You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reasons:

This IP address has been blocked from editing Wikipedia.
This does not affect your ability to read Wikipedia pages.
Most people who see this message have done nothing wrong. Some kinds of blocks restrict editing from specific service providers or telecom companies in response to recent abuse or vandalism, and can sometimes affect other users who are unrelated to that abuse. Review the information below for assistance if you do not believe that you have done anything wrong.

The IP address or range 44.201.0.0/16 has been blocked (disabled) by ‪ST47‬ for the following reason(s):

The IP address that you are currently using has been blocked because it is believed to be a web host provider. To prevent abuse, web hosts may be blocked from editing Wikipedia.
You will not be able to edit Wikipedia using a web host provider because it hides your IP address, much like a proxy or VPN.
We recommend that you attempt to use another connection to edit. For example, if you use a proxy or VPN to connect to the internet, turn it off when editing Wikipedia. If you edit using a mobile connection, try using a Wi-Fi connection, and vice versa. If you are using a corporate internet connection, switch to a different Wi-Fi network. If you have a Wikipedia account, please log in.
If you do not have any other way to edit Wikipedia, you will need to request an IP block exemption.

How to appeal if you are confident that your connection does not use a web host's IP address:
If you are confident that you are not using a web host, you may appeal this block by adding the following text on your talk page: ((unblock|reason=Caught by a web host block but this host or IP is not a web host. My IP address is _______. Place any further information here. ~~~~)). You must fill in the blank with your IP address for this block to be investigated. Your IP address can be determined here. Alternatively, if you wish to keep your IP address private you can use the unblock ticket request system. There are several reasons you might be editing using the IP address of a web host (such as if you are using VPN software or a business network); please use this method of appeal only if you think your IP address is in fact not a web host.

Administrators: The IP block exemption user right should only be applied to allow users to edit using web host in exceptional circumstances, and they should usually be directed to the functionaries team via email. If you intend to give the IPBE user right, a CheckUser needs to take a look at the account. This can be requested most easily at SPI Quick Checkuser Requests. Unblocking an IP or IP range with this template is highly discouraged without at least contacting the blocking administrator.

This block will expire on 23:54, 31 July 2024.

Even when blocked, you will usually still be able to edit your user talk page, as well as email administrators and other editors.

For information on how to proceed, please read the FAQ for blocked users and the guideline on block appeals. The guide to appealing blocks may also be helpful.

Other useful links: Blocking policy · Help:I have been blocked
Your IP address is in a range that has been blocked on all Wikimedia Foundation wikis. The block was made by ‪AntiCompositeNumber‬. The reason given is Open proxy/Webhost: Visit the FAQ if you are affected .
- Start of block: 13:55, 18 August 2022
- Expiry of block: 13:55, 18 April 2025
Your current IP address is 44.201.219.156. The blocked range is 44.201.0.0/16. Please include all above details in any queries you make. If you believe you were blocked by mistake, you can find additional information and instructions in the No open proxies global policy. Otherwise, to discuss the block please post a request for review on Meta-Wiki. You could also send an email to the stewards VRT queue at stewards@wikimedia.org including all above details.

You can view and copy the source of this page:

((Short description|Private organization))
((multiple issues|
((More citations needed|date=May 2023))
((Advert|date=May 2023))
))
((Use dmy dates|date=May 2023))

The '''Global Food Safety Initiative''' ('''GFSI''') is a private organization that works as a "coalition of action" from the [[Consumer Goods Forum]] (CGF) and brings together retailers and brand owners (manufacturers) from across the CGF membership. The GFSI operates under [[multistakeholder governance|multi-stakeholder governance]], with the objective to create "an extended food safety community to oversee food safety standards for businesses and help provide access to safe food for people everywhere".<ref>((Cite web|title=Overview|url=https://mygfsi.com/who-we-are/overview/|access-date=3 November 2021|website=myGFSI|publisher=GFSI))</ref> GFSI's work in benchmarking and [[Harmonization (standards)|harmonization]] aims to foster mutual acceptance of GFSI-recognized certification programs across the industry, with the ambition to enable a "once certified, accepted everywhere" approach.<ref>((Cite web|title=Recognition|url=https://mygfsi.com/how-to-implement/recognition/|access-date=3 November 2021|website=MyGFSI))</ref>

