Exploring Key Barriers of HACCP Certification Adoption in the Meat Industry: A Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory Approach
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- (O1)
- Identifying the critical barriers that impede the successful adoption of HACCP certification within the meat industry.
- (O2)
- Creating a thorough causal relationship model that reveals the interdependencies between the identified barriers.
- (O3)
- Categorizing the barriers into distinct cause-and-effect groups to assess their relative significance within the context of HACCP certification adoption.
2. Literature Review
3. Materials and Methods
- Step 1:
- Generating the Direct-Relation Matrix (M).
- Step 2:
- Computing the Standardized Direct-Relationship Matrix (X)
- Step 3:
- Calculating the Total-Relation Matrix (T)
- Step 4:
- Determining the Causal Parameters
- Step 5:
- Determining the Prominence and Effect Score
4. Results and Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
No. | Barrier | References |
---|---|---|
1 | Company size | [17,34] |
2 | Product type | [17,32,34] |
3 | Industry field | [17] |
4 | Safety requirements | [17,34] |
5 | Ineffective management | [6,17,34] |
6 | Staff | [17,29] |
7 | Company culture | [15] |
8 | Communication | [15] |
9 | Verification and evaluation difficulties | [17] |
10 | Lack of equivalency between related programs | [17] |
11 | Financial constraints | [6,13,21,23,26,27,28,29,31,32,34,35] |
12 | Low priority | [21] |
13 | Lack of prerequisite programs | [6,17,35] |
14 | Lack of knowledge about HACCP | [6,9,17,27,32] |
15 | Time | [6,13,15,23,24] |
16 | Staff turnover | [6,35] |
17 | Infrastructure | [6,13,17,31] |
18 | Lack of employee motivation | [6,9,16] |
19 | Complicated terminology | [6,9,18,28] |
20 | Complicated guidelines | [6,9,18,32] |
21 | Volume of paperwork | [6,31] |
22 | Training | [6,23,30,34] |
23 | Not enough support from the authorities | [6] |
24 | Lack of awareness | [9,25,32,34] |
25 | Lack of agreement | [9] |
26 | Lack of self-efficacy | [9] |
27 | Lack of outcome expectancy | [9] |
28 | Lack of cueing mechanism | [9] |
29 | Lack of competence | [9] |
30 | Negative environmental factors | [9] |
31 | Negative external factors | [9] |
Appendix B
F1 | F2 | F3 | F4 | F5 | F6 | F7 | F8 | F9 | F10 | F11 | F12 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
F1 | 0 | 4.00 | 3.33 | 4.00 | 0.94 | 3.00 | 1.83 | 0.94 | 3.22 | 1.83 | 0.94 | 3.50 |
F2 | 0.11 | 0 | 2.00 | 0.61 | 1.72 | 3.00 | 2.17 | 2.11 | 2.39 | 1.22 | 2.17 | 2.39 |
F3 | 3.78 | 2.39 | 0 | 3.78 | 3.61 | 3.33 | 3.44 | 2.61 | 1.94 | 1.89 | 1.56 | 3.39 |
F4 | 2.72 | 2.00 | 2.94 | 0 | 3.28 | 2.61 | 4.00 | 2.39 | 0.06 | 1.39 | 1.28 | 2.50 |
F5 | 3.00 | 2.44 | 2.56 | 3.11 | 0 | 1.61 | 2.89 | 2.17 | 0.06 | 1.67 | 2.72 | 3.61 |
F6 | 3.17 | 2.28 | 2.61 | 2.44 | 1.17 | 0 | 3.22 | 1.33 | 0.89 | 0.00 | 0.78 | 3.22 |
F7 | 1.61 | 1.33 | 3.11 | 3.50 | 3.78 | 2.00 | 0 | 1.44 | 2.11 | 1.56 | 1.56 | 2.94 |
F8 | 0.67 | 2.44 | 3.33 | 2.17 | 3.00 | 0.22 | 2.22 | 0 | 1.56 | 0.83 | 0.89 | 1.94 |
F9 | 4.00 | 3.17 | 2.78 | 2.17 | 1.28 | 2.22 | 0.83 | 2.33 | 0 | 0.06 | 1.72 | 2.56 |
F10 | 2.17 | 1.89 | 3.56 | 2.33 | 3.06 | 0.33 | 3.44 | 1.11 | 0.67 | 0 | 1.89 | 2.44 |
F11 | 2.83 | 1.61 | 2.06 | 1.89 | 1.56 | 1.39 | 1.06 | 3.06 | 0.67 | 2.83 | 0 | 2.33 |
F12 | 2.50 | 2.61 | 4.00 | 4.00 | 3.67 | 3.78 | 3.28 | 2.33 | 0.72 | 2.67 | 2.67 | 0 |
References
- Brooks, C.; Parr, L.; Smith, J.M.; Buchanan, D.; Snioch, D.; Hebishy, E. A review of food fraud and food authenticity across the food supply chain, with an examination of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and Brexit on food industry. Food Control 2021, 130, 108171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lytton, T.D. Outbreak: Foodborne Illness and the Struggle for Food Safety; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Motarjemi, Y.; Lelieveld, H. (Eds.) Food Safety Management: A Practical Guide for the Food Industry; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Popescu, D.V.; Dima, A.; Radu, E.; Dobrota, E.M.; Dumitrache, V.M. Bibliometric analysis of the green deal policies in the food chain. Amfiteatru Econ. J. 2022, 24, 410–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dima, A.; Radu, E.; Dobrotă, E.M.; Oțoiu, A.; Săracu, A.F. Sustainable Development of E-commerce in the Post-COVID Times: A Mixed-Methods Analysis of Pestle Factors. Amfiteatru Econ. J. 2023, 25, 1095–1114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baş, M.; Yüksel, M.; Çavuşoğlu, T. Difficulties and barriers for the implementing of HACCP and food safety systems in food businesses in Turkey. Food Control 2007, 18, 124–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thakkar, J.J. Multi-Criteria Decision Making; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2021; Volume 336, pp. 1–365. [Google Scholar]
- Tzeng, G.H.; Huang, J.J. Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Gilling, S.J.; Taylor, E.A.; Kane, K.; Taylor, J.Z. Successful hazard analysis critical control point implementation in the United Kingdom: Understanding the barriers through the use of a behavioral adherence model. J. Food Prot. 2001, 64, 710–715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhou, J.; Jin, Y.; Wang, Y.; Liang, Q. Do producers respond to quality information disclosure? The HACCP certification in meat industry. China Agric. Econ. Rev. 2022, 14, 47–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marchini, A.; Polenzan, B.; Riganelli, C.; Martino, G. Food safety investments factors in the Italian meat sector: Conceptual framework and empirical evidence. New Medit Mediterr. J. Econ. Agric. Environ. = Rev. Méditerranéenne Dʹeconomie Agric. Environ. 2020, 19, 53–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shi, X.; Zhang, X.; Wang, T.; Zhang, J.; Liang, Y. Current status and frontier tracking of the China HACCP system. Front. Nutr. 2023, 10, 1072981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kirby, R. HACCP in practice. Food Control 1994, 5, 230–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Panisello, P.J.; Quantick, P.C.; Knowles, M.J. Towards the implementation of HACCP: Results of a UK regional survey. Food Control 1999, 10, 87–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lynch, M.R. Implementation of HACCP at retail food service facilities. In Proceedings of the 2nd NSF International Conference on Food Safety, Savannah, GA, USA, 11–13 October 2000; pp. 483–488. [Google Scholar]
- Lerman, D.L. Changing behavior, changing lives: Food safety training for kitchen workers. In Proceedings of the 2nd NSF International Conference on Food Safety, Savannah, GA, USA, 11–13 October 2000; pp. 287–294. [Google Scholar]
