Food safety in low- and middle-income countries: What works, what doesn't and why

TLDR: In this paper, foodborne disease (FBD) in low and middle income countries (LMICs) is still limited, but important studies in recent years have broadened our understanding, suggesting that developing country consumers are concerned about FBD; that most of the known burden of FBD disease comes from biological hazards; and, most FBD is the result of consumption of fresh, perishable foods sold in informal markets.

Abstract: Evidence on foodborne disease (FBD) in low and middle income countries (LMICs) is still limited, but important studies in recent years have broadened our understanding. These suggest that developing country consumers are concerned about FBD; that most of the known burden of FBD disease comes from biological hazards; and, that most FBD is the result of consumption of fresh, perishable foods sold in informal markets. FBD is likely to increase in LMICs as the result of massive increases in the consumption of risky foods (livestock and fish products and produce) and lengthening and broadening value chains. Although intensification of agricultural production is a strong trend, so far agro-industrial production and modern retail have not demonstrated clear advantages in food safety and disease control. There is limited evidence on effective, sustainable and scalable interventions to improve food safety in domestic markets. Training farmers on input use and good practices often benefits those farmers trained, but has not been scalable or sustainable, except where good practices are linked to eligibility for export. Training informal value chain actors who receive business benefits from being trained has been more successful. New technologies, growing public concern and increased emphasis on food system governance can also improve food safety.