==About==
The Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) is a business-driven initiative for the continuous improvement of [[food safety]] management systems, with the ambition to ensure confidence in the delivery of safe food to consumers worldwide. GFSI provides a platform for collaboration between some of the world's leading food safety experts from retailer, manufacturer, food service companies, service providers associated with the food supply chain, international organizations, academia, and government.

The initiative was launched in 2000 following a number of food safety crises and pending changes to public laws in the food sector, including EU food law.<ref>((cite journal |title=Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the council|journal=Official Journal of the European Union L 31, 1/2/2002: 1-24 |date=2002 |volume=L 31/1 |pages=1–24 |url=https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/id/cbb8b2b8-9ad6-4f36-a1c7-0090187c8262/396410.pdf))</ref> With legal obligations for their supply chains, and compliance connected to liability, European retailers decided to use [[technical standards]] to comply with public law requirements.<ref>((cite book |last1=Van der Meulen |first1=B |title=Reconciling food law to competitiviness. Report on the regulatory environment of the European food and dairy sector |date=2009 |publisher=Wageningen Academic Publishers |isbn=9789086860982 |url=https://research.wur.nl/en/publications/reconciling-food-law-to-competitiviness-report-on-the-regulatory-))</ref>

Since then, experts from all over the world have been collaborating in numerous technical working groups to tackle current food safety issues defined by GFSI stakeholders. Key activities within GFSI include the definition and control of minimum requirements for food safety certification programs and a robust benchmarking process. GFSI benchmarking and recognition of existing technical standards are used for food safety certification programs, with the objective to enhance confidence, acceptance, and implementation of third-party certification along the entire food supply chain.

Other important activities include the development of a capacity-building program for small and/or less developed businesses to facilitate their access to local markets, and a continuous focus on food safety auditor competence to bring industry experts in collaboration with key stakeholders to a common consensus on the skills, knowledge, and attributes that a competent auditor should possess.

In 2020, GFSI launched a program named The Race to the Top (RTTT), with the objective to address specific challenges in relation to lack of trust and confidence in GFSI-recognized certification.<ref>((cite web |title=Stakeholder Consultation – Implementing GFSI's Conceptual Framework for 'The Race to the Top' |url=https://mygfsi.com/news_updates/stakeholder-consultation-the-race-to-the-top/ |website=mygfsi.com |date=5 May 2020 |publisher=GFSI |access-date=21 September 2021))</ref> This included food safety recalls for food manufacturers with GFSI-recognized certificates in the supply chains of their [[Consumer Goods Forum]] members.<ref>((cite web |last1=Torfs |first1=Michaël |title=Greenyard recalling products in 80 countries after reports of nine listeria deaths |url=https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/en/2018/07/14/greenyard-under-fire-due-to-potential-listeria-infection/ |website=vrt.be |date=14 July 2018 |access-date=14 July 2018))</ref><ref>((cite web |title=FDA Investigated Multistate Outbreak of Salmonella Mbandaka Infections Linked to Kellogg's Honey Smacks Cereal |url=https://www.fda.gov/food/outbreaks-foodborne-illness/fda-investigated-multistate-outbreak-salmonella-mbandaka-infections-linked-kelloggs-honey-smacks |website=fda.gov |date=9 September 2020 |publisher=FDA))</ref> In 2022, IFS reported they had requested the legality of the RTTT to be reviewed by the [[Federal Cartel Office]] under antitrust and competition law.<ref>((cite web |title=Important Notification about GFSI suspension |url=https://www.ifs-certification.com/index.php/en/news/news-archiv/4304-important-notification-about-gfsi-suspension |website=ifs-certification.com |access-date=9 December 2022))</ref>

