Ricotta Salata is a traditional ripened and salted whey cheese made in Sardinia (Italy) from sheep's milk. This product is catalogued as ready-to-eat food (RTE) since it is not submitted to any further treatment before consumption. Thus, foodborne pathogens, such as Listeria monocytogenes, can represent a health risk for consumers. In September 2012, the FDA ordered the recall of several batches of Ricotta Salata imported from Italy linked to 22 cases of Listeriosis in the United States. This study was aimed at evaluating the presence and virulence properties of L. monocytogenes in 87 samples of Ricotta Salata produced in Sardinia. The ability of this product to support its growth under foreseen packing and storing conditions was also evaluated in 252 samples. Of the 87 samples 17.2% were positive for the presence of L. monocytogenes with an average concentration of 2.2 log10 cfu/g. All virulence-associated genes (prfA, rrn, hlyA, actA, inlA, inlB, iap, plcA, and plcB) were detected in only one isolated strain. The Ricotta Salata samples were artificially inoculated and growth potential (δ) was assessed over a period of 3 mo. The value of the growth potential was always >0.5 log10 cfu/g under foreseen packing and storing conditions. This study indicates that Ricotta Salata supports the L. monocytogenes growth to levels that may present a serious risk to public health, even while stored at refrigeration temperatures.

What mechanisms facilitate state compliance with human rights? This article proposes and applies a model to assess the extent to which two United Nations human rights mechanisms—the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) and the state reporting procedure of the treaty bodies—are perceived as capable of stimulating compliance with human rights, and why. It does so by identifying a set of goals potentially achieved by these organizations—generating pressure, stimulating learning, providing an accurate overview of states’ performance, and delivering practically feasible recommendations—and testing the extent to which reaching these goals is seen to facilitate compliance with human rights. It concludes that the treaty bodies’ perceived strength lies in providing states with learning opportunities and an accurate overview of their internal situations. In contrast, the UPR is deemed particularly strong in generating peer and public pressure on states. From a theoretical point of view, this article shows that, under certain conditions, the three main theoretical schools on compliance—enforcement, management, and constructivist—offer credible explanations for states’ performance in implementing human rights recommendations, with the enforcement school faring relatively better than the other two. Data were collected by means of forty semi-structured interviews and an online survey.

This article conducts a comparative analysis of peer and public pressure in peer reviews among states. Arguing that such pressure is one increasingly important form of shaming in global politics, we seek to understand the extent to which five different peer reviews exert peer and public pressure and how possible variation among them can be explained. Our findings are based on responses to an original survey and semi-structured interviews among participants in the reviews. We find that peer and public pressure exist to different degrees in the peer reviews under study. Such differences cannot be explained by the policy area under review or the international organization in which peer reviews are organized. Likewise, the expertise of the actors involved in a peer review or perceptions of the legitimacy of peer review as a monitoring instrument do not explain the variation. Instead, we find that institutional factors and the acceptance of peer and public pressure among the participants in a peer review offer the best explanations.

No abstract

No abstract