Last week via Twitter, I learned that the Center for Produce Safety released an updated agenda for its 2012 Research Symposium, June 27 at the University of California at Davis. A few months ago I shared news about the Center making $3 million available to fund general and commodity-specific research to address the fresh produce industry’s food safety research projects designed to fill basic knowledge gaps in specific areas of food safety practices for fruit, vegetable and tree nut production, harvest and post-harvest handling. Using that as a backdrop, this year’s symposium will explore:

• Good Agricultural Practices – Buffer Zones and Animal Vectors. Topics include E. coli O157:H7 in bioaerosols from cattle production; buffer zone distances between sheep grazing operations and vegetable crops; evaluation of amphibians and reptiles as potential reservoirs of foodborne pathogens; and a wildlife survey for E. coli O157:H7 in the central coast counties of California.
• Good Agricultural Practices – Irrigation Water Quality. Topics include epidemiologic analysis and risk management practices for reducing E. coli in irrigation source water; science-based evaluation of regional risks for Salmonella contamination of irrigation water at mixed produce farms; risk assessment of Salmonella pre-harvest internalization in relation to irrigation water quality standards for melons and other cucurbits; and mitigation of irrigation water using zero-valent iron treatment.
• Good Agricultural Practices – Inputs, Cultivation and Harvest. Topics include the benefits and challenges of using industry data; developing and validating practical strategies to improve microbial safety in composting process control and handling; assessing postharvest risks for Salmonella in pistachios; and pathogen transfer risks associated with specific tomato harvest and packing operations.
• Wash Water and Process Control. Topics include rapid testing of flume water organic load to better assess the efficacy of free chlorine against E. coli O157:H7 during commercial lettuce processing; enhancing the efficacy of fresh produce washing operations via monitoring methods and water disinfection technologies; evaluation and optimization of postharvest intervention strategies for the reduction of bacterial contamination on tomatoes; and improving produce safety by stabilizing chlorine in washing solutions with high organic loads.

PMA is a long-time supporter of the CPS. Earlier this year, we donated $900,000 to the Center to cover all administrative costs during the next two years and ensure that all other funding for CPS goes directly to support science-based research. In addition, Dr. Bob Whitaker, our Chief Science and Technology Officer, is chair of the CPS Technical Committee.

For full details on the 2012 Research Symposium (including registration and hotel information), visit the CPS website. To discuss this or other industry food safety research issues, join the Food Safety Community on PMA Xchange.

Also, if your organization is a PMA Gold Circle contributor, you’re invited to a free networking breakfast on June 28, where Dr. Bob Whitaker will discuss key findings from the new food safety research presented at the CPS symposium. If you’re not a Gold Circle contributor, here are details on how to become one.

The internet is changing how we work, live, and communicate, but it is also changing business – how we innovate, create products and services, and interact with customers and suppliers. Anthony D. Williams, a keynote speaker at the recent Canadian Produce Marketing Association convention in Calgary, told attendees how they could immerse themselves in technology and get benefits for their business, personal, and social lives. Williams, co-author of Macrowikinomics and Wikinomics, said these new ways of interacting are also changing education, health care, government, and political engagement.

Collaboration, openness and sharing are the three principles of “wikinomics,” he said.

He spoke of the new fabric of connectivity: social consequences, the changing nature of society and human communities. No longer does your life include those you meet in business or in your geographic community. You can form communities around any shared interest, goal, or idea. He noted how many successful endeavors are being built by volunteers who gather around a common concept (Wikipedia, Linux operating system, etc.). These are not just about free information or open source programming; they are about a different kind of business model. Some companies, when faced with a conundrum go beyond their internal R&D departments and seek solutions outside the company. They send the issue out to their networks and get solutions. Williams called it extraordinary sharing for extraordinary challenges. Another example is the apps for iPhones. Apple doesn’t develop the apps; it offers a platform for innovation. Apple doesn’t have to pay the developers, just share the profits.

Every business decision doesn’t work this way, and Williams said you have to assess the right circumstances for this type of solution. And, he said, this is a big advantage for small and medium sized companies as it allows them to compete with the big guys. They can have global reach and tap talent pools around the world. They don’t have to create infrastructure for themselves, they can use Google apps, communication from Skype, and remote staffers.

Williams likened this time to the time of the invention of the printing press. Putting knowledge into the hands of the people empowered them to think differently and forever changed feudal economies and the concentrated power of monarchies and the church. The current version of democratizing knowledge led to the Arab Spring and powerful transparency is evident in Wikileaks. On a more local level, it means that after a medical diagnosis, you may go into your doctor far better-informed and prepared to participate more fully in your treatment.