- Panisello, P.J.; Quantick, P.C. Technical barriers to hazard analysis critical control point (HACCP). Food Control 2001, 12, 165–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vela, A.R.; Fernández, J.M. Barriers for the developing and implementation of HACCP plans: Results from a Spanish regional survey. Food Control 2003, 14, 333–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taylor, E.A.; Taylor, J.Z. Using qualitative psychology to investigate HACCP implementation barriers. Int. J. Environ. Health Res. 2004, 14, 53–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jevšnik, M.; Hlebec, V.; Raspor, P. Meta-analysis as a tool for barriers identification during HACCP implementation to improve food safety. Acta Aliment. 2006, 35, 319–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Herath, D.; Henson, S. Barriers to HACCP implementation: Evidence from the food processing sector in Ontario, Canada. Agribusiness 2010, 26, 265–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boccas, F.; Ramanauskas, A.; Boutrif, E.; Cavaille, P.; Lacaze, J.M.; Pilipiene, I. HACCP “train-in-action” program in the Lithuanian dairy industry. Food Control 2001, 12, 149–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taylor, E. HACCP in small companies: Benefit or burden? Food Control 2001, 12, 217–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Strohbehn, C.H.; Gilmore, S.A.; Sneed, J. Food safety practices and HACCP implementation: Perceptions of registered dietitians and dietary managers. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 2004, 104, 1692–1699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Azanza, M.P.V.; Zamora-Luna, M.B.V. Barriers of HACCP team members to guideline adherence. Food Control 2005, 16, 15–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Herath, D.; Henson, S. Does Canada need mandatory HACCP? Evidence from the Ontario food processing sector. Can. J. Agric. Econ./Rev. Can. D’agroeconomie 2006, 54, 443–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karaman, A.D.; Cobanoglu, F.; Tunalioglu, R.; Ova, G. Barriers and benefits of the implementation of food safety management systems among the Turkish dairy industry: A case study. Food Control 2012, 25, 732–739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lowe, J.P.; Taylor, J.Z. Barriers to HACCP amongst UK farmers and growers: An in-depth qualitative study. Br. Food J. 2013, 115, 262–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Busaidi, M.A.; Jukes, D.J.; Bose, S. Hazard analysis and critical control point (HACCP) in seafood processing: An analysis of its application and use in regulation in the Sultanate of Oman. Food Control 2017, 73, 900–915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mol, S.; Erdogan, B.E.; Ulusoy, S. Survey into the characteristics, working conditions and deficiencies of Turkish seafood processing firms. Turk. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2014, 14, 705–712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Galstyan, S.H.; Harutyunyan, T.L. Barriers and facilitators of HACCP adoption in the Armenian dairy industry. Br. Food J. 2016, 118, 2676–2691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chon, J.; Koo, R.; Song, K.; Kang, I.; Kim, D.; Bae, D.; Kim, H.; Kim, S.; Seo, K. Strategies for expanding HACCP certification rate using an awareness survey of dairy farmers. Int. J. Dairy Technol. 2021, 74, 453–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fotopoulos, C.; Kafetzopoulos, D.; Gotzamani, K. Critical factors for effective implementation of the HACCP system: A Pareto analysis. Br. Food J. 2011, 113, 578–597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Milios, K.D.E.Z.P.; Drosinos, E.H.; Zoiopoulos, P.E. Factors influencing HACCP implementation in the food industry. J. Hell. Vet. Med. Soc. 2012, 63, 283–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, Y.; Wei, L.; Pei, J. Application of meta-analysis technique to assess effectiveness of HACCP-based FSM systems in Chinese SLDBs. Food Control 2019, 96, 291–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Radu, E.; Dima, A.; Dobrota, E.M.; Badea, A.M.; Madsen, D.