Barriers of HACCP team members to guideline adherence

Barriers of HACCP team members to guideline adherenceMa.Patricia V.Azanza *,Myrna Benita V.Zamora-LunaDepartment of Food Science and Nutrition,College of Home Economics,University of the Philippines,Diliman,Quezon City 1101,PhilippinesReceived 29September 2003;received in revised form 9October 2003;accepted 9October 2003AbstractA cognitive-behavior model to evaluate barriers to HACCP guideline adherence by HACCP team members was developed.It was based on the theory of experiential learning where knowledge,attitude and behavior must be sequentially overcome.Twenty-seven HACCP team members from four food processors participated to assess barriers to guideline adherence.Non-awareness to HACCP guideline was a major barrier.The national government was recognized as key source of HACCP -mitment to adopt HACCP guideline was established.Also,the need for food processor management to understand that teams must be multidisciplinary to ensure guideline adherence has been established.Ó2004Elsevier Ltd.All rights reserved.Keywords:HACCP guideline;Barrier model;Adherence1.IntroductionHazard analysis critical control point (HACCP)is a food safety tool that is more recently advocated by international and national regulatory institutions as either voluntary or mandatory prescription to food processing (Gilling,Taylor,Kane,&Taylor,2001;Suwanrangsi,2000;Taylor,2001;Torres,2000;Wallace &Williams,2001).These recent advocacy efforts to propel HACCP implementation are now in fact over-whelmingly evident in most food safety government programs.Despite the orchestrated efforts of inter-national institutions like Codex Alimentarius Commis-sion (CAC)to drum up HACCP awareness and compliance,only food industries in more developed countries are currently apt to immediately implement this food safety tool.The Philippine government,as signatory of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade Uruguay Round Final Act,and now as member nation of World Trade Organization,abides by the provisions of the Treaty including the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SCRA,1997).Under this Agreement,the Philippine government isencouraged to harmonize its national food safety mea-sures with international standards,guidelines and rec-ommendations developed by international regulatory agencies,primarily the CAC.The HACCP guideline has been recommended by CAC as part of its revised guidelines on the General Principles of Food Hygiene as early as 1993(Fogden,2000).In a memorandum from the Office of the President of the Philippines,Mal-aca ~nang,Philippines to the secretaries of various con-cerned food regulatory agencies and its affiliates,a directive was issued pertaining to the accreditation program for food processors that stipulates that Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP)and HACCP be the underlying systems for processing of safe foods for ex-port (Ramos,1997).Although large-scale food processing establishments have been identified as key players in Philippine econ-omy,micro-to small-scale establishments still have a significant contribution to the viability of the food economy sector.The smaller food industries in this country are numerous as a result of chronic national economic problems,which is further aggravated by the more recent political turmoils (Marfil &Pablo,2002;Pablo,Javellana,&Marfil,2002).Prompting the underdeveloped food industry sectors towards HACCP guideline awareness,implementation and adherence tends to be more difficult because these industries are reported to be ill-equipped with the required industry intrinsic support system to attain it (Taylor,2001).*Corresponding author.Tel.:+632-920-5301;fax:+632-926-1449/926-2813/920-5473/920-2091.E-mail address:ma_patricia.azanza@.ph (Ma.P.V.Azanza).0956-7135/$-see front matter Ó2004Elsevier Ltd.All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2003.10.009Food Control 16(2005)15–22/locate/foodcontLikewise,these less developed industries are less likely to invest in HACCP knowledge acquisition.Problems in guideline adherence by underdeveloped food industries have been reported to be partly miti-gated by understanding in-depth of the specific barriers to compliance(Cabana et al.,1999;Gilling et al.,2001). Utilizing the behavioral adherence model for technical barrier assessment for specific food industry has been reported previously to facilitate identification of appropriate intervention strategies for HACCP adher-ence(Gilling et al.,2001).The HACCP plan implementation is generally vested upon the efforts of a team in an establishment rather than on the commitment of a single individual.This study for thefirst time,evaluated HACCP guideline adherence barriers specific to HACCP team members of micro-to small-scale beverage and meat processors. Baseline information established in this study could facilitate HACCP implementation in the local micro-to small-scale food processing industries thru