So, how can you get into this? Williams suggested:

• On Twitter, follow the leaders of topics you’re interested in. They are often ahead of the curve, ahead of the media, and innovators. Then share your own knowledge to inform others.
• Immerse yourself in the future. Experiment with Wikipedia and contribute where you have expertise.
• Get serious about innovation – make it a priority. Encourage risk taking, embrace suggestions from any level in the company, give people time to create.
• Challenge a community (however you define it) to solve a problem.
• Put your customers on your design team.
• Recruit young people to lead change – and let them do it.

How are you embracing collaboration? Tell us about it on PMA Xchange, where you can collaborate with other members and PMA staff experts on a wide variety of topics.

Something I’ve wondered about – as have many of you – is on what do Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) recipients spend their benefits? This question arises frequently, but even more so as we move toward a new farm bill, the legislation that governs SNAP. And the context is usually a debate about whether SNAP benefits should be restricted to more healthful foods.

This month, USDA, which runs SNAP, released “Building a Healthy America: A Profile of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.” The report explains the program and covers a wide variety of statistics. Though the information is not as detailed as we might like, it does begin to give some insight into SNAP expenditures. Here are a few of the data points that may resonate with you:

“Food expenditures among SNAP participants: Vegetables, fruits, grain products, meat, and meat alternatives account for most of the money value of food used by SNAP households…nearly 75% of the money value of food used at home.

“Dietary Guidelines: The overall average score on the Healthy Eating Index-20053 was 58 out of a possible 100 in 1999–2004. SNAP participants scored slightly lower, with an overall score of 52, vs. 56 for income-eligible nonparticipants and higher-income nonparticipants. All groups had very low intakes of whole grains, dark green and orange vegetables, and legumes.

“Increasing the amount SNAP participants can spend on food improves diet quality, but the improvement is very small…. A 10% increase in food spending for SNAP participants correlates to increased intake of fruits and vegetables, high-fat dairy and milk products, and whole grains—including grains that are more nutrient-dense.

“Within food categories, SNAP participants do make some less healthful food choices, as compared to higher-income nonparticipants….However, more than half of all foods consumed by all Americans are foods that should be consumed only occasionally. …SNAP participants were somewhat less likely to consume fruits or vegetables than other Americans.”

I would like more detail on food spending by SNAP recipients, but this is a good start. What do you think of the statistics? Let’s talk about it in the Increasing Consumption Community on PMA Xchange.

The Senate Agriculture Committee is expected to take up the farm bill, the massive reauthorization of federal farm programs, soon. Though it began as a reconsideration of price support programs, the farm bill has become the primary congressional vehicle on food and agricultural policy. In the last farm bill (enacted in 2008 and expiring this September), the Specialty Crop Farm Bill Alliance successfully advocated for the inclusion of programs targeted to the needs of produce and other specialty crops.

Senator Debbie Stabenow of Michigan championed specialty crop agriculture in the 2008 bill; this time, she chairs the Senate Agriculture Committee. Recently Chairwoman Stabenow released a draft of the bill, known as “the chair’s mark.” A review of this draft reveals the proposal continues the tremendous gains specialty crops received in the last farm bill, but in a far more difficult budgetary environment. It increases spending for block grants to states to support specialty crops and the plant and disease program known as “10201.”

The draft maintains nutrition programs such as the snack program and USDA purchases of fruits and vegetables for school meals. The bill reauthorizes the research program designed to target research needed by specialty crops and even attempts to address concerns the coalition has raised to better align that research with industry needs.

The farm bill journey has many steps to go. It is not known if the work may be completed before the existing bill expires, but the Specialty Crop Farm Bill Alliance, which includes PMA, will continue fighting for the priorities for the fruit and vegetable industry. Chairwoman Stabenow’s bill is a significant start.

To make your voice heard in Washington on this critical legislation, visit PMA’s Advocacy Action Center to contact your Congressional leaders.

What if lack of produce availability in poorer areas doesn’t contribute to obesity? That’s the question raised by a couple of studies quoted in a New York Times article published April 17. The article, “Studies Question the Pairing of Food Deserts and Obesity,” notes that research shows that poor urban “neighborhoods not only have more fast food restaurants and convenience stores than more affluent ones, but more grocery stores, supermarkets and full-service restaurants, too. And there is no relationship between the type of food being sold in a neighborhood and obesity among its children and adolescents.”