Ø.; Dobrin, C.; Stanciu, S. Global trends and research hotspots on HACCP and modern quality management systems in the food industry. Heliyon 2023, 9, e18232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khanifar, H.; Rahmati, M.H.; Lahoutian, A.; Haddadi, M.R. Analyzing the Interrelationships between Factors Influencing Entrepreneurship Process Based on Grey DEMATEL:(Case Study: Iran’s Food Industries). Iran. J. Manag. Stud. 2018, 11, 601–628. [Google Scholar]
- Khan, S.; Khan, M.I.; Haleem, A. Evaluation of barriers in the adoption of halal certification: A fuzzy DEMATEL approach. J. Model. Manag. 2019, 14, 153–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prakash, S.; Jasti, N.V.K.; Chan, F.T.S.; Sharma, V.P.; Sharma, L.K. Decision modelling of critical success factors for cold chains using the DEMATEL approach: A case study. Meas. Bus. Excell. 2022, 26, 263–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumar, A.; Mangla, S.K.; Kumar, P. Barriers for adoption of Industry 4.0 in sustainable food supply chain: A circular economy perspective. Int. J. Prod. Perform. Manag. 2022, 73, 385–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abdel-Basset, M.; Atef, A.; Smarandache, F. A hybrid Neutrosophic multiple criteria group decision making approach for project selection. Cogn. Syst. Res. 2019, 57, 216–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, W.K.; Nalluri, V.; Hung, H.C.; Chang, M.C.; Lin, C.T. Apply dematel to analyzing key barriers to implementing the circular economy: An application for the textile sector. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 3335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anand, K.; Ramalingaiah, R.; Parthiban, P. Evaluation of Green Supply Chain Factors Using DEMATEL. In Applied Mechanics and Materials; Trans Tech Publications, Ltd.: Bäch, Switzerland, 2014; Volumes 592–594, pp. 2619–2627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khan, S.; Singh, R.; Haleem, A.; Dsilva, J.; Ali, S.S. Exploration of critical success factors of logistics 4.0: A DEMATEL approach. Logistics 2022, 6, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, C.; Singh, D.; Khamba, J.S. Analyzing barriers of Green Lean practices in manufacturing industries by DEMATEL approach. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 2021, 32, 176–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, Y.; Niu, X.; Gu, C.; Yang, D.; Sun, Q.; Rodriguez, E.F. Using the DEMATEL-VIKOR method in dam failure path identification. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 1480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, W.; Zhu, Y.; Zhao, Q. Analyzing barriers for adopting sustainable online consumption: A rough hierarchical DEMATEL method. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2020, 140, 106279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pamučar, D.; Mihajlović, M.; Obradović, R.; Atanasković, P. Novel approach to group multi-criteria decision making based on interval rough numbers: Hybrid DEMATEL-ANP-MAIRCA model. Expert Syst. Appl. 2017, 88, 58–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- García-Díez, J.; Moura, D.; Nascimento, M.M.; Saraiva, C. Performance assessment of open-access information about food safety. J. Consum. Prot. Food Saf. 2018, 13, 113–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Code | Barrier/ Factor | References | ||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | ||
