Food Protection Trends - November 2008 - 768

TABLE 2. The adoption rate of various standards by firms surveyed Types of standards National Ministerial Provincial Enterprise International Number of firms 39 19 10 11 11 % of firms 100.0 48.7 25.6 28.2 28.2 How certification agencies are selected The research found that nationally accredited certification agencies were the most popular among producers. More than 2/3 of firms (67.6%) ranked the quality of certification (as they perceived it) as the most important factor in choice of certifier. The reputation of the agency was also an important factor, and the cost of certification and the specification of the certification agency could not be ignored. More than 50% of firms said their clients sometimes designated a particular certification agency. Most certification services were offered by government designated certifiers. Limited service was offered by foreign certifiers. national business, and more than 50% of those firms work with domestic wholesalers. The information gathered in the group meetings, indicated that products from most certified firms were consumed by upper- or middle-income consumers. of each type of standard among those surveyed. Many of these standards had been updated in the past five years, but some of them had not. Third party certification Certification is helpful for improving product reputation and is an important approach to enhancing competitiveness. More than 90% of the firms in this study chose to adopt TPC. A very small number of producers chose self-certification or second-party certification. Firms chose TPC for several reasons. The main reasons cited were market demand and government regulations. In the study, 65.7% of firms explained the reason for their choice as market demand, and 21 firms (54.3%) claimed that TPC was chosen to meet government regulations. Some firms also thought that TPC would help them to address the challenges of increasing environmental protection requirements and market competition. In the study, 32 firms answered the question as to whether their products had gone through TPC. More than 50% of producers reported that their products were verified by a third-party certifier. At present, agro-product certification in China consists mainly of product certification, such as safe agro-product certification, green food certification, and organic food certification, as well as system certifications such as HACCP and ISO. The study revealed that safe agroproduct certification was most common, while organic food certification was least common. The producers from the four cities argued that the main reason for this was that safe agro-product certification received a great deal of support from the government, whereas organic food certification was constrained by its unique requirements and high certification fees. Cost of third party certification To meet requirements set by certifiers, firms in the study usually needed to purchase new equipment and technology, and to increase the number of employees. Of the firms interviewed, 17.6% spent US$123,800. Although 42.4% of firms reported that certification was a financial burden for the firm, most firms (76.5%) rated the effects of certification as positive. Some firms believed that certification helped to increase sales and to raise the price of their products. Aoyang Feed Co. Ltd is an example of a case in which certification has increased product sales. Since 2003, the company had been certified for safe agro-products, HACCP, and ISO. Aoyang Feed Co. reported that per acre returns from fish farming were US$1,856 more than before certification was received. To differentiate the tilapia fed with their own feed from other tilapia, the company uses the label “Aoyang colorful snapper” which has been certified nationally as a safe agro-product. “Aoyang colorful snapper” is now purchased by hotels, special exhibition centers, and grocery chain stores in Guangzhou. Its sale price is three times that of ordinary tilapia. Standards adoption among producers in the four cities China’s standards system includes four categories: national, ministerial, provincial, and enterprise standards. In the field of agriculture, national standards are developed by the Standardization Administration of China. If there are no existing technical requirements but there is a need to harmonize in certain industries, general standards are developed by the MOA. If there are no national and ministerial standards but there is a need to harmonize requirements at the provincial or municipal level, the provincial or municipal administrative agencies are in charge of developing standards and reporting them to the Standardization Administration and relevant ministries for recordkeeping. If no relevant standards exist for a certain agro-product, an enterprise may establish enterprise standards and follow them during the production process. Enterprise standards must be reported to local standardization and government agricultural agencies. Even if national or provincial standards exist, the government still encourages enterprises to develop more stringent standards. Agro-product producers from the four cities reported that national and ministerial standards were used most frequently. Some producers also adopted some international or enterprise standards. Of course, some firms adopted all three types of standards at the same time. Table 2 displays the adoption rates Challenges of TPC In the group meetings, firm representatives talked about their various experiences and opinions on TPC. Responses from questionnaires echoed 768 FOOD PROTECTION TRENDS | NOVEMBER 2008

Food Protection Trends - November 2008

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Food Protection Trends - November 2008