Mandatory vs. Voluntary Approaches
to Food Safety
I. Introduction
Recent outbreaks of food-borne illnesses have raised concerns about the
adequacy of protection measures designed to ensure food safety.1 Illnesses
can result from contamination introduced at a number of possible points,
including the production stage, the processing stage, and the distribution
and use stage. The first two of these are controlled by producers. In the
third stage, users can affect safety as well, through, for example, proper
washing and food preparation.
Incentives for producers to undertake protective measures can be
provided either through the market (e.g., demand side shifts created
through reputation or certification and labeling) or through public policy
design (e.g., imposition of liability for damages, or direct regulation of
processes or product quality).2 While the federal government has a long
history of regulation of food quality and safety,3 there has been a trend
toward increased regulation in recent years. For example, the USDA has
recently required firms in food processing plants to implement Hazard
Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) systems designed to improve
food safety.4 There is, however, a considerable debate about whether
mandatory controls are necessary, since some firms had already chosen to
implement HACCP systems voluntarily (Caswell and Henson 1997). The
question is whether reliance on voluntary measures would lead to adequate
consumer protection.5
1 See Antle (1995) for a discussion of issues related to food safety policy.
2 Of course, market outcomes reflect public policies. Thus, the incentives
created through public policy design can work through the market as well. See
further discussion below.
3 For a detailed list of references on food safety regulation, see Caswell (1988).
4 See U.S. Food and Drug Administration (1995) and U.S. Department of
Agriculture (1996). For discussions of HACCP, see Pierson and Corlett (1992),
Mortimore and Wallace (1994), Unnevehr and Jensen (1996), Mazzocco (1996),
Caswell and Hooker (1996), and Antle (1998). For a discussion of the benefits and
costs of adopting a HACCP system, see GAO (1996) and Roberts et al. (1996).
5 Caswell and Henson (1997) distinguish between "private" and "public" quality
control systems, where private systems are voluntarily adopted by firms. In their
terminology, the question is whether private systems are likely to lead to adequate
protection.