The purpose of this study was to compare the difference of the methodologies between ISO 22000:2005 and ISO 22000:2018. Compared to the methodology of food safety management system ISO 22000:2005, the methodology of ISO 22000:2018 has not been seen yet. The methodology established in this study was based on the differences of ISO 22000:2018 and ISO 22000:2005 and the abundant experiences of author toward the counseling of verification. The high-level structural management of ISO 22000:2018 can be integrated with other management systems. The risk which was assessed through the severity and possibilities could be converted into an opportunity according to the new method of risk evaluation of ISO 22000:2018 based on the CODEX HACCP. Relatedly, through the implementation of the HACCP system, the key regulatory terms relevant for adherence to ISO 22000:2018 have been added and revised. In particular, the new regulations state that the members of food safety management committees must either possess the expertise required to determine hazards or seek the assistance of outside experts when necessary. This regulation must be effectively implemented in the FSMS of small- and medium-sized enterprises throughout the world. In addition, the key terms and definitions of ISO 22000:2018 such as critical control points, prerequisite programs, and operation prerequisite programs are more clearly defined and consistent with the standard operating procedures of effective food safety management systems. ISO 22000:2018 also pays greater attention to the two “plan, do, check, action” (PDCA) cycles including food safety management system and food safety level. These two PDCA cycles emphasize the need for independent operation but should also be implemented such that they have close synergy and harmony with each other. This methodology was used for the verification of ISO 22000:2018 of seven factories.
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Chemical Engineering(all)
- Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality