Economic Effects of the U.S. Food Safety Modernization Act

Bovay, John; Sumner, Daniel A.

doi:10.1093/aepp/ppx039

Cited by 18 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, the simulation results at the U.S. state level suggest that the gains from the trade reform are unequally shared by individual states. The finding is consistent with Bovay and Sumner (2018), who suggested that large produce growers benefit more than smaller scale growers under the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA). Specifically, we find that large exporting states tend to benefit more from the potential trade liberalization.…”

Section: Simulation Results and Policy Implicationssupporting

confidence: 88%

A State‐Level Analysis of the Impact of a U.S.‐EU Harmonization of Food Safety Standards on U.S. Exports of Fruits and Vegetables

Karemera¹,

Xiong²,

Whitesides³

2019

Applied Eco Perspectives Pol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A comprehensive trade agreement has the potential to intensify agricultural trade between the United States and the European Union (EU). The cooperation on nontariff barriers including food safety standards and sanitary and phytosanitary issues will expand trade in fruits and vegetables. Using quarterly bilateral trade data at the U.S. state level, we deployed gravity models and probit equations and found that a 10% reduction in MRL stringency would promote trade by 5%. If the final provisions endorse the Codex MRLs, the U.

show abstract

Section: Simulation Results and Policy Implicationssupporting

confidence: 88%

A State‐Level Analysis of the Impact of a U.S.‐EU Harmonization of Food Safety Standards on U.S. Exports of Fruits and Vegetables

Karemera¹,

Xiong²,

Whitesides³

2019

Applied Eco Perspectives Pol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Organic produce farming is often thought to be a hotspot of enteric pathogen transmission, and increasingly, farmers are encouraged to remove wildlife habitat from their farms (Beretti & Stuart, ). Adhering to these Good Agricultural Practice recommendations can be extremely cost prohibitive to small‐scale growers (Bovay & Sumner, ). Therefore, understanding risk of enteric pathogen spillover within this system is particularly important.…”

Section: Literature Search and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Are we overestimating risk of enteric pathogen spillover from wild birds to humans?

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Enteric illnesses remain the second largest source of communicable diseases worldwide, and wild birds are suspected sources for human infection. This has led to efforts to reduce pathogen spillover through deterrence of wildlife and removal of wildlife habitat, particularly within farming systems, which can compromise conservation efforts and the ecosystem services wild birds provide. Further, Salmonella spp. are a significant cause of avian mortality, leading to additional conservation concerns. Despite numerous studies of enteric bacteria in wild birds and policies to discourage birds from food systems, we lack a comprehensive understanding of wild bird involvement in transmission of enteric bacteria to humans. Here, we propose a framework for understanding spillover of enteric pathogens from wild birds to humans, which includes pathogen acquisition, reservoir competence and bacterial shedding, contact with people and food, and pathogen survival in the environment. We place the literature into this framework to identify important knowledge gaps. Second, we conduct a meta-analysis of prevalence data for three human enteric pathogens, Campylobacter spp., E. coli, and Salmonella spp., in 431 North American breeding bird species. Our literature review revealed that only 3% of studies addressed the complete system of pathogen transmission. In our meta-analysis, we found a Campylobacter spp. prevalence of 27% across wild birds, while prevalence estimates of pathogenic E. coli (20%) and Salmonella spp. (6.4%) were lower. There was significant bias in which bird species have been tested, with most studies focusing on a small number of taxa that are common near people (e.g. European starlings Sturnus vulgaris and rock pigeons Columba livia) or commonly in contact with human waste (e.g. gulls). No pathogen prevalence data were available for 65% of North American breeding bird species, including many commonly in contact with humans (e.g. black-billed magpie Pica hudsonia and great blue heron Ardea herodias), and our metadata suggest that some under-studied species, taxonomic groups, and guilds may represent equivalent or greater risk to human infection than heavily studied species. We conclude that current data do not provide sufficient information to determine the likelihood of enteric pathogen spillover from wild birds to humans and thus preclude management solutions. The primary focus in the literature on pathogen prevalence likely overestimates the probability of enteric pathogen spillover from wild birds to humans because a pathogen must survive long enough at an infectious dose and be a strain that is able to colonize humans to cause infection. We propose that future research should focus on the large number of under-studied species commonly in contact with people and food production and demonstrate shedding of bacterial strains pathogenic to humans into the environment where people may contact them. Finally, studies assessing the duration and intensity of bacterial shedding and survival of bacteria in the environme...

show abstract

“…In other words, smaller farms have higher average costs per acre in food safety investments relative to larger farms. Market equilibrium models incorporating foodborne illness outbreaks that simulate long-term market effects have also demonstrated large growers will benefit more from FSMA relative to small growers [19]. The results of these studies have caused concern regarding the continued financial feasibility of smaller farms given the relatively larger cost burden they face in meeting increasing food safety regulatory requirements.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the costs and returns of on-farm food safety improvements: A survey of Good Agricultural Practices (GAPs) training participants

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Good Agricultural Practices (GAPs) training programs were developed to provide guidance to fruit and vegetable growers on how to reduce food safety risks on the farm. These programs have been enhanced over the years due, in part, to increasing buyer and regulatory requirements. However, the costs of implementing additional food safety practices has been identified as a primary barrier to long-term farm financial feasibility, particularly for smaller scale producers. A survey of past participants in New York State revealed that increasing food safety improvements facilitated by GAPs have not significantly impacted the size of farm operations or the types of crops grown. In terms of farm size, we show that both the financial costs and financial benefits of food safety improvements increase with farm size, but at decreasing rates. In so doing, relatively higher market sales gains per acre by smaller farms from additional food safety investments offset the relatively higher costs to them of their implementation. We also demonstrate that benefits of food safety improvements were significantly higher for farms that had third-party food safety audits and for those that market primarily through wholesale channels. The results should prove welcome by educators as they encourage participation by all scales of producers in GAPs trainings and for growers in understanding that food safety investments can support both reduced microbial risks and sales growth.

show abstract

Economic Effects of the U.S. Food Safety Modernization Act

Cited by 18 publications

References 13 publications

A State‐Level Analysis of the Impact of a U.S.‐EU Harmonization of Food Safety Standards on U.S. Exports of Fruits and Vegetables

A State‐Level Analysis of the Impact of a U.S.‐EU Harmonization of Food Safety Standards on U.S. Exports of Fruits and Vegetables

Are we overestimating risk of enteric pathogen spillover from wild birds to humans?

Assessing the costs and returns of on-farm food safety improvements: A survey of Good Agricultural Practices (GAPs) training participants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About