==Benchmarking==
Within GFSI, [[benchmarking]] is a procedure by which a food safety-related certification programme is compared to GFSI benchmarking requirements.<ref name=":0">((Cite web|title=Harmonisation|url=https://mygfsi.com/what-we-do/harmonisation/|access-date=10 November 2021|website=MyGFSI))</ref>

In 2000, food safety was a top-of-mind issue for companies due to several high-profile recalls, quarantines, and negative publicity about the food industry. There was also extensive audit fatigue throughout the industry, as retailers performed inspections or audits themselves or asked a third party to do this on their behalf. These were often carried out against food safety schemes that lacked international certification and accreditation, resulting in incompatible auditing results.<ref>((cite book |last1=Kellermann |first1=Martin |title=Ensuring Quality to Gain Access to Global Markets: A Reform Toolkit |date=2019 |publisher=International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank and Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB) |location=Washington, DC |isbn=978-1-4648-1372-6 |page=53 |url=https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/249621553265195570-0090022019/original/FullQIToolkitReport.pdf |chapter=3.3 Private Standards))</ref>

CEOs of global companies came together at the Consumer Goods Forum, knowing that under new pending EU food law, "unsatisfactory inspection results should lead to appropriate action". If they could demonstrate that technical standards avoid non-compliance to food law, enforcement authorities would be less likely to prosecute their companies in the event of food safety incidents within supply chains.<ref>((cite journal |last1=Martinez |first1=M.G |last2=Fearne |first2=A |last3=Caswell |first3=J.A |last4=Henson |first4=S.J |title=Co-regulation as a possible model for food safety governance: opportunities for public-private partnerships |journal=Food Policy |date=2007 |volume=32 |issue=3 |pages=299–314 |doi=10.1016/j.foodpol.2006.07.005 |url=https://scholarworks.umass.edu/resec_faculty_pubs/35/))</ref> The CEOs agreed that consumer trust needed to be strengthened and maintained through a safer supply chain.

GFSI was created to achieve this through the [[Harmonization (standards)|harmonization]] of food safety standards that would help mitigate liability exposure for retailers and reduce audit duplication throughout the supply chain. At the time, there was no existing scheme that could be adopted by all. GFSI therefore chose to implement benchmarking, developing a model that determines equivalency between existing food safety schemes, whilst leaving flexibility and choice in the marketplace.

Benchmarking allows multiple certification programmes with GFSI recognition to enter the marketplace. This created strong competition among certification programme owners (CPO) who employ large marketing teams with annual growth targets. GFSI benchmarking implies equivalency, though the financial opportunities with certification programme fees<ref>((cite web |title=BRC service fee increase 2022 |url=https://techni-k.co.uk/brcgs-standards/brc-service-fee-increase/ |website=techni-k.co.uk |date=2 March 2021 |publisher=Techni-K))</ref> resulted in a [[perverse incentive]], with CPOs working to differentiate themselves from their competitors. The unintended consequence of harmonization was fragmentation due to additional CPO entrants requesting recognition for monetary gain. Companies that have to choose a certification program often hire consultants to help them decide on the best scheme, which causes confusion for stakeholders.<ref>((cite book |last1=Washington |first1=Sally |title=Private standards and certification in fisheries and aquaculture |date=2011 |publisher=FAO |isbn=978-92-5-106730-7 |url=http://www.fao.org/in-action/globefish/publications/details-publication/en/c/338612/ |access-date=29 May 2020))</ref><ref>((cite web |last1=Horlock |first1=David |title=Collaborate, innovate and accelerate; how standards build consensus and facilitate trade |url=https://www.bsigroup.com/en-GB/blog/food-industry-blog-news/food-community/ |website=bsigroup.com |publisher=BSI))</ref>

GFSI is not a CPO and does not undertake any certification or accreditation activities. However, it is structured and designed to control the minimum requirements in schemes and therefore influence certification activities. GFSI represents its Consumer Goods Forum members, and their steering committee [[Multistakeholder governance|governance]]<ref>((cite web |title=Governance |url=https://mygfsi.com/who-we-are/governance |website=mygfsi.com |publisher=Consumer Goods Forum))</ref> have controlling interest to decide benchmarking requirements.

