Global Food Safety Concerns and the Role of Codex Standards

Every year, an estimated 600 million people – nearly 1 in 10 worldwide – fall ill after eating contaminated food, and 420,000 die as a result. Unsafe food costs low- and middle-income countries over US$110 billion annually in lost productivity and medical expenses. As global food trade continues to grow and supply chains stretch across continents, these numbers make one thing clear: food safety is not a local problem. It is an international one. At the centre of the global response stands a framework most people have never heard of – the Codex Alimentarius.

Why food safety is a global concern 🔗

Food safety risks do not stop at national borders. A contaminated ingredient processed in one country can end up on a dinner table thousands of kilometres away. Contamination at one end of the food chain can affect populations on the other side of the world, making international cooperation essential rather than optional.

The drivers of this global risk are well documented. Foodborne illnesses caused by bacteria, viruses, mycotoxins, heavy metals, pesticides, and pharmaceutical residues have become increasingly prevalent as food systems grow more complex. At the same time, climate change is exacerbating these threats – warmer temperatures increase aflatoxin production in crops, rising sea temperatures promote toxin-producing algae, and extreme weather events spread pathogens from sewage and animal waste onto agricultural land.

Countries that rely heavily on food imports face a particular challenge. Nearly two-thirds of all fruits and vegetables consumed in the United States, and 80% of its seafood, are imported – and that proportion is expected to keep rising. When food crosses multiple borders and passes through several handlers, the opportunities for contamination multiply. The question is: who sets the rules?

What is the Codex Alimentarius? 🔗

The Codex Alimentarius – Latin for “Food Code” – is a collection of internationally adopted food standards, guidelines, and codes of practice developed jointly by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO) of the United Nations. It was first established in 1963, and its governing body – the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) – currently includes 188 member countries, 1 member organization (the European Union), and more than 230 observer organizations. That membership covers 99% of the world’s population.

The Commission has two core objectives: protecting consumer health and ensuring fair practices in international food trade. To achieve these, it develops standards covering everything from maximum residue limits for pesticides and veterinary drugs, to rules on food additives, contaminants, food labelling, hygiene, and methods of sampling and analysis.

What Codex standards actually cover 🔗

The Codex Alimentarius includes standards for all principal foods – whether processed, semi-processed, or raw – and covers provisions on food hygiene, food additives, pesticide and veterinary drug residues, contaminants, labelling, methods of analysis and sampling, and import and export inspection and certification. Every standard it publishes is grounded in scientific evidence, assessed by independent expert bodies such as the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) and the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR).

The link between Codex and international trade 🔗

The Codex Alimentarius would be a useful but largely advisory document if not for one critical development: its formal recognition by the World Trade Organization (WTO). The WTO’s Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement) explicitly names the Codex Alimentarius Commission as the relevant standard-setting organization for food safety. This changed everything.

When member countries adopt Codex standards, they are presumed to be in compliance with the SPS Agreement – creating a powerful incentive for harmonization. Countries that choose to set stricter national standards must justify that decision with scientific evidence, or risk having those standards treated as unjustified trade barriers in WTO dispute settlements. Codex standards have been cited directly in several major WTO trade disputes, including cases involving beef hormones and sardine labelling.

Harmonization: reducing barriers, building trust 🔗

The founders of the Codex programme envisaged that harmonizing food regulations internationally would result in fewer trade barriers and a freer movement of food products, benefiting farmers, reducing hunger, and lowering poverty. That vision still holds today. When exporters in one country know their product meets Codex standards, and importers in another country recognise those same standards, the process of trade becomes faster, cheaper, and more reliable.

When food producers and traders comply with Codex standards, consumers can trust the safety and quality of the products they buy, and importers can have confidence that the food they import meets Codex specifications. This mutual confidence is the foundation of functioning global food markets.

The European Commission notes that WTO members who apply Codex standards automatically meet their SPS Agreement obligations – streamlining compliance and reducing bureaucratic friction for exporters and importers alike.

Food safety incidents that shaped the need for global standards 🔗

The urgency of common food safety standards is not theoretical. Real-world incidents have repeatedly demonstrated what happens when those standards are absent or ignored.

In 2008, over 300,000 Chinese infants were sickened and at least 6 died after consuming powdered milk contaminated with melamine, an industrial chemical. The incident shattered public trust in China’s food supply and directly led to the establishment of China’s Food Safety Law. In South Africa between 2017 and 2018, the largest recorded Listeria outbreak killed 216 people and sickened over 1,000, traced to processed meat products from a major food company operating in the absence of mandatory HACCP requirements. In Africa more broadly, failure to meet international aflatoxin standards costs African countries approximately $750 million annually.

These cases share a common thread: gaps in food safety regulation and enforcement – gaps that Codex standards are specifically designed to close.

Codex standards and developing countries 🔗

For developing countries, the relationship with Codex is both an opportunity and a challenge. On one hand, adopting Codex standards opens access to international markets. On the other, the costs of complying with food safety standards have led to concerns about a loss of competitiveness for firms – especially those in developing countries.