the under-standing of barriers to guideline adherence.2.Materials and methods2.1.Cognitive-behavior barrier model to HACCP guide-line adherenceThe study developed a cognitive-behavior barrier model to HACCP guideline adherence for individuals comprising the HACCP team(Fig.1).The model was established by consolidating various concepts from similar models used in assessing physician adherence to medical guideline(Cabana et al.,1999;Pathman,Kon-rad,Freed,Freeman,&Koch,1996)and food industry adherence to HACCP guideline(Gilling et al.,2001).16Ma.P.V.Azanza,M.B.V.Zamora-Luna/Food Control16(2005)15–22Briefly,the consolidated model divided the major bar-rier categories into knowledge,attitude and behavior. Subcategories of these general barriers included aware-ness,familiarity and comprehension for knowledge while the subcategories for attitude major barrier com-prised of agreement and commitment.Adoption and adherence were the subcategories for the last major barrier,behavior.The study further classified each subcategory into themes of barriers as industry intrinsic or extrinsic factors.The research proponents formulated working definitions included in the consolidated model through a series of brainstorming sessions.2.2.Survey of respondentsThe survey to assess the barriers to HACCP guideline adherence specific to HACCP team members of micro-and small-scale food processors was conducted as part of2research projects aimed to develop HACCP plans for these industries.Participating small-scale food pro-cessing industries were defined based on the amended Philippine Magna Carta for Small Scale Enterprises (Republic Act8289).Micro-scale industries were busi-ness establishments having a capital outlay of6US $30,000(PhP1.5M),excluding the cost of land where the plant and equipment are located,whereas small-scale industries have>US$30,0006$300,000(6PhP15 M).The respondents of the survey were recruited from HACCP team members of participating industries in the two earlier mentioned studies.Communications were made to HACCP team mem-bers from small-scale meat processors from Pampanga (n¼16)and micro-to small-scale beverage processors of the National Capital Region and Region4(n¼48), Philippines to recruit survey respondents.The names of government-registered beverage and meat processors were obtained from the Department of Trade and Industry,Bureau of Food and Drug,and Local Gov-ernment Units.Additional names of food processors were also obtained from professional organizations including Pampanga Association of Meat Processors and Foundation of Food Science and Technology,Inc. The names of unregistered processors,referred by other processors and vendors encountered in the test areas were also included in the lists.The modes of commu-nication used to recruit participants were through the following,used either singly or in combination:elec-tronic and ordinary mails,field visits,or telephone calls. Amongst those who responded positively to the recruitment phase of the survey were two HACCP team members of processors per test industry.2.3.The HACCP technical barrier surveyA questionnaire was designed based on the developed cognitive-behavior barrier model to HACCP principle adherence(Fig.1)for members of the HACCP teams. Briefly,it included questions on demographics and, levels of knowledge,attitude and behavior barriers of respondents to HACCP guideline.The survey tool in-cluded some questions with multiple choices for the answers and other open-ended queries(Table1).For awareness and familiarity of HACCP guideline under the knowledge major barrier,the interrogative pro-nouns:when,from whom and where were used to query about pertinent HACCP knowledge information. Questions on accessibility and adequacy of HACCP information were likewise included under the knowl-edge barrier category.The role of external sources of HACCP information including government,media, consumer,market and technical consultants in the adoption of the guideline were likewise asked.The capability of individual members to sustain guideline implementation was placed under the adherence major barrier.Follow-up questions were used to fully elucidate details of some unclear responses.The HACCP team members were individually asked to respond to the questionnaire using the face-to-face narrative interview technique.The interview was con-ducted by the research proponents who read each of the questions aloud during the interview.Respondents were given adequate time to answer each query in writing. Questions were translated to the appropriate regional dialects to which survey respondents were more familiar with when necessary.Results of the study were tabu-lated.Frequency and percentage distributions were calculated(Gatchalian,1989).3.Results and discussion3.1.Cognitive-behavior barrier model to HACCP guide-line adherenceThe developed cognitive-behavior barrier model to HACCP guideline adherence in the study(Fig.1)was modified from similar guideline adherence models gen-erated by Pathman et al.