The studies, which used different methodologies, came to the same conclusions: proximity to healthful or unhealthful foods doesn’t determine obesity outcomes. I expect we’ll see reaction to this from those who believe food deserts are a strong contributing factor to obesity. (Note: Reaction came swiftly in this April 23 op-ed.)

The question for me isn’t who’s right or who’s wrong in this. My question is: What does it take to increase fruit and vegetable consumption? If there is availability in these poorer, urban areas, then people there are making the same poor choices everyone else is making. The statistics show us that we are not moving the needle significantly on fruit and vegetable consumption. Is it lack of awareness? Probably not. Ask anyone whether they should eat more fruits and vegetables and they know they should. Is it personal choice? Is it availability? Is it marketing? Is it convenience? Is it competitive foods? Is it parental teaching? Is it school meals? Is it culture?

It’s complicated. One thing is for sure. The industry that stands to benefit the most from the solution to this conundrum is ours. Let’s talk about it in the Increasing Consumption Community on PMA Xchange.

Last week, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration released its Second Annual Reportable Food Registry (RFR) Report, which showed that the registry has increased the speed with which FDA and its state and local partners investigate reports and take appropriate follow-up action, including removing reportable foods from commerce when necessary, and improved FDA’s understanding of how products are distributed through commodity supply chains, increasing FDA’s ability to trace reportable foods upstream and downstream.

From September 8, 2010 to September 7, 2011, the RFR logged 225 primary reports – initial reports about a safety concern with a food. The 225 primary reports for this time period involved products in 22 commodity categories. There was an increase in fresh produce reports to 27 (up from 14), while the number of reports for fresh-cut produce declined from 13 to 9. FDA states that “this rise is attributable to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) sampling program intended to establish current baseline values of contamination against which the effectiveness of new procedures to reduce or eliminate harmful microorganisms in certain fresh fruits and vegetables can be measured.”

In general, Salmonella accounted for 38.2 percent of hazards; for fresh produce, this was the most frequently reported hazard. For fresh-cut produce, that hazard was Listeria monocytogenes.

Interestingly, the report notes that “FDA’s proposed rules on preventive controls and produce safety which are expected to publish in the near future will address many of the problems evidenced by the RFR data, especially microbiological contamination.”

It’s a teasing hint that the Food Safety Modernization Act proposals we’ve been waiting on might be coming soon; however, that statement could have been written months ago when the proposals were originally expected. In the meantime, you can check out the RFR Second Annual Report via the FDA website. After looking at it, tell us what you think in the Food Safety Community on PMA Xchange.

On Wednesday, I shared with you the highlights of a USDA Webinar on country of origin labeling trends at retail; today I’d like to let you know about another USDA Webinar – this on focused on the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act (PACA).

Hosted by USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service Fruit and Vegetable Program, this Webinar will feature PACA Division Director Karla Whalen discussing how PACA helps companies resolve business disputes and protects the fruit and vegetable industry. Following her presentation, participants will have an opportunity to take part in a question and answer session.

For those unfamiliar with the PACA, it was enacted at the request of the fruit and vegetable industry to promote fair trade. The Act protects businesses dealing in fresh and frozen fruits and vegetables by establishing and enforcing a code of fair business practices and helping companies resolve business disputes.

The Webinar will be held April 25 from 2:00 to 3:00 Eastern time, and you can register for it here. Please note that space for this Webinar is limited; USDA tells me that early registration is encouraged.

Here at PMA, we sometimes receive questions from members about PACA or other regulatory programs and services. To that end, we created a navigating government agencies resource page that contains brief overviews of USDA, FDA, and Customs programs connected to the produce industry. In addition to the PACA information, we also highlight Market News, export resources, plant health rules/phytosanitary information, and other USDA tools.

The Free Trade Agreement between the United States and Colombia goes into effect May 15. According to the U.S. Trade Representative, more than half of current U.S. farm exports to Colombia will become duty-free immediately, and virtually all remaining tariffs will be eliminated within 15 years. Colombia will immediately eliminate duties on many items, including almost all fruit and vegetable products. PMA supported this FTA.

The U.S. International Trade Commission notes that Colombian exporters generally face substantially lower tariffs in the U.S. market than do U.S. exporters in the Colombian market. This is because most U.S. imports from Colombia enter free of duty either unconditionally or under other duty-free provisions. Because of this tariff asymmetry, the primary effects of the TPA will be improved U.S. access to the Colombian market and an increase in U.S. exports to Colombia.

