements, particularly regarding compliance factors. In general, the current list of factors brought forward in our review lays the groundwork for building a transparent, objective, and risk-based method for food safety inspections of FBOs.
引用
收藏
页数:20
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Risk-Based Prioritization of Construction Inspection
    Yuan, Chenxi
    Park, Jaehyun
    Xu, Xin
    Cai, Hubo
    Abraham, Dulcy M.
    Bowman, Mark D.
    TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECORD, 2018, 2672 (26) : 96 - 105
  • [32] Tanker inspection and a risk-based approach
    Ma, K
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE EIGHTH INTERNATIONAL OFFSHORE AND POLAR ENGINEERING CONFERENCE, VOL 4, 1998, : 504 - 512
  • [33] Risk-based approaches to food safety regulation: what role for co-regulation?
    Martinez, Marian Garcia
    Verbruggen, Paul
    Fearne, Andrew
    JOURNAL OF RISK RESEARCH, 2013, 16 (09) : 1101 - 1121
  • [34] Risk-based inspection on the Rough field
    Jones, J.S.
    Journal of Offshore Technology, 1997, 5 (02): : 41 - 42
  • [35] Dynamic risk-based inspection methodology
    Bhatia, Karan
    Khan, Faisal
    Patel, Hiralben
    Abbassi, Rouzbeh
    JOURNAL OF LOSS PREVENTION IN THE PROCESS INDUSTRIES, 2019, 62
  • [36] Risk-based inspection: Implementation and results
    Kaley, L
    Alvarado, G
    INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE AND WORKSHOP ON RELIABILITY AND RISK MANAGEMENT, 1998, : 451 - 456
  • [37] Consumer perceptions raised by the food safety inspection report: Does the smiley communicate a food safety risk?
    Vainio, Annukka
    Kaskela, Jenni
    Finell, Eerika
    Ollila, Sari
    Lunden, Janne
    FOOD CONTROL, 2020, 110
  • [38] Food safety Radiation risk for food imports
    Dorey, Emma
    CHEMISTRY & INDUSTRY, 2011, (07) : 8 - 8
  • [39] A review on hydrogen embrittlement and risk-based inspection of hydrogen technologies
    Campari, Alessandro
    Ustolin, Federico
    Alvaro, Antonio
    Paltrinieri, Nicola
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY, 2023, 48 (90) : 35316 - 35346
  • [40] RISK ANALYSIS AND FOOD SAFETY
    ALBANESE, RA
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN VETERINARY MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1992, 201 (02) : 245 - 249