The Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) was signed into law in the United States in 2011, shifting the existing food safety focus from a reactive to a preventive approach. According to literature, legislative requirements of FSMA can be challenging for small food facilities affected by the regulations immediately or in near future. Thus, the purpose of this research was to utilize quality management tools to identify and prioritize major challenges faced by small food facilities in adopting the preventive controls' component of the FSMA legislation. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews of food industry representatives and academic professionals from the Midwest region of the United States. An affinity diagram was used to identify the set of challenges that emerged from the interviews, following which a weighted multi-voting survey was used to prioritize the identified challenges. Major identified challenges included: understanding of the FSMA law, cost of implementation, timeline for implementation, employee preparedness, absence of quality culture, and employee willingness. Furthermore, a difference was observed in how industry representatives and academic professionals rank ordered the above-listed challenges. shifting the existing food safety focus from a reactive to a preventive approach. According to literature, legislative requirements of FSMA can be challenging for small food facilities affected by the regulations immediately or in near future. Thus, the purpose of this research was to utilize quality management tools to identify and prioritize major challenges faced by small food facilities in adopting the preventive controls' component of the FSMA legislation. Data was collected using semi-structured interviews of food industry representatives and academic professionals from the Midwest region of the United States. An affinity diagram was used to identify the set of challenges that emerged from the interviews, following which a weighted multi-voting survey was used to prioritize the identified challenges. Major identified challenges included: understanding of the FSMA law, cost of implementation, timeline for implementation, employee preparedness, absence of quality culture, and employee willingness. Furthermore, a difference was observed in how industry representatives and academic professionals rank ordered the above-listed challenges.Keywords: Food safety modernization act, preventive controls, small food facilities, quality management, challenges This is the accepted manuscript of an article published in Food Control 66 (2016): 241-249. The final version can be found at http://dx
The success of a firm's supply chain strategy depends on resources in the political environment and the supply network in which it operates. If the political environment is not conducive to a firm's supply chain strategy, a firm can either change its supply chain strategy or seek a political environment that is more favorable to its supply chain. This paper examines this second alternative. The structure-conduct-performance (SCP) paradigm and the competitive dynamics literature are used to explore the relationships between political actions that leverage supply network resources, supply chain strategies, and firm performance. We extend a well-known typology of political actions from the strategic management literature and suggest that beyond influencing or complying with the political environment, firms may choose to moderate the political environment (circumvent or submit) or stay neutral (free ride). An integrated model is developed to explore the relationships between political actions and supply chain strategy, along with a series of propositions outlining how political actions can facilitate supply chain risk management strategies. Finally, suggestions are provided for future research.
In 2014, the government of the state of Indian Punjab amended its existing system of public distribution of food grains by launching the “new atta‐daal (wheat‐pulses) scheme”. Instead of distributing subsidized food grains monthly to its underprivileged citizens, the state started distributing grains on a biannual basis (i.e., every 6 months). The state claims that the new system yields logistical and monetary benefits that favour the state treasury; however, beneficiaries have voiced concerns regarding grain handling and one‐time payments. To achieve a beneficial outcome for multiple stakeholders with conflicting objectives, a formal analysis of different policy alternatives is necessary. This research paper applies multi‐criteria decision analysis to evaluate alternative public grain distribution schemes for the district of Ludhiana in Indian Punjab. First, an objectives hierarchy and measures for the decision problem were developed using emergent codes from qualitative data collected via semi‐structured interviews, focus group discussions, and guided conversations with 40 participants representing eight different stakeholders. Using the rank‐order method, weights were then assessed to identify the relative importance of these measures. Five feasible grain distribution policy alternatives were generated, and data describing the performance of these alternatives with respect to each measure were collected via Likert scale surveys of over 300 beneficiary households across 14 different villages (rural) and localities (urban) of Ludhiana district in Punjab. Value functions were assigned to each measure to identify the best performing alternative, and sensitivity analysis was performed to establish the robustness of the final solution. Overall, beneficiaries preferred a 6‐monthly distribution system with improvements, such as better communication and disciplined distribution.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.