However, floral exports from Colombia to the United States will enjoy a more-certain benefit as the FTA effectively replaces the Colombia provisions of the often-renewed Andean Trade Preference Act (later the Andean Trade Promotion and Drug Eradication Act). Enacted in December 1991, this law was passed to help four Andean countries (Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru) in their fight against drug production and trafficking by expanding their economic alternatives.

The Colombian floral exporters association and the Florida floral importers association supported the free trade agreement, noting benefits such as job creation, floral availability for consumers, and national security.

What benefits do you see from this FTA? Discuss it in our Global Trade Community on PMA Xchange.

Yesterday afternoon, I participated in an industry Webinar focused on country of origin labeling (COOL) hosted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. For those that missed it, the recording is expected to be available on the USDA website later this week.

This year, USDA’s COOL Division plans to conduct 3,700 retail surveillance reviews; these will be conducted by COOL-certified state officials (typically state department of agriculture staff). USDA also plans to conduct 500 follow-up retail reviews in 2012. A new aspect of these follow-ups includes the gathering of photographic evidence of noncompliance findings – more on that later. USDA plans to conduct 251 supplier traceback audits/paper audits this year as well.

The Webinar addressed the intent of country of origin labeling (“to provide consumers with additional information on which they base purchasing decisions and to ensure the public receives accurate information”) and provided a review of the retail surveillance process, supplier traceback audits, and required records.

Relative to our industry, last year overall retail compliance trends for fresh produce were quite promising, with 98 percent of fruit being compliant and just under 97 percent of vegetables being compliant across 3,966 stores. That said, the biggest noncompliance violations remain no country of origin declarations provided at all (66 percent) or some type of inaccuracy (14 percent) in the declaration such as the declaration on the bulk display sign and the Price Look Up codes not matching.

In general, of the 3,966 stores reviewed, 25 percent had zero noncompliance findings. Slightly more than 50 percent had less than 10 instances of noncompliance findings, while about 17 percent had major noncompliance findings (ranging from 10 to 24). Between five and eight percent of stores had more than 25 noncompliance findings; USDA said it finds that these are frequently found in small independent stores where English may not be the primary language spoken.

In the question-and-answer portion of the Webinar, I asked if USDA – in light of last fall’s GAO report on country of origin labeling implementation – anticipates issuing monetary penalties to retailers with chronic noncompliance problems. The response I received was that the agency hopes to not have to go down the road of issuing fines but it will be gathering evidence (remember the photos I mentioned a few paragraphs ago regarding follow-up reviews?) to present to an administrative law judge to determine if monetary penalties should be issued.

If you need additional information or resources on country of origin labeling, visit the PMA website. You can also check out previous posts on this topic here on Field to Fork.

It’s been a few weeks since the last sustainability story here on Field to Fork, but recently I received some information from Driscoll’s Strawberry Associates concerning its first large-scale sustainability project, which is focused on water conservation and improving water quality in California’s Pajaro Valley.

For decades the Pajaro Valley aquifer has been in overdraft due to groundwater depletion and saltwater intrusion since the 1950s. To remedy this, Driscolls has been actively working to improve water levels and the water quality of the aquifer to ensure that agriculture can continue to thrive in the valley. Some of its key projects include:

• Establishing a formal forum for dialogue and collaborative projects with more than 50 community leaders and stakeholders
• Conducting water use research and data collection
• Piloting irrigation technologies, and efficiencies
• Conducting grower irrigation trainings and extension
• Managing the Valley’s first private aquifer recharge pilot project
• Researching nutrient management and leaching
• Partnering with growers and the Resource Conservation District to develop practice-based incentives to reduce water use and improve water quality

In speaking with Driscoll’s Sustainability Specialist Naomi Sakoda, I learned that the aquifer recharge pilot was officially launched this year. She told me that it is the first basin to be built collaboratively between private and public agencies. “Driscolls recognizes that its grower community is the largest collective user in the Valley and therefore sees it as a responsibility and opportunity to drive the community toward solutions in order to protect the highly fertile and critical agricultural community. We partnered with one of our growers, landowners, the Resource Conservation District, the Natural Resources Conservation Service, and the University of California at Santa Cruz. We hope that it can serve as a model for others, and that we can eventually leverage what we learn our learnings to help other landowners replicate something similar on other properties,” she noted.

Unfortunately, the lack of rainfall since construction finished has hampered Driscoll’s efforts to yield expected results; hydrologic estimates from UCSC predict the basin will capture 200 acre feet of water per year (eight acre feet per day of rainfall for 30 days of rain).

If you’ve got a sustainability story to share, please let me know. We highlight these items here on the blog, the PMA website, and in the Sustainability Community on PMA Xchange.