The safety and quality of the U.S. food supply is governed by a complex  system that is administered by 15 agencies. USDA and FDA have primary responsibility for ensuring the safety of  foods. Many proposals have been made to consolidate the U.S. food safety system,  but to date no action has been taken. Although the seven countries whose food safety systems we reviewed are  much smaller in population than the United States, they, like the United  States, are high-income countries where consumers have very high  expectations for food safety. While the extent to which  countries consolidated their food safety systems varied considerably, each  country established a single agency to lead food safety management or  enforcement of food safety legislation. Although most countries incurred  some consolidation start-up costs, government officials, as well as food  industry and consumer stakeholders, generally agree that consolidation  has led to significant qualitative improvements in the effectiveness or  efficiency of their food safety systems. First, many countries faced a similar decision  regarding whether to place the new agency within the existing health or  agriculture ministry or establish it as a stand-alone agency while also  determining what responsibilities the new agency would have. A second  challenge, cited by officials in several countries, was helping employees  assimilate into the new agency’s culture and support its priorities. Although countries have not formally analyzed consolidation results, the  government officials and stakeholders we interviewed in each of the seven  countries cited improvements in food safety system operations and stated  that the net effect of consolidation has been or will likely be positive. However, government officials in each of the seven countries  believe the benefits of their consolidations have exceeded or will likely  exceed the costs. Concluding Observations

Although different in many respects, the seven countries’ experiences  provide information on the reform and consolidation of food safety  systems that can be useful to U.S. policymakers. Comments from the Seven Countries Examined

We provided relevant excerpts from a draft of this report to officials of food  safety agencies in Canada, Denmark, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands,  New Zealand, and the United Kingdom for their review. In  commenting on this report, both HHS and USDA stated that U.S. food  safety agencies are working together effectively. HHS also  commented that the countries included in our report have smaller food and  agriculture industries than the United States. As a result, we believe  the consolidation experiences of the countries reviewed have applicability  to the United States. Scope and Methodology

This report describes the approaches the seven countries have taken in  consolidating food safety functions, the challenges they faced, and the  results of the countries’ efforts, including benefits and costs cited by  government officials and industry or consumer stakeholders. Reasons for Consolidating Food Safety Responsibilities

Canada consolidated its food safety system to (1) improve effectiveness by  making inspections and enforcement more consistent, clarifying  responsibilities, and enhancing reporting to the Canadian parliament, (2)  improve efficiency by reducing duplication and overlap in food safety  activities, and (3) reduce federal spending. Inspections were consolidated within the DVFA in 1999 and 2000. Challenges

According to officials, in deciding where to place the new food safety  agency within the government, Ireland chose to place it under its existing  Department of Health and Children specifically to separate food safety  responsibilities from food and agriculture promotion efforts, which is the  responsibility of the Department of Agriculture and Food. Challenges

Officials in the Netherlands faced three challenges in changing the  country’s food safety system.
Why GAO Did This Study

The safety and quality of the U.S. food supply are governed by a complex system that is administered by 15 agencies. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), have primary responsibility for food safety. Many legislative proposals have been made to consolidate the U.S. food safety system, but to date no other action has been taken. Several countries have taken steps to streamline and consolidate their food safety systems. In 1999, we reported on the initial experiences of four of these countries--Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the United Kingdom. Since then, additional countries, including Germany, the Netherlands, and New Zealand, have undertaken consolidations. This report describes the approaches and challenges these countries faced in consolidating food safety functions, including the benefits and costs cited by government officials and other stakeholders. In commenting on a draft of this report, HHS and USDA said that the countries' consolidation experiences have limited applicability to the U.S. food safety system because the countries are much smaller than the United States. The two agencies believe that they are working together effectively to ensure the safety of the food supply.

What GAO Found

In consolidating their food safety systems, the seven countries we examined--Canada, Denmark, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom--varied in their approaches and the extent to which they consolidated. However, the countries' approaches were similar in one respect--each established a single agency to lead food safety management or enforcement of food safety legislation. These countries had two primary reasons for consolidating their food safety systems--public concern about the safety of the food supply and the need to improve program effectiveness and efficiency. Countries faced challenges in (1) deciding whether to place the agency within the existing health or agriculture ministry or establish it as a stand-alone agency while also determining what responsibilities the new agency would have and (2) helping employees adjust to the new agency's culture and support its priorities. Although none of the countries has analyzed the results of its consolidation, government officials consistently stated that the net effect of their country's consolidation has been or will likely be beneficial. Officials in most countries stated their new food safety agencies incurred consolidation start-up costs. However, in each country, government officials believe that consolidation costs have been or will likely be exceeded by the benefits. These officials and food industry and consumer stakeholders cited significant qualitative improvements in the effectiveness or efficiency of their food safety systems. These improvements include less overlap in inspections, greater clarity in responsibilities, and more consistent or timely enforcement of food safety laws and regulations. In addition to these qualitative benefits, officials from three countries, Canada, Denmark, and the Netherlands, identified areas where they believe financial savings may be achieved as a result of consolidation. For example, in the Netherlands officials said that reduced duplication in food safety inspections would likely result in decreased food safety spending and that they anticipate savings from an expected 25 percent reduction in administrative and management personnel. Although the seven countries we reviewed are much smaller than the United States, they are also high-income countries where consumers have very high expectations for food safety. Consequently, we believe that the countries' experiences in consolidating food safety systems can offer useful information to U.S. policymakers.