Mexican papaya industry – a model for sector-wide food safety evolution

It can be easy for consumers and food safety professionals to become frustrated, lose faith in the system, and believe that significant changes are too far off in the wake of recent noteworthy food safety incidents in the US, which are made worse by reports exposing long-standing inefficiencies within the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

In these situations, it is critical to share success stories — those in which industry participants put aside competitive ideas, own up to a problem, and collaborate to increase the industry-wide standard for food safety.

Determining the issue

This is the situation for Mexican papaya growers, who provide more than 80% of the US papaya market. This sector was also connected, over an eight-year period, to eight multi-state Salmonella outbreaks in 2019. After taking notice, the FDA wrote a formal letter to the Mexican papaya sector on August 26, 2019, requesting action and stating that “recurring outbreaks taking place with any commodity are unacceptable from a public health perspective.”

An ambitious, multi-year plan to develop best practices, train the industry in them, and verify their implementation was quickly put out in response by a coalition of associations and industry members, including the Texas International Produce Association (TIPA) and the former United Fresh Produce Association (now International Fresh Produce Association, IFPA). A large stakeholder group including growers, packers, exporters, distributors, retailers, service providers, regulators, other government officials, and US and Mexican researchers got to work in November 2019 after this plan was submitted to the FDA.

The end result was a multiyear, intensive effort to generate teaching materials, train the entire staff, and determine best practices for preventing food safety that are unique to the production of papayas in order to stop outbreaks from happening again. Héctor del Razo Vargas of ProExport Papaya, a group that was formally established in 2020 and represents 90% of the Mexican papaya exporters, is spearheading these efforts today. Additionally, verification audits and training development and delivery support are being handled by Sergio Nieto-Montenegro and his team at Food Safety Consulting and Training Solutions (Food Safety CTS).

A similarly large stakeholder working group was formed after the November conference. Assessing potential risks in the papaya production and packaging process required multiple phone calls with industry representatives, FDA representatives, representatives from SENASICA (Mexico’s public health agency in charge of food and agriculture safety), and researchers. In an effort to foster mutual improvement, we weren’t afraid to ask the papaya growers questions, and the industry wasn’t afraid to share its methods either. The fact that there was very little food safety research done on the cultivation and packaging of papayas was one of the challenges encountered during the process. Utilizing available money, researchers from the US Department of Agriculture’s Agricultural Research Service were able to quickly turnaround important research that served as the basis for the guide, further highlighting the substantial advantages of industry-academic cooperation. Ongoing research is being conducted with partners at the University of Guadalajara in order to close any more gaps.

A manual for the manual

The 23-page Food Safety Best Practices Guide for the Growing and Handling of Mexican Papaya was released in both English and Spanish in June 2020, having been written in just a few months. The guide found best practices in seven major Good Agricultural Practices (GAPs) areas, but as any extension practitioner is aware, industry understanding and use of recommended practices is not ensured by the guide’s mere presence. How many managers of food safety have the time to study a document that is more than twenty pages long? Instead, it is the responsibility of the creators to ensure that their resource is widely disseminated and trained.

And so an industry outreach drive was launched. This focused on raising the knowledge and comprehension of best practices among Mexican packers and growers as well as among US purchasers, who may then, ideally, further enforce the adoption of these standards in the industry by demanding them from their Mexican suppliers. For these purchasers, an additional Guide to Develop and Implement Foreign Supplier Verification Programs (FSVP) for Mexican Papaya Importers was created.

Using webinars and in-person and online workshops, over 250 industry members—including all ProExport Papaya members—have received training over the course of two years (and a pandemic). Consequently, this signifies 90% of the current members of the FDA Green List and 95% of all papayas that are imported into the US.

But industry initiatives didn’t end with instruction. A comparable need was found for papaya farmers, just as the deployment of any prevention-based control necessitates documentation and verification in a strong food safety management system.

A large stakeholder working group was once more formed in cooperation with TIPA, United Fresh, and ProExport Papaya in order to create and publish the Food Safety Programs and Auditing Protocol for the Fresh Papaya Supply Chain, commonly known as the Papaya Safety Checklist, in May 2021. The purpose of this checklist is to supplement any conventional good agricultural practices (GAP) audit with information particular to papayas; in this instance, the Produce GAPs Harmonized conventional (the Harmonized) was utilized. Producers’ experience with GAP programs varied, though, as can be seen in the US and any other region. Some producers were more conversant with other certification programs, including Primus GFS or SENASICA’s Sistemas de reducción de riesgos de contaminación (SRRC).

This presented an additional obstacle to complete execution. Some growers and packers found it difficult to participate in the initial pilot audits because of residual unfamiliarity with the Harmonized or the checklist itself, even though ProExport Papaya and Food Safety CTS made great efforts to instruct them on fundamental GAPs, the papaya safety checklist, and the audit process.

You may also like:

Food security in emerging nations: issues and remedies
Are drinks the secret to increasing cannabis use among consumers?
Managing the lack of labour for mushroom picking

Continuity pays off.

At this point, everyone involved needed to come to the realization that the audit verification process is more than just getting a passing audit score; it’s also about pushing the boundaries of your daily food safety management program, identifying its biggest weakness, and putting steps in place to address it.

The foundational programs for preventing food safety must first be firmly established in order to do this. Despite the initial lack of enthusiasm among auditees due to these bumps in the pilot audit process, food safety improved quickly as producers exchanged insights, audit experiences, and approaches to resolving critical issues via a WhatsApp community group. Positive observations were made in addition. For instance, it was discovered that most packers had good control over wash water and antimicrobial management, which is a major problem mentioned in the guide and papaya safety checklist and a crucial point of control for any produce product utilizing a washing phase.

As of June 2022, 82 units—including farms and packing houses—of 41 Mexican papaya producers have undergone audits since February 2022. As the industry’s cooperative efforts move into their third year, there are no intentions to slow down. In the second phase of the certification procedure, ProExport and Food Safety CTS will audit more seasonal manufacturers from June to December 2022. Experiences gained from working on farms have helped to identify areas that will require more money and training in the future. These areas include developing a culture of food safety and giving employees more authority.

ProExport Papaya, Food Safety CTS, and all other industry participants deserve recognition for their unwavering efforts in creating a producer community committed to improving. These producers not only put in a lot of effort to get better, but they also kept open lines of communication with government representatives at SENASICA and the FDA regarding their endeavors. The success of a project such as this, which involves numerous moving elements at the same time, depends on the motivation, support, and alignment of government officials, industry representatives, and researchers. Although it might be challenging, if not impossible, to measure prevention, there is no denying the benefits of the food safety program enhancements the papaya sector has put in place over the past few years.

It is ineffective to bury your head in the sand, especially when lives are involved, as notable outbreaks in the past have taught us. “My commodity has never experienced an outbreak before” is not a valid or appropriate substitute for a robust, prevention-focused food safety policy. Indeed, it says volumes about the degree—or lack thereof—of a culture around food safety in that town.

IFPA will keep showcasing these efforts as a success story in the produce industry and beyond, hoping that it can act as a template for any commodities industry beset by ongoing food safety issues. This should assist the industry in continuing to prioritize prevention and bringing about significant change before those issues result in the next outbreak of foodborne illness.