Non-Compliance of Fresh Nile Perch (Lates niloticus) Fisheries Products from Uganda
Johnson A. Ssubi *
Department of Food Technology & Nutrition, College of Agricultural and Environmental Science, School of Food Technology, Nutrition & Bioengineering, P.O. Box 7062, Makerere University Kampala, Uganda.
Ivan M. Mukisa
Department of Food Technology & Nutrition, College of Agricultural and Environmental Science, School of Food Technology, Nutrition & Bioengineering, P.O. Box 7062, Makerere University Kampala, Uganda.
Charles K. Muyanja
Department of Food Technology & Nutrition, College of Agricultural and Environmental Science, School of Food Technology, Nutrition & Bioengineering, P.O. Box 7062, Makerere University Kampala, Uganda.
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
This study aimed to assess official monitoring data for fresh Nile perch fisheries products in Uganda. This review focuses on identifying patterns of non-compliance with food safety standards and understanding hazards associated with the Nile perch value chain. The results will serve as a basis for updating/improving pertinent Uganda Standards and regulations. An in-depth analysis was conducted utilizing secondary data for 14 factories encompassing official laboratory results spanning twelve years (2010-2022), sourced from the Department of Fisheries Resources records. Frequency distribution tables were employed to determine trends in non-compliance, emphasizing both the frequency and parameters contributing to deviations from safety standards. Examination of non-compliance trends, done using the Mann-Kendall test, revealed a compliance rate of approximately 80% for fresh Nile perch products across the majority (10) of the studied factories. Four factories experienced non-compliance, exceeding 20% of the total monitoring samples at least once during the study period. Among these, only one factory consistently demonstrated non-compliance exceeding 20% throughout the entire review period. There was a correlation between the factories exhibiting the highest non-compliance rates and their history of frequent changes in ownership and/or management over the past two decades. Microbial analysis results highlighted Total Viable Count (TVC), Total Coliforms (TC), and Enterobacteriaceae as the predominant contributors to non-compliance. In addition, heavy metals, particularly lead and cadmium, emerged as prevalent chemical hazards associated with non-compliance in the fresh Nile perch value chain in Uganda. It is recommended that efforts be concentrated on addressing the prevalence of the identified microbiological parameters. Furthermore, a formal review of national standards is advised, with consideration for the removal of parameters such as Listeria monocytogenes, Vibrio cholerae, and Clostridium perfringens, which showed negligible occurrence. Instead, emphasis should be placed on incorporating Enterobacteriaceae, consistently prevalent in fresh Nile perch products across most factories throughout the entire review period.
Keywords: Nile perch, food safety, non-compliance, microbial analysis, hazard assessment
How to Cite
Downloads
References
Nakiyende H, Mbabazi D, Bassa JS, Muhumuza E, Mpomwenda V, Mangeni SR, Mulowoza A, Mulondo P, Nansereko F, Taabu AM. Fishing effort and fish yield over a 15-year period on Lake Victoria, Uganda: Management implications. National Agricultural Research Organosation (NARO), National Fisheries Resource Research Institute (NaFIRRI). 2016;1(1).
UBOS. Statistical Abstract; 2020. Available:https://www.ubos.org/wpcontent/uploads/publications/11_2020STATISTICAL__ABSTRACT_2020.pdf
Waniala. Impact of SPS measures on Uganda fish exports, paper presented at the UNCTAD workshop on Standards and Trade, Geneva; 2002.
Akinwumi FO, Adegbehingbe KT. Microbiological analysis of three samples of smoked fish obtained from the Ondo State, Nigeria. Food and Public Health. 2015;5(4):122-126.
Kareem FO, Martínez-Zarzoso I, Brümmer B. What drives africa’s inability to comply with EU Standards? Insights from Africa’s Institution and Trade Facilitation Measures. European Journal of Development Research. 2023;35(4):938–973. Available: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41287-022-00547-9
Schillhorn van Veen TW. International Trade and Food Safety in Developing Countries Food Control. 2005;16:491-496.
Brouder AM, Henson S, Mitullah W. Food Safety Requirements and Food Exports from Developing: The Case of Fish Exports from Kenya to the European Union American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 2000;82(5):1159-1169.
Bergovoy Lisazo M, de Haan C, Henson S, Jaffee S, Ignacio L, Lamb J, Sewadeh M, van de Meer K. Food safety and agricultural health standards: Challenges and opportunities for developing country exports, World Bank Report No. 31207; 2005.
Bose S, Marhoon A, Al R, Boughanmi H, Yousuf JB. Domestic Ban Versus Border Rejections: A Case of Oman’ s Fish Exports to the EU; 2019. Available:https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244018823079
The Fish (Fishery and Aquaculture Products) (Quality Assurance) Rules; 2017.
Uganda national bureau of standards. Fresh and frozen whole finfish – Specification. (US EAS 827:2015); 2015.
Uganda National Bureau of Standards. Frozen fish fillets – Specification. (US EAS 831: 2015); 2015.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 of 15 November 2005 on microbiological criteria for foodstuffs OJ L 338 22.12.2005. Available:http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2005/2073/2020-03-08
FAO and WHO. Code of Practice for Fish and Fishery Products. Rome; 2020. Available:https://doi.org/10.4060/cb0658en
Stata Corp. Stata Statistical Software: Release 15. College Station, TX: StataCorp LLC.; 2017.
Kendall MG. Rank Correlation Methods. Griffin, London; 1975.
Hirsch RM, Slack JR, Smith RA. Techniques of trend analysis for monthly water quality data, Water Resources Research. 1982;18(1):107-121.
Amico PD, Nucera D, Guardone L, Mariotti M, Nuvoloni R, Armani A. Seafood products noti fi cations in the EU Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF) database: Data analysis during the period 2011 – 2015. Food Control, 2018 93(June);241–250. Available:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2018.06.018
FAO. The state of world fisheries and aquaculture 2016. Contributing to food security and nutrition for all. Rome. 2016;200.
Gildas D, Anihouvi H, Kpoclou YE, Abdel M, Ogouyôm M, Iko H, Assogba MF, Covo M, Louise M, Djidjoho S, Hounhouigan J, Anihouvi V, Mahillon J. Microbiological characteristics of smoked and smoked – dried fish processed in Benin. February. 2019;1821–1827. Available:https://doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.1030
Renjini VR, Venkatesh P, Nithyashree ML, AS. Processed Food Export from India to European Union: Trend and Potential; 2021. Available:file:///C:/Users/VICRIS/Downloads/0-0_Paper_19376_handout_165_0.pdf
Aranda M, Gallic BLE, Ulrich C. Research for PECH Committee - EU fisheries policy - latest development and future challenges; November 2019.
Witold Czubala, Ben Shepherd JW. Help or Hindrance? The Impact of Harmonised Standards on African Exports. Journal of African Economies; 2009.
Available:https://econpapers.repec.org/article/oupjafrec/v_3a18_3ay_3a2009_3ai_3a5_3ap_3a711-744.htm
UNIDO. What do Border Rejections tell us about Trade Standards Compliance of Developing Countries ? Analysis of EU and US Data 2002-2008 UNIDO Working Paper; 2011.
Available:https://www.unido.org/sites/default/files/2011-12/rejection_analysis_0.PDF
Sheng L, Wang L. The microbial safety of fish and fish products: Recent advances in understanding its significance , contamination sources , and control strategies. July 2020;738–786. Available: https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.12671
Tournas V, Stack ME, Mislivec PB, Koch HA, Bandler R. Yeasts, molds and mycotoxins In. mycological analysis manual. Food and Drug Administration, USA; 2001.