'''GFSI objectives''':
* Reduce food safety risks by delivering equivalence and convergence between effective food safety management systems
* Manage cost in the global [[food system]] by eliminating redundancy and improving operational efficiency
* Develop competencies and capacity-building in food safety to create consistent and effective global food systems
* Provide a unique international stakeholder platform for collaboration, knowledge exchange, and networking<ref>((Cite web |url=http://www.mygfsi.com/about-gfsi/vision-mission-and-objectives.html |title=Mission And Objectives |publisher=GFSI |access-date=18 April 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120420042603/http://www.mygfsi.com/about-gfsi/vision-mission-and-objectives.html |archive-date=20 April 2012))</ref>

==Recognition==
GFSI has recognized a number of food safety management programs that fulfill the criteria of the GFSI benchmarking requirements.<ref name=":0" /> These are regularly revised by GFSI to reflect improvements in best practices. GFSI is not a CPO in itself and does not carry out any accreditation or certification activities.

The status of recognition is achieved through a comprehensive benchmarking process.<ref name=Certification>((Cite web |url=https://mygfsi.com/how-to-implement/cpos-undergoing-benchmarking |title=GFSI-Recognized CPOs Undergoing Benchmarking Against V2020 |publisher=GFSI |access-date=20 March 2021))</ref> Once a standard has gained formal recognition by the GFSI steering committee, this standard is deemed to meet all of the requirements in the GFSI benchmarking requirements.<ref name=":0" />

Certification according to a GFSI-recognized certification programme can be achieved through a successful [[Certification|third-party audit]] against any of the following certification programs, recognized by GFSI:<ref name=Certification />
* [[British Retail Consortium|BRC]] Global Standard for Food Safety, issue 8
* BRC Global Standard for Packaging and Packaging Materials, issue 6
* BRC Global Standard for Agents and Brokers, issue 2
* BRC Global Standard for Storage and Distribution, issue 4
* CanadaGAP (Canadian Horticultural Council On-Farm Food Safety Program), v8
* Freshcare FSQ, edition 4.2
* FSSC 22000, v5.1 (based on requirements defined in [[ISO 22000]])
* Global Aquaculture Alliance Seafood – Seafood Processing Standard, version 5.1
* Global Red Meat Standard
* GLOBALG.A.P. Integrated Farm Assurance Scheme, v5.4
* GLOBALG.A.P. Harmonized Produce Safety Standard, v1.2
* GLOBALG.A.P. Produce Handling Assurance Standard , v1.2
* International Featured Standards IFS Food, v7
* International Featured Standards IFS Logistics, v2.2
* International Featured Standards IFS Broker, v3
* International Featured Standards IFS PACsecure, v1.1
* Japan Food Safety Management Association JFS-C, v3.0
* Japan GAP Foundation ASIAGAP, version 2.3
* PrimusGFS Standard, version 3.2
* SQF Safe Quality Food Code, edition 9

Up-to-date information on the status of CPO benchmarking and recognition is published on the GFSI website.<ref>((Cite web|title=Certification Programme Owners|url=https://mygfsi.com/how-to-implement/recognition/certification-programme-owners/|access-date=12 November 2021|website=MyGFSI|language=en))</ref> Some CPOs are registered as [[nonprofit organizations]] and others as [[for-profit corporation|for-profit]].