F1 | Company size | x | x | |||||||||||||||
F2 | Product type | x | x | x | ||||||||||||||
F3 | Ineffective management | x | x | x | ||||||||||||||
F4 | Lack of staff expertise and commitment | x | x | |||||||||||||||
F5 | Verification and evaluation difficulties | x | ||||||||||||||||
F6 | Financial constraints | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | ||||||||
F7 | Lack of knowledge about HACCP | x | x | x | x | |||||||||||||
F8 | Time | x | x | x | x | x | ||||||||||||
F9 | Lack of physical conditions | x | x | x | x | |||||||||||||
F10 | Complicated guidelines | x | x | x | x | |||||||||||||
F11 | Volume of paperwork | x | x | |||||||||||||||
F12 | Lack of or inadequate personnel training | x | x | x | x |
Descriptors | Scale |
---|---|
No influence | 0 |
Very low influence | 1 |
Low influence | 2 |
High influence | 3 |
Very high influence | 4 |
No. | Type of Industry or Field | Organization Size | Company Position | Industry Experience | Professional Qualification Level |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Meat Production | 51–100 employees | Owner/Proprietor (2) | 16–20 Years | Bachelor’s degree |
Senior Manager (2) | 11–15 Years | Master’s degree | |||
Food Safety Specialist (2) | 11–15 Years | Professional certification | |||
101–500 employees | Owner/Proprietor (1) | More than 20 Years | High school diploma or equivalent | ||
Owner/Proprietor (1) | More than 20 Years | Bachelor’s degree | |||
Senior Manager (2) | 16–20 Years | Master’s degree | |||
Food Safety Specialist (4) | 11–15 Years | Professional certification | |||
2. | Academia/ Research Institution | More than 500 employees | Researcher (1) | 11–15 Years | Ph.D. |
Researcher (3) | More than 20 Years | Ph.D. |
F1 | F2 | F3 | F4 | F5 | F6 | F7 | F8 | F9 | F10 | F11 | F12 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
F1 | 0 | 0.124 | 0.103 | 0.124 | 0.029 | 0.093 | 0.057 | 0.029 | 0.100 | 0.057 | 0.029 | 0.108 |
F2 | 0.003 | 0 | 0.062 | 0.019 | 0.053 | 0.093 | 0.067 | 0.065 | 0.074 | 0.038 | 0.067 | 0.074 |
F3 | 0.117 | 0.074 | 0 | 0.117 | 0.112 | 0.103 | 0.107 | 0.081 | 0.060 | 0.059 | 0.048 | 0.105 |
F4 | 0.084 | 0.062 | 0.091 | 0 | 0.102 | 0.081 | 0.124 | 0.074 | 0.002 | 0.043 | 0.040 | 0.077 |
F5 | 0.093 | 0.076 | 0.079 | 0.096 | 0 | 0.050 | 0.089 | 0.067 | 0.002 | 0.052 | 0.084 | 0.112 |
F6 | 0.098 | 0.071 | 0.081 | 0.076 | 0.036 | 0 | 0.100 | 0.041 | 0.028 | 0.000 | 0.024 | 0.100 |
F7 | 0.050 | 0.041 | 0.096 | 0.108 | 0.117 | 0.062 | 0 | 0.045 | 0.065 | 0.048 | 0.048 | 0.091 |
F8 | 0.021 | 0.088 | 0.121 | 0.078 | 0.108 | 0.008 | 0.080 | 0 | 0.056 | 0.030 | 0.028 | 0.070 |
F9 | 0.124 | 0.098 | 0.086 | 0.067 | 0.040 | 0.069 | 0.026 | 0.072 | 0 | 0.002 | 0.053 | 0.079 |
F10 | 0.067 | 0.059 | 0.110 | 0.072 | 0.095 | 0.010 | 0.107 | 0.034 | 0.021 | 0 | 0.059 | 0.076 |
F11 | 0.088 | 0.050 | 0.064 | 0.059 | 0.048 | 0.043 | 0.033 | 0.095 | 0.021 | 0.088 | 0 | 0.072 |
F12 | 0.077 | 0.081 | 0.124 | 0.124 | 0.114 | 0.117 | 0.102 | 0.072 | 0.022 | 0.083 | 0.083 | 0 |
F1 | F2 | F3 | F4 | F5 | F6 | F7 | F8 | F9 | F10 | F11 | F12 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
F1 | 0.273 | 0.386 | 0.427 | 0.43 | 0.322 | 0.352 | 0.363 | 0.258 | 0.25 | 0.228 | 0.222 | 0.419 |
F2 | 0.204 | 0.196 | 0.299 | 0.25 | 0.262 | 0.272 | 0.283 | 0.227 | 0.181 | 0.163 | 0.203 | 0.301 |
F3 | 0.418 | 0.382 | 0.384 | 0.476 | 0.439 | 0.393 | 0.451 | 0.335 | 0.235 | 0.258 | 0.267 | 0.466 |
F4 | 0.328 | 0.31 | 0.395 | 0.301 | 0.37 | 0.316 | 0.401 | 0.279 | 0.15 | 0.207 | 0.218 | 0.373 |
F5 | 0.341 | 0.329 | 0.392 | 0.395 | 0.283 | 0.296 | 0.377 | 0.28 | 0.153 | 0.222 | 0.262 | 0.408 |
F6 | 0.306 | 0.285 | 0.342 | 0.33 | 0.272 | 0.214 | 0.339 | 0.221 | 0.156 | 0.145 | 0.178 | 0.350 |
F7 | 0.303 | 0.291 | 0.397 | 0.397 | 0.381 | 0.3 | 0.287 | 0.256 | 0.201 | 0.21 | 0.226 | 0.382 |
F8 | 0.248 | 0.306 | 0.386 | 0.339 | 0.348 | 0.228 | 0.331 | 0.192 | 0.182 | 0.178 | 0.192 | 0.333 |
F9 | 0.343 | 0.326 | 0.362 | 0.335 | 0.284 | 0.29 | 0.285 | 0.261 | 0.138 | 0.154 | 0.213 | 0.347 |
F10 | 0.297 | 0.288 | 0.388 | 0.346 | 0.345 | 0.237 | 0.364 | 0.231 | 0.156 | 0.157 | 0.225 | 0.349 |
F11 | 0.293 | 0.263 | 0.325 | 0.308 | 0.279 | 0.243 | 0.276 | 0.266 | 0.145 | 0.223 | 0.151 | 0.320 |
F12 | 0.387 | 0.388 | 0.498 | 0.484 | 0.446 | 0.406 | 0.454 | 0.331 | 0.201 | 0.283 | 0.300 | 0.374 |
Factor | Di | Rj | Di + Rj | Rank | Di − Rj | Identity |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Company size (F1) | 3.931 | 3.742 | 7.673 | 6 | 0.189 | Cause |
Product type (F2) | 2.84 | 3.752 | 6.592 | 8 | −0.912 | Effect |
Ineffective management (F3) | 4.501 | 4.594 | 9.095 | 1 | −0.093 | Effect |
Lack of staff expertise and commitment (F4) | 3.65 | 4.392 | 8.042 | 3 | −0.742 | Effect |
Verification and evaluation difficulties (F5) | 3.738 | 4.031 | 7.769 | 5 | −0.293 | Effect |
Financial constraints (F6) | 3.138 | 3.547 | 6.685 | 7 | −0.409 | Effect |
Lack of knowledge about HACCP (F7) | 3.631 | 4.211 | 7.842 | 4 | −0.580 | Effect |
Time (F8) | 3.263 | 3.137 | 6.400 | 9 | 0.126 | Cause |
Lack of physical conditions (F9) | 3.339 | 2.148 | 5.487 | 12 | 1.191 | Cause |
Complicated guidelines (F10) | 3.383 | 2.427 | 5.810 | 10 | 0.956 | Cause |
Volume of paperwork (F11) | 3.092 | 2.657 | 5.749 | 11 | 0.435 | Cause |
Lack of or inadequate personnel training (F12) | 4.552 | 4.421 | 8.973 | 2 | 0.131 | Cause |
Category | Factor | Rank |
---|---|---|
Management and Human Resources | Ineffective management (F3) | 1 |
Lack of or inadequate personnel training (F12) | 2 | |
Lack of staff expertise and commitment (F4) | 3 | |
Assessment and Documentation | Lack of knowledge about HACCP (F7) | 4 |
Verification and evaluation difficulties (F5) | 5 | |
Complicated guidelines (F10) | 10 | |
Volume of paperwork (F11) | 11 | |
Resources and Organizational Structure | Company size (F1) | 6 |
Financial constraints (F6) | 7 | |
Lack of physical conditions (F9) | 12 | |
Product and Time-Related Aspects | Product type (F2) | 8 |
Time (F8) | 9 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Dima, A.; Radu, E.; Dobrin, C. Exploring Key Barriers of HACCP Certification Adoption in the Meat Industry: A Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory Approach. Foods 2024, 13, 1303. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods13091303
Dima A, Radu E, Dobrin C. Exploring Key Barriers of HACCP Certification Adoption in the Meat Industry: A Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory Approach. Foods. 2024; 13(9):1303. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods13091303
Chicago/Turabian StyleDima, Adriana, Elena Radu, and Cosmin Dobrin. 2024. "Exploring Key Barriers of HACCP Certification Adoption in the Meat Industry: A Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory Approach" Foods 13, no. 9: 1303. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods13091303