Many developing countries, especially the least developed, lack the capacity, resources, and in some cases the technical expertise to face the challenges and take advantage of the opportunities associated with international food trade. Recognising this, the FAO actively supports capacity-building programmes to help these countries participate more effectively in Codex, and to translate Codex standards into national legislation.

The Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) – a joint initiative of the WTO, WHO, World Bank, FAO, and the World Organisation for Animal Health – exists specifically to help developing countries build capacity to meet SPS standards, including those set by Codex. This support is critical because a country’s ability to export safe food is not just a food policy issue. It is an economic development issue.

Codex as a basis for national food legislation 🔗

One of Codex’s most practical roles is providing a ready-made scientific and regulatory framework that governments can adapt into national law. The use of international standards allows countries to prioritise the use of their often-limited resources and to concentrate on risk analysis and scientific investigations specific to their own contexts, rather than building entire food safety frameworks from scratch.

Countries that have adopted Codex-aligned food safety laws benefit from greater regulatory credibility. When an importing country’s authorities review a shipment, Codex compliance provides internationally recognised assurance. This reduces the likelihood of rejection, customs delays, and trade disputes – all of which carry significant economic costs for exporting nations.

The science behind Codex standards 🔗

Codex standards are based on the best scientific and technical knowledge available. FAO and WHO support the CAC through a number of annual expert meetings – including committees focused on food additives, contaminants, pesticide residues, and microbiological risk assessment. This scientific rigour is what gives Codex its credibility as an international reference point.

The work of the Codex Alimentarius Commission has provided a focal point for food-related scientific research and has become an important international medium for the exchange of scientific information about the safety of food. Countries bring new data and research findings to CAC sessions, which in turn triggers review and revision of existing standards – a continuous process of improvement grounded in evidence.

This is particularly important for emerging food safety challenges, including risks from genetically modified organisms, nanotechnology in food processing, antimicrobial resistance in food-producing animals, and food safety risks in e-commerce. Recent Codex work has extended to guidelines on the use of technology to provide food information via e-commerce and remote audit frameworks for regulatory systems – reflecting how global food trade continues to evolve.

Codex and consumer protection 🔗

At its core, the Codex Alimentarius exists to protect consumers. Every standard, every maximum residue limit, every labelling requirement is designed with one objective: ensuring that the food people eat is safe, accurately described, and free from adulteration. Standards and guidelines published in the Codex Alimentarius are intended for food safety legislators, manufacturers, traders, food handlers, and consumers.

For consumers in import-dependent countries, this protection is especially significant. Without internationally harmonised standards, there would be no consistent basis for determining whether imported food meets acceptable safety criteria. Codex provides that basis. It sets the floor below which no food entering international trade should fall – and gives regulators in every country a clear, science-backed reference point for their inspections and import controls.

Food labelling standards under Codex also protect consumers by ensuring they have accurate information about ingredients, allergens, nutritional content, and country of origin. Codex standards contain requirements for food aimed at ensuring that consumers receive a safe, wholesome product free from adulteration, correctly labelled and presented.

The road ahead: strengthening global food safety 🔗

Despite the progress made through Codex and related frameworks, significant gaps remain. No country can strengthen its food safety systems alone – multisectoral and international cooperation is essential. Foodborne disease burden continues to be underreported, particularly in low- and middle-income countries, which limits the data available to inform better standards.

There is also a growing recognition that stricter standards, while beneficial for consumer protection, can function as non-tariff barriers to trade, particularly for developing economies that lack the infrastructure and technical resources to comply. Addressing this asymmetry – ensuring that global food safety standards truly serve all countries, not just the most resource-rich ones – remains one of the central challenges facing the international food governance system.

The Codex Alimentarius is not a perfect instrument. But in a world where a single contaminated shipment can trigger a public health crisis on another continent, a shared, science-based framework for food safety is not just useful – it is indispensable.

What do you think? As global food supply chains grow longer and more complex, should developing countries receive more structural support to meet Codex standards – or does the current technical assistance framework already provide enough? And with food safety risks increasingly shaped by climate change, how should Codex standards evolve to account for threats that didn’t exist when the framework was first designed?

References

1. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/food-safety
2. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4431568/
3. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11332392/
4. https://www.rti.org/insights/food-safety-risks-global-development
5. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5867548/
6. https://www.fao.org/fao-who-codexalimentarius/about-codex/en/
7. https://www.fao.org/food-safety/food-control-systems/policy-and-legal-frameworks/codex-alimentarius/en/
8. https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/coher_e/wto_codex_e.htm
9. https://foodsafety.institute/food-laws-standards/codex-standards-international-food-trade/
10. https://food.ec.europa.eu/horizontal-topics/international-affairs/international-standards/codex-alimentarius_en
11. https://www.food-safety.com/articles/6307-the-most-common-food-safety-incidents-related-to-developing-countries
12. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44279-025-00301-9
13. https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/sps_e.htm
14. https://www.fao.org/4/w9474t/w9474t02.htm
15. https://www.fao.org/fao-who-codexalimentarius
16. https://www.fooddocs.com/post/codex-alimentarius