==Conformity assessment==
The third-party audit of certification programs with GFSI recognition is performed by accredited certification bodies. GFSI allows certification programs to choose which conformity assessment requirements certification bodies must follow. The two options are:
* ISO/IEC 17021 conformity assessment — requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of management systems
* ISO/IEC 17065 conformity assessment — requirements for bodies certifying products, processes, and services

Certification programmes following ISO/IEC 17021 must also meet the requirements of ISO 22003-1 certification of food safety management systems; ISO 22003-2 certification of food safety systems is supplemental to ISO/IEC 17065.

ISO 17021 and ISO 17065 follow ISO/IEC 17000 for vocabulary and general principles,<ref>((cite web |title=ISO/IEC 17000:2020(en) Conformity assessment — Vocabulary and general principles |url=https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso-iec:17000:ed-2:v2:en |website=iso.org |publisher=ISO))</ref> which defines the terms "conformity assessment scheme" and "scheme". This term is referenced by regulators.<ref>((cite web |title=Commission Communication — EU best practice guidelines for voluntary certification schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs |url=https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2010:341:0005:0011:en:PDF |website=eur-lex.europa.eu))</ref> In 2018, GFSI introduced a new term, Certification Program Owner, to refer to scheme owners. Additionally, GFSI raised an objection to the term "scheme" in the Codex Committee Electronic Working Group for Codex Draft  Principles and Guidelines for the assessment and use of voluntary third-party assurance programs.<ref>((cite web |title=draft Principles and Guidelines for the assessment and use of voluntary Third-Party Assurance (vTPA) programmes |url=http://www.fao.org/fao-who-codexalimentarius/sh-proxy/en/?lnk=1&url=https%253A%252F%252Fworkspace.fao.org%252Fsites%252Fcodex%252FCircular%252520Letters%252FCL%2525202021-52-OCS%252Fcl21_52e.pdf |website=fao.org/ |publisher=Codex Alimentarius Commission))</ref> This resulted in a new term, "vTPA", being introduced.

A comparative study of schemes explains an ISO 17065 scheme as [[product certification]], which is prescriptive, and an ISO 17021
scheme as a management certification, and non-prescriptive.<ref>((cite journal |last1=Pop |first1=S.Z. |last2=Dracea |first2=R. |last3=Vlădulescu |first3=C. |title=Comparative Study of Certification Schemes for Food Safety Management Systems in the European Union Context |journal=Amfiteatru Economic |date=February 2018 |volume=20 |issue=47 |pages=9–29 |doi=10.24818/EA/2018/47/9 |url=https://www.amfiteatrueconomic.ro/temp/Article_2692.pdf |access-date=26 September 2021))</ref> A paper from the [[Food and Agriculture Organization]], with a review of literature (Wolff and Scannell, 2008; FAO, 2009a; IIED, 2009; WTO, 2010), highlighted concerns that included private food safety standards being prescriptive rather than outcome-focused.<ref>((cite book |title=Private Food Safety Standards: Their Role in Food Safety Regulation and their Impact |date=2010 |publisher=Food and Agriculture Organization |page=10 |url=http://www.fao.org/food/food-safety-quality/a-z-index/private-food-standards0/en/ |access-date=9 July 2010))</ref>

==Industry influence and motivation==
Under the umbrella of GFSI, eight major retailers ([[Carrefour]], [[Tesco]], [[ICA AB|ICA]], [[Metro AG|Metro]], [[Migros]], [[Ahold]], [[Wal-Mart]], and [[Delhaize]]) operate as a private sector-led Multi-Stakeholder Initiative (MSI), also referred to as [[multistakeholder governance|mult-istakeholder governance]]. Major retailers came to a common acceptance of the GFSI benchmarked food safety certification programs in June 2007.<ref>((Cite magazine |last=Wellik |first=Rhonda |date=2 April 2012 |url=https://www.foodqualityandsafety.com/article/global-food-safety-initiative-improves-organizational-culture-efficiency-in-food-industry/ |title=Global Food Safety Initiative Improves Organizational Culture, Efficiency in Food Industry |magazine=Food Quality and Safety |publisher=Wiley Periodicals, Inc. |access-date=20 March 2021))</ref>

