• Investment World
• eWorld
• Catalyst
• Mentor
• Life
• Canvas
• Praxis
• Urban Pulse
• Brand Quest

EXPORT INSPECTION Agency's summary order to five firms in the seafood business to stop production and exports is nothing but a knee-jerk reaction to the rejection by the European Union of some consignments that had traces of detection of antibiotics. While such rejections are not uncommon, the EIA's action has merely sent unwarranted negative signals about Indian seafood quality. Far from being a serious problem of sub-standard quality, the present case points to the need to upgrade Indian testing equipment whose precision is admittedly less than that employed in the EU. Regrettably, the EIA has failed to apply its mind to the complexities of international commodity trade including contractual terms and to non-tariff barriers widely believed to be imposed by developed nations on products from developing countries. There is also the violation of the principle of natural justice, in terms of which the EIA ought to have given the firms an opportunity to explain their position.

Any wilful compromise on quality is indeed indefensible; but that does not seem to be the case. If Indian exporters are at fault, the Government and its inspection agency are equally culpable. Globally, food safety, quality and hygiene have started to receive renewed attention even as standards are becoming stricter. Progressive exporters here are not unaware of these developments. Many are certified under HACCP, ISO and similar systems, but that may not be enough because quality is an evolving concept and upgrade is a continuous process. It must be borne in mind that in Europe and other developed parts of the world, food manufacturers/sellers cannot take any chances with quality because of the strong consumer movement and the heavy financial liability that complaints can entail. The Government, which obtains revenue in the form of cess on seafood exports, should show what proactive role it has played in ensuring high standards of hygiene and sanitation among exporting units, including setting up modern testing systems. The Marine Products Export Development Authority and the Ministry of Commerce will have some explaining to do.

Be that as it may, it is time to remedy the situation and look ahead. Marine products exports fetch $1.2-1.3 billion per annum with large scope for expansion. Given the significant foreign exchange earning potential of this sector, a focussed attention is necessary. On a priority basis, sampling and testing methods will have to be upgraded to meet EU standards. If laboratories here have the same equipment, systems and procedures as the buying countries, quality certificates issued here must suffice — the "principle of equivalence" will apply. A survey of exporting units may be necessary to mandate them to upgrade. Rejection insurance is available with international insurers; Indian companies can seek such a cover. Terms of export contract probably deserve re-examination in the light of the current experience. A delegation to meet the EU authorities will be in order. All stakeholders — exporters, government, service providers — have to pull together. Seafood processing and exports provide livelihood to several tens of thousands of people. Over-zealous action by some officials should not be allowed to compromise export prospects.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail
Comment on this article to BLFeedback@thehindu.co.in

Stories in this Section
Without taste

Copyright © 2002, The Hindu Business Line. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu Business Line