Presentation by Delia Grace, Lucy Lapar, Iheanacho Okike, V Padmakumar and Anna Fahrion at an international South-South symposium on managing risks in emerging pork markets, Hanoi, Vietnam, 23-25 April 2012.
Boost PC performance: How more available memory can improve productivity
Managing risks in emerging pork markets: Safe food in informal markets
1. Managing risks in emerging pork
markets
Safe food in informal markets
Delia Grace; Lucy Lapar; Iheanacho Okike; V Padmakumar; Anna Fahrion.
International Livestock Research Institute
1
4. Context
2. Increasing concern over food safety
In developing countries studied
Many/most concerned over
food safety (40 to 97%)
WTP 5-10% premium for
safety
Younger, wealthier, town,
supermarket-shoppers
willing to pay more for
safety
Buy less during animal
health scares
4
12. Nigeria
80% cook <3 hours after purchase
93% boil for >20 minutes
75% keep in fridge
10% eat raw meat
Vietnam
100% of respondents cooked food < 3 hours of purchase
98% cooked for >10 minutes
58% keep in fridge
Nagaland
100% cook <3 hours after purchase
99% boil for >60 minutes
10% keep in fridge
90% keep pork ‘in the chimney’
12
13. Risks
4% consumers Vietnam report to GIT
illness in last 2 weeks (no relation pork or
meat consumption, strong relation vegetable
consumption)
9% consumers in Nigeria (strong relation
meat consumption)
23% consumers in Nagaland (no relation
pork, meat or vegetable consumption, strong relation
hygiene)
43% Nigerian butchers (strong relation group,
gender, hygienic practice, eating own products)
13
14. 100
90 Supermarket
Wet market
80
Village market
70
60
% UNACCEPTABLE
50
v
40
30
20
10
0
Total bacteria Enterobac Staph Listeria Residues
14
15. Conclusions
Findings support other work by ILRI in informal markets
Food in informal markets often contains hazards
But risks to human health less clear
And SUPERMARKET does not mean SAFE
Hazards, risks, practices are highly context specific
Time between slaughter and sale has biggest effect on
bacterial load
Slaughter house point of maximal contamination
– Village slaughtered often safer;
– Slaughterhouse which slaughter smaller no. of pigs have
higher bacteriological quality;
– Presence of customers at the slaughter place increase the
adoption of hygienic practices; 15
16. Conclusions
Many risk-mitigating practices as well as risk-
enhancing along the value chain
Endogenous trumps exogenous
Concerns over food safety even among poorest
But over-estimate ability to control
Over-estimate ability to judge
Rules & regulations don’t work and may make food
less safe
Incentives can work and need not involve profit
Risk-based approaches can provide contra-intuitive
insights implying radical changes in food safety
policy and practice
16