The motivation for retailer- and brand-owner influence over benchmarking requirements for CPOs is focused on their legal liability, mostly related to food safety failures within supply chains.<ref>((cite book |last1=van der Meulen |first1=Bernd |title=Private food law Governing food chains through contract law, self-regulation, private standards, audits and certification schemes |date=2011 |publisher=Wageningen Academic |isbn=978-90-8686-176-7 |page=97 |url=https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/id/cbb8b2b8-9ad6-4f36-a1c7-0090187c8262/396410.pdf |access-date=6 July 2021))</ref> Under EU food law, retailers and brand owners have a legal responsibility for their brands, and the main reason GFSI was founded at the time was to comply with the legal obligation to check suppliers.<ref>((cite web |last1=Willem Paul de Mooij |title=IFS boss outraged by suspension: 'GFSI unjustly shames us' |url=https://www.vmt.nl/60530/ifs-boss-outraged-by-suspension-gfsi-unjustly-shames-us |website=vmt.nl |date=December 2022))</ref> This legal obligation stimulated a parallel development of private standards as self-regulation tools, adding to the global food sector's burden, as the requirements were focused on liability mitigation against EU food law.<ref>((cite book |last1=Christodoulou |first1=Maria |title=Study on the evaluation of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 ("the General Food Law Regulation") |date=October 2015 |publisher=European Commission, Directorate-General for Health and Food Safety |url=https://food.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2018-01/gfl_fitc_external_study_gen_part_gfl.pdf))</ref> Retailers were cautious to avoid potential scandals, which resulted in taking the lead on technical committees and with governance over standard-setting organizations such as IFS and BRCGS.<ref>((cite book |title=Standard for auditing product and process compliance in relation to food safety and quality |date=April 2023 |publisher=IFS Management GmbH |page=4 |edition=8 |url=https://www.ifs-certification.com/images/ifs_documents/IFS_Food_v8_standard_EN_1681804068.pdf |chapter=Members of the IFS International Technical Committee))</ref> <ref>((cite web |title=BRCGS Governance |url=https://www.brcgs.com/about-brcgs/governance/ |website=brcgs.com |access-date=6 July 2021))</ref>

Concerns around self-regulation and corporate governance in the absence of government regulation have been raised by the Institute for Multi-Stakeholder Initiative Integrity, with conclusions that private-sector MSIs adopt weak or narrow standards that better serve corporate interests than rightsholder interests.<ref>((cite book |title=Not Fit-for-Purpose The Grand Experiment of Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives in Corporate Accountability, Human Rights and Global Governance |date=July 2020 |publisher=MSI Integrity |location=San Francisco: Institute for Multi-Stakeholder Initiative Integrity |url=https://www.msi-integrity.org/not-fit-for-purpose/ |access-date=20 September 2021))</ref><ref>((cite web |title=Who's Tipping the Scales? |url=http://www.ipes-food.org/pages/tippingthescales |website=ipes-food.org |publisher=IPES-Food))</ref>

==Divided opinion within GFSI==
Brand owners, who are more focused on manufacturing food, and retailers, who are more focused on selling food, have divided opinions on schemes with GFSI recognition. The majority of brand owners who are GFSI members<ref>((cite web |title=Governance |url=https://mygfsi.com/who-we-are/governance |website=mygfsi.com |publisher=GFSI))</ref> implement FSSC 22000 in their manufacturing facilities. This includes  [[Barilla]], [[Cargill]], [[Coca-Cola]], [[Danone]], [[Kraft Heinz]], [[Mondelez]], [[PepsiCo]], and [[Nestle]]. FSSC 22000 is based on an [[international standard]] ([[ISO 22000]]) and follows ISO 17021.

Brand owners choose FSSC 22000 for two reasons: Firstly, food manufacturing is a [[process manufacturing|process industry]], and ISO 17021 is a process-based approach to food safety, which complements process manufacturing. Secondly, some brand owners have implemented ISO-integrated management systems in their manufacturing facilities, which are designed for integration with [[ISO 9001]] Quality, [[ISO 14001]] Environmental, and [[ISO 45001]] Occupational Health & Safety standards.<ref>((cite web |title=Safe Working Environment |url=https://www.mondelezinternational.com/Snacking-Made-Right/ESG-Topics/Safe-Working-Environment |website=mondelezinternational.com |publisher=Mondelez))</ref><ref>((cite web |title=Integrated Management of food safety, quality, environment, health and safety |url=https://www.cargill.com/sustainability/aquaculture/integrated-management |website=cargill.com |publisher=Cargill))</ref><ref>((cite web |title=Nestlé Quality Policy |url=https://www.nestle.com/sites/default/files/asset-library/documents/library/documents/suppliers/quality_policy_nestle.pdf |website=nestle.com |publisher=Nestlé))</ref><ref>((cite web |title=Quality & Food Safety Policy |url=https://www.coca-colacompany.com/policies-and-practices/quality-and-food-safety-policy |website=coca-colacompany.com |publisher=Coca-Cola))</ref><ref>((cite web |title=Offer superior experiences and innovate, always |url=https://www.danone.com/integrated-annual-reports/integrated-annual-report-2019/performance/offer-superior-food-experience-and-innovate-always.html |website=danone.com |date=21 April 2021 |publisher=Danone))</ref>

In 2007, the [[United Nations Conference on Trade and Development]] and the [[World Trade Organization]] jointly organized an informal information session on private standards. A proposal was made to GFSI to adopt [[ISO 22000]] as a single international standard for the reasons of impartiality, independence, consensus, and no scheme-owner fees. There was strong opposition from scheme owners, as their schemes would likely become obsolete if an international standard was adopted.<ref>((cite web |title=Joint UNCTAD/WTO informal information session on private standards |url=https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/private_standards_june07_e/private_standards_june07_e.htm |website=wto.org |publisher=World Trade Organization (WTO)))</ref>

Retailers rejected the proposal due to their close relationships with scheme owners using private standards.<ref>((cite web |title=Our services and quality systems, IFS |url=https://www.schoutenadvies.nl/en/kwaliteitssystemen/ifs/ |website=.schoutenadvies.nl |publisher=Schouten Advies))</ref> The proposal was raised again in 2020, and GFSI restated their position not to have one standard for the food industry.<ref>((cite web |title=One Standard for the Food Industry |url=https://mygfsi.com/news_updates/one-standard-for-the-food-industry-ask-gfsi/ |website=mygfsi.com/ |date=13 August 2020 |publisher=Global Food Safety Initiative))</ref> Promoting ISO 22000 for food and farming would mean reducing the power of global retailers in terms of control over standards.<ref>((cite journal |last1=Soon |first1=Jan Mei |last2=Baines |first2=Richard N. |title=Public and Private Food Safety Standards: Facilitating or Frustrating Fresh Produce Growers? |journal=Laws |date=2013 |volume=2 |issue=Global Food Safety Law and Policy |pages=1–19 |doi=10.3390/laws2010001 |doi-access=free ))</ref>

==GFSI conference==
GFSI hosts an annual conference in different regions, including Europe, North America, and Asia.<ref>((cite web |title=GFSI Conference |url=https://mygfsi.com/events/gfsi-conference/ |website=mygfsi.com |publisher=Consumer Goods Forum))</ref>

{| class="wikitable"
|+
!Year
!City
!Country
!Region
|-
|2001 
|Geneva
|Switzerland
|Europe
|-
|2002
|Geneva
|Switzerland
|Europe
|-
|2004
|Barcelona
|Spain
|Europe
|-
|2005
|Rome
|Italy
|Europe
|-
|2006
|Paris
|France
|Europe
|-
|2007
|Munich
|Germany
|Europe
|-
|2008
|Amsterdam
|The Netherlands 
|Europe
|-
|2009
|Barcelona
|Spain
|Europe
|-
|2010
|Washington D.C. 
|USA
|North America 
|-
|2011
|London
|UK
|Europe
|-
|2012
|Orlando
|USA
|North America
|-
|2013
|Barcelona
|Spain
|Europe
|-
|2014
|Anaheim
|USA
|North America
|-
|2015
|Kuala Lumpur
|Malaysia
|Asia
|-
|2016
|Berlin
|Germany
|Europe
|-
|2017
|Houston
|USA
|North America
|-
|2018
|Tokyo
|Japan
|Asia
|-
|2019
|Nice
|France
|Europe
|-
|2020
|Seattle<ref>((cite web |title=GFSI Conference Executive Summary – Seattle 2020 |url=https://mygfsi.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/GFSI-2020-Executive-Summary.pdf |website=mygfsi.com |publisher=Consumer Goods Forum))</ref>
|USA
|North America
|-
|2022
|Barcelona
|Spain
|Europe
|-
|2023
|Atlanta
|USA
|North America
|}

==References==
((reflist))

==External links==
* [https://www.fssc.com/ FSSC 22000]
* [http://www.theconsumergoodsforum.com/ The Consumer Goods Forum]

[[Category:Farm assurance]]
[[Category:Food safety]]
[[Category:Medical and health organisations based in Belgium]]

Pages transcluded onto the current version of this page (help):

Global Food Safety Initiative (edit)
Template:Advert (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Ambox (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Cite book (view source) (protected)
Template:Cite journal (view source) (protected)
Template:Cite magazine (view source) (protected)
Template:Cite web (view source) (protected)
Template:DMCA (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Dated maintenance category (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Dated maintenance category (articles) (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:FULLROOTPAGENAME (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Find sources mainspace (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Main other (view source) (protected)
Template:More citations needed (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Multiple issues (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Multiple issues/styles.css (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Ns has subpages (view source) (protected)
Template:Pagetype (view source) (protected)
Template:Reflist (view source) (protected)
Template:Reflist/styles.css (view source) (protected)
Template:SDcat (view source) (protected)
Template:Short description (view source) (protected)
Template:Short description/lowercasecheck (view source) (protected)
Template:Use dmy dates (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Arguments (view source) (protected)
Module:Category handler (view source) (protected)
Module:Category handler/blacklist (view source) (protected)
Module:Category handler/config (view source) (protected)
Module:Category handler/data (view source) (protected)
Module:Category handler/shared (view source) (protected)
Module:Check for unknown parameters (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1 (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/COinS (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Date validation (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Utilities (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Whitelist (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css (view source) (protected)
Module:Disambiguation/templates (view source) (protected)
Module:Find sources (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Find sources/config (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Find sources/links (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Find sources/templates/Find sources mainspace (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Message box (view source) (protected)
Module:Message box/ambox.css (view source) (protected)
Module:Message box/configuration (view source) (protected)
Module:Namespace detect/config (view source) (protected)
Module:Namespace detect/data (view source) (protected)
Module:Ns has subpages (view source) (protected)
Module:Pagetype (view source) (protected)
Module:Pagetype/config (view source) (protected)
Module:Pagetype/disambiguation (view source) (protected)
Module:Pagetype/setindex (view source) (protected)
Module:Pagetype/softredirect (view source) (protected)
Module:SDcat (view source) (protected)
Module:String (view source) (protected)
Module:Unsubst (view source) (protected)
Module:Wikitext Parsing (view source) (protected)
Module:Yesno (view source) (protected)

Return to Global Food Safety Initiative.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Food_Safety_Initiative"