(1996)and Cabana et al.(1999) for medical guidelines,and Gilling et al.(2001)for HACCP guideline.The ladderized barrier concept for evaluation of knowledge,attitude and behavior in guideline adherence as presented by both Cabana et al. (1999)and Gilling et al.(2001)was adopted in this new developed model as general barrier categories.The generated working definitions for the general barrier categories included:knowledge as a body of acquired facts;attitude as mental reaction to knowledge;and behavior as the action taken as a result of knowledge acquisition and attitude development.It was hypothesized in the developed barrier model for HACCP guidance adherence that the HACCP team member designate mustfirst become aware,and beMa.P.V.Azanza,M.B.V.Zamora-Luna/Food Control16(2005)15–2217exposed to the guideline at least more than once before comprehension is attained.Having full understanding of the principles,the team member was assumed to develop the proper attitude which may subsequently lead to agreement and commitment.Such attitude was expected to cause a change in behavior through adoption and finally adherence to the guideline.However,it was ex-pected that HACCP knowledge acquisition alone could not ensure HACCP guideline compliance.Gilling et al. (2001)reported that right attitude should be supported by the appropriate industry intrinsic and extrinsic environmental factors to facilitate HACCP compliance (Fig.1).3.2.Profile of HACCP team members respondentsThe HACCP team member respondents of the study belonged to micro-to small-scale industries(Table2).It has been previously reported that micro-to small-scale food industries are generally not in the position to implement the HACCP guideline due to their small company size,lack of technical expertise and training, rapid turnover of trained personnel,and lack of appropriate resources support prerequisites to HACCP guideline adherence(Panisello&Quantick,2001;Tay-lor,2001;Torres,2000).The CAC and World Health Organization(WHO)fortunately,in its effort to address the unique needs of the small and less developed food processing industries,sponsored the development of fundamental strategies for implementing HACCP in these level of industries(WHO,1999).However,the formal schemes to facilitate the actual implementation of the strategies for underdeveloped food businesses are yet to be fully realized.The survey respondents belonged to HACCP teams comprising of4–10members representing various work divisions in their companies(Table2).Ideally,HACCP team members should be multidisciplinary consisting of individuals who have the appropriate technical skills and expertise about the product and its processes(NAC-Table1Details of survey tool used to determine technical barriers of HACCP team members to HACCP guideline adherenceBarrier Subcategories Survey itemsKnowledge AwarenessA body of acquired facts First heard or read about the guideline When have youfirst heard or read about theHACCP guideline?•Now•Last6months•Last year•Last2years•Last3years or moreFamiliarityDenotes fuller knowledge based on continues awareness but still without complete under-standing of the essence of the guideline as they were originally designed Are you able to use the term HACCP and its related concepts in casual discussions?If yes, cite specific situations.ComprehensionDenotes familiarity with the guideline with full understanding,proximate to the essence of the concept as it was originally designed What is the impact of the HACCP guideline implementable to the operations of your company?Attitude AgreementMental reaction to knowledge Belief in the HACCP guideline,in general orsome parts of it To what extent do you agree with the HACCP guideline?•Full/in general•Partial•Not at allCommitmentPledge to adopt the guideline Are you willing to pledge to adopt theHACCP guideline in your line of work? Behavior AdoptionAction taken as a result of knowledge acquisition and attitude developmentPutting the guideline into action,change inpracticeAre you willing to put the HACCP guidelineinto action?•Yes•NoAdherenceSustained adoption Do you think as a member of your company,you can sustain the implementation of theHACCP guideline in your line of work?Briefly explain your answer18Ma.P.V.Azanza,M.B.V.Zamora-Luna/Food Control16(2005)15–22MCF,1999).Unfortunately,majority of the members of the HACCP teams from the two participating meat processors essentially came from similar work sectors. The HACCP team member respondents from1meat processor were all quality control officers,while the team from the other meat processor was constituted with mostly line workers.The apparent inappropriate con-stitution of the meat HACCP teams may have been mainly based on the decision of their respective man-agements.The organizational set-up of the micro-and small-scale processing industries are not complex and major decisions are traditionally the unilateral respon-sibility of the management rather than any other sector of the company.The sectoral skewdness of the group composition for the HACCP teams for meat processors lends itself to a limited perspective and lack of technical expertise to all significant aspects of the product and its processes that might be pertinent to the HACCP plans.The memberships of the beverage HACCP teams were more appropriately assembled as multidisciplinary groups.The respondents from HACCP teams of the beverage industries were from various disciplines including personnel from:the research and develop-ment,production,quality control and,sales and mar-keting.The multidisciplinary membership of the beverage HACCP teams might not be again based on the critical view of the responsible management on the appropriate constitution of the teams but rather more as a consequence of the diminutive nature of the company. Choice of the HACCP team members was quite limited in the participating beverage processors considering the very small employment numbers which were composed of5–18workers only(Table2).The educational background of HACCP team mem-bers was quite diverse.There were those who completed tertiary education.Others,however,were only able to have vocational training and some primary education. For those teams consisting of mostly undereducated members,technical difficulties in acquiring knowledge and transposing these into implementable activities might be encountered.The apparent educational inad-equacy of some of the members of the teams might beTable2Profile of HACCP team member survey respondents coming from meat and beverage industriesFood industry profile Teammember(n)Category distribution(%)aGender Position in theestablishmentHighest educational levelMeat industry1.Meat processor small scale,30y operational,100workers,2shifts/d(8h/shift),2tnitrite-cured meat production/dFemale90Research andDevelopmentOfficer10Tertiary level8010Male10Quality controlofficer80Food Technology andNutritionManagementEducationComputer Science andEngineeringDraftsman10Secondary level10Vocational(i.e.Secretarial)102.Meat processor small scale,operational for30yrs,employed100workers,2shifts/d(8h/shift),2production/d t nitrite-cured meatFemale50Supervisor12Secondary level80 8Male50Line Worker88VocationalComputer TechnologySecretarial20Beverage industry1.Beverage processor micro-scale,12y operational,18workers,2200cup production/d(300ml cup),500bottle production/d(500ml bottle) young coconut juiceFemale50Owner25Masters level(i.e.Child Psychology)254Male50Supervisor75Tertiary levelBusiness AdministrationHotel and RestaurantManagement752.Beverage processor b micro-scale,10y operational,5workers,300 cup production/d young coconut juice(300ml cup)5Female60Supervisor20Primary level60 Male40Line Worker80Secondary level40n,number of HACCP team members per establishment.a Percent values relative to number of HACCP team members per establishment.b Cooperative-base.Ma.P.V.Azanza,M.B.V.Zamora-Luna/Food Control16(2005)15–2219further aggravated by the fact that small companies may have limited access to HACCP information and provide less resources for skill development for them(Taylor, 2001).The gender profile of the HACCP team member designates indicated inclusion of50–90%female.In a matriarchal society such as the Philippines,females tend to dominate food management concerns(Fernandez& Alegre,1988).The female-skewdness of the HACCP team composition is,therefore,expected since assurance of food safety is usually associated with women in the country.3.3.Knowledge levelThe knowledge-,attitude-and behavior-related bar-riers of HACCP team members of micro-to small-scale meat and beverage processors are shown in Table3. Results showed that most of the respondents were not aware of HACCP principles and tasks.Familiarity was the highest knowledge level achieved among the respondents.This current HACCP knowledge level of the respondents may be due in part to the inadequate and inappropriate information dissemination systems available within the country.Based on a more general industry perspective,Gilling et al.(2001)similarly identified lack of awareness of the HACCP guideline as one of the technical barriers restricting HACCP guideline adherence in U.K.food processing establishments.However,this was true only for a small proportion of food businesses in the UK. There may be a disparity in HACCP awareness levels of food processors in the Philippines and UK.which could be attributed to the more widespread and comprehen-sive HACCP information dissemination efforts exerted by the better developed country(Gilling et al.,2001; Taylor,2001).Details of HACCP knowledge-based barriers identi-fied by HACCP team member survey respondents are presented in Table4.Since majority of the respondents did not go beyond the familiarity level,they were unable to identify intrinsic and extrinsic factors influencing knowledge barriers(Fig.1).For the few who were aware and already familiar with the HACCP guideline,time and accessibility of HACCP information were of prime importance to attain full comprehension that could eventually lead to a change in behavior.Fortunately,the Philippine national government was the main external source of information although lim-ited through the conduct of seminars/workshops by concerned agencies.The National Meat and Inspection Commission,Philippines and University of the Philip-pines Diliman were the government agencies specified by respondents to provide HACCP information.According to the respondents who graduated from tertiary education in food technology and food science relatedfields,academic institutions offering undergrad-uate degree in food technology programs now covered HACCP in their curricula.Majority of the respondents who had some level of HACCP knowledge still per-ceived that HACCP information from available sources were limited.Even if the information were made avail-able HACCP team members still felt that they were not generally given adequate time to fully comprehend it.In the Philippines,HACCP information dissemination systems usually comprised of seminars/workshops thatTable3Barriers to HACCP principle adherence by HACCP team members from micro-to small-scale meat and beverage processing industries Barrier Subcategories Percentage distribution(%)Meat industry Beverage industryTeam1 (n¼10)Team2(n¼8)Team1(n¼4)Team2(n¼5)Knowledge Non-awareness401002580 No previous exposure to HACCP principlesAwareness400500Once heard or readFamiliarity2002520>1exposure but without full understandingAttitude Agreement3002520 Full-belief in HACCP principlesCommitment4002520Pledge to adoptNo response301005060Lack of knowledge of HACCP principlesBehavior No responseLack of knowledge of HACCP principles100100100100 n,number of team members per establishment.20Ma.P.V.Azanza,M.B.V.Zamora-Luna/Food Control16(2005)15–22are characteristically providing copious amount of information for short periods of time.Evaluations of the efficacy of such HACCP seminar/workshops,however, are rarely done.3.4.Attitude and behavior levelsIn terms of attitude and behavior-related barriers, this study considers non-awareness to be translated to the inability of the team members to develop the proper attitude toward the HACCP guideline.In fact,inade-quate knowledge level is the reason for non-adoption of the guideline.To the survey respondents who only reached knowledge levels of awareness and familiarity, agreement and commitment were fortunately already expressed.Ideally,HACCP team members should have attained full comprehension to develop the proper atti-tude towards the guideline.Theoretically,the cognitive-behavior model devel-oped in this study should require that each member must have full knowledge of what the HACCP guideline is all about,develop an action concept of what appro-priate behavior would lead to the efficient functioning of the HACCP plan,develop positive attitudes towards HACCP procedures and a belief that the team is capable of implementing plans(Johnson&Johnson,1987).This model follows the basic concept of experiential learning where awareness is a requisite for expansion of skill performance(Bandura,1986;Johnson&Johnson,1987; Stage&Associates,1993).The HACCP learner there-fore,must comprehend the guideline to be able to de-velop positive attitude and behavior towards it.The application of the cognitive-behavior barrier model for HACCP guideline adherence could still be further studied particularly for HACCP team mem-bers who belong to establishments,which are already HACCP parison of results generated in this study which,is based on responses of HACCP team members from teams which are still in its early stage of HACCP plan implementation,must be compared with the results obtained from responses of those who be-longed to HACCP compliant processors.Only at this point could the model be fully evaluated and appreciated.4.Summary and recommendationsThe cognitive-behavior barrier model to HACCP guideline adherence designed in the study presents the sequence of barriers that must be overcome by HACCP team member designates tofinally reach a point con-ducive to HACCP adherence.The model starts withTable4Knowledge-based barriers to HACCP principle adherence identified by HACCP team members from micro-small-scale meat and beverage processing industriesKnowledge acquisition barriers Percentage distribution(%)Meat industry Beverage industryTeam1 (n¼10)Team2(n¼8)Team1(n¼4)Team2(n¼5)Sources of HACCP information are obtained from......Industry intrinsic sources...Co-worker600500...No response4010050100 ...Industry extrinsic sources like...Seminar/workshop conducted by...ernment4005020...Academe100100...No response501005080 Accessibility of HACCP information from identified source is......Easy00020...Not easy900750...No response101002580 Adequacy of HACCP information from identified source is......Satisfactory100250...Not satisfactory8007520...No response10100080 Adequacy of time to comprehend HACCP information from identifiedsources is......Satisfactory100020...Not satisfactory800750...No response101002580n,number of team members per establishment;total…100%due to multiple answers.Ma.P.V.Azanza,M.B.V.Zamora-Luna/Food Control16(2005)15–2221knowledge acquisition followed by proper attitude development leading to eventual behavioral change targeting adherence.The model tries to provide niches for possible identifiable barriers within the major cate-gories cited.The study was conducted to analyze barriers that impede HACCP guideline adherence of27HACCP team members from four micro-to small-scale Philip-pine food processors.The study established that non-awareness of respondents of the HACCP guidelines was the major barrier to adherence.Currently the major external source of HACCP information for the team members is the national government mainly through seminars/workshops.Respondents showed an optimistic attitude toward HACCP guideline implementation de-spite their low HACCP knowledge competence level.It is evident that the management responsible for the HACCP team membership needs to fully appreciate the fundamental concept of the group to be multidisciplin-ary.The respondents from HACCP teams were found to be multidisciplinary have been formed only accidentally since the processors involved had limited employees and had to include everyone to the team.More intensive knowledge-based intervention strate-gies specifically designed for HACCP team members must be formulated and implemented as an initial step to achieve HACCP guideline adherence.Furthermore,gov-ernment and other sources of HACCP information must continue to advocate HACCP adherence in Philippine food industries.Additional efforts on a national scale must be exerted to make HACCP information more accessible. The usefulness of the developed HACCP guideline cog-nitive-behavior barrier model could still be further stud-ied.Results from this study should be used to better educate HACCP instructors and industry implementors. ReferencesBandura,A.(1986).A social foundation of thought and action:A social cognitive theory.Englewood Cliffs,NJ:Prentice-Hall.Cabana,M.D.,Rand,C.S.,Powe,N.R.,Wu,A.W.,Wilson,M.H., Abboud,P.A.C.,&Rubin,H.R.(1999).Why don’t physicians follow clinical practice guidelines?A framework for improvement?Journal of the American Medical Association,282(15),1458–1465.Fernandez,D.G.,&Alegre,E.N.(1988).Sarap:Essays on Philippine food.Manila,Philippines:Mr.and Mrs.Publishing Company. Fogden,M.(2000).The regulatory context in the EU.In M.Brown (Ed.),HACCP in the meat industry.England:Woodhead Publish-ing Limited.Gatchalian,M.(1989).Sensory Evaluation Methods for Quality Assessment and Development.Quezon City,Philippines:University of the Philippines College of Home Economics.Gilling,S.J.,Taylor, E. A.,Kane,K.,&Taylor,J.Z.(2001).Successful hazards analysis critical control point implementation in the United Kingdom:understanding the barriers through the use of a behavioral adherence model.Journal of Food Protection, 64(5),710–715.Johnson,D.W.,&Johnson,F.P.(1987).Joining together group theory and group skills.Englewoods Cliffs,NJ:Prentice-Hall,Inc.Marfil,M.P.,&Pablo,C.(2002).1700troops coming,big number ‘‘normal’’for Balikatan02–2set next month.Philippine Daily Inquirer,17(102),A1–A18.NACMCF(National Advisory Committee on Microbiological Crite-ria for Foods)(1999).Hazard analysis and critical control point principles and application guidelines.In K.E.Stevenson,&D.T.Bernard(Eds.),HACCP a systematic approach to food safety(3rd ed.).Washington,DC:The Food Processors Institute.Pablo,C.,Javellana,J.L.,&Marfil,M.P.(2002).And300more going to Basilan.Philippine Daily Inquirer,17(102),A1–A18. Panisello,P.J.,&Quantick,P.C.(2001).Technical barriers to hazard analysis critical control point(HACCP).Food Control,12,165–173.Pathman, D. E.,Konrad,T.R.,Freed,G.L.,Freeman,V. A., &Koch,G.G.(1996).The awareness-to-adherence model of steps to clinical guideline compliance.Medical Care,34(9),873–889.Ramos,F.V.R.(1997).Memorandum from the President(May27, 1997):Accreditation Program for Food Exporters(pp.1–5).Office of the President of the Philippines,Malaca~n ang,Philippines. Stage,F.K.,&Associates(1993).Linking theory to practice case studies from working with college students.Accelerated Devt.,Inc Muncie,Indiana.SCRA(Supreme Court Reports Annotated)(1997).Ta~n ada vs.Angara(Vol.272,pp.18,40–41).Quezon City,Philippines:LPB, Inc.Suwanrangsi,S.(2000).HACCP implementation in the Thaifisheries industry.Food Control,11,377–382.Taylor,E.(2001).HACCP in small companies:benefit or burden.Food Control,12,217–222.Torres,D.H.(2000).Role of government in HACCP audit:a Cuban perspective.Food Control,11,365–369.Wallace, C.,&Williams,T.(2001).Pre-requisites:a help or a hindrance to HACCP.Food Control,12,234–240.WHO(World Health Organization)(1999).Strategies for implement-ing HACCP in small and/or less developed businesses.WHO Document WHO/SDE/PHE/FS/99.7.Geneva:WHO.22Ma.P.V.Azanza,M.B.V.Zamora-Luna/Food Control16(2005)15–22。