CODEX ALIMENTARIUS – Main Outcome of the 49th meeting of the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC49)

The 49^th session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission successfully addressed all the topics on its agenda. CAC49 adopted new international commodity standards (e.g., baker’s yeasts, vanilla, coriander, food additives, veteri­nary drugs residues, fats and oils amendments) and new regional standards (e.g., maamoul, quick-frozen dump­lings). CAC49 also adopted important new or revised food hygiene texts, e.g., to define water fit-for-purpose assessment, safety management, and technologies for recovery and treatment of water for reuse; two others on Campylobacter and Salmonella in chicken meat; and consequential amendments to the Code of practice on management of food allergens by food business operators. Also, CAC49 adopted new Guidelines on the use of pre­cautionary allergen labelling, as well as specific labelling provisions for food prepacked in joint presentation and multipack formats, both for inclusion into the general standard for the labelling of prepackaged foods (CXS 1). CAC49 endorsed the revised provisions on country for harvest for Saffron and held significant discussions on country of harvest and country of origin, while referring further guidance to the Committee on Spices and Culi­nary Herbs, for future reviews of related provisions in standards under its purview. CAC49 adopted a new and significant Guidelines on the application of food labelling provisions in emergencies. CAC49 also held intense discussions on Ultra-Processed Foods (UPFs) and on New Food Protein and Production Sources (NFPS), while not embarking into new work (yet) on these topics.¹

See more information available about CAC49 working documents quoted in this article², as well as in the official report of the CAC49 meeting.³ Dr Allan Aze-gele, CAC49 Chairperson, emphasized in his opening remarks that the large participation of countries to this meeting was a “testimony of the commitment of mem­ber countries to Codex” and a reflection of the “shared belief that food safety, fair practices in food trade, and consumer health remain global priorities that tran­scend borders”. CAC49 also paid a tribute to the work of Markus Lipp, retiring soon from the FAO, especial­ly about his tireless work to promote FAO scientific advice to Codex activities as well as FAO guidelines and foresight looking reports. CAC49 also honoured in silence the passing of Mrs Lisa Ralph, passionate Codex senior policy analysist (New Zealand) and a supporter of capacity-building of the local food production in the Pacific Islands.

ADOPTED OF NEW AND REVISED STANDARDS – All through untouched, with some reservations (e.g., vanilla; and, MRLs veterinary drugs)

CAC49 adopted new international commodity standards for vanilla, large cardamon, coriander, curry leaves, and baker’s yeasts; and, new regional standards for maamoul (Near East), quick frozen dumplings (Asia). CAC49 updated three other com­modity standards (canned tuna and bonito (CXS 70); canned sardines and sardine-type products (CXS 94), and quick-frozen lobsters (CXS 95)) by revising some taxonomic species names. CAC49 adopted the re­vised section 8.2 on country of origin and country of harvest in the Standard for dried floral parts – Saffron (CXS 351), as a result of CCFL49 discussions.

CAC49 adopted important new or revised food hy­giene texts, such as the appendixes on fish and fishery products and on water fit-for-purpose assessment, safety management, and technologies for recovery and treat­ment of water for reuse to be included in the existing Guidelines for the safe use and reuse of water in food production and processing (CXG 100); the revised Guidelines for the control of Campylobacter and Sal­monella in chicken meat (CXG 78); revised Guidelines on the application of general principles of food hygiene to the control of Listeria monocytogenes in foods (CXG 61), as the result of CCFH50 meeting.

CAC49 adopted new international Guidelines on the use of precautionary allergen labelling (PAL); and spe­cific labelling provisions for food prepacked in joint presentation and multipack formats, both for inclu­sion into the general standard for prepackaged foods. CAC49 adopted the landmark new and self-standing Guidelines on the application of food labelling provi­sions in emergencies.

CAC49 adopted all the other changes proposed by the committees on food additives (i.e., Maximum levels, Specifications, Class names and numbering, amend­ments to food additive sections in commodity stan­dards resulting from endorsement and alignment), on residues of veterinary drugs (i.e., extrapolated MRLs for camelids (i.e., ivermectin in milk; tetracyclines (chlortetracycline, oxytetracycline, and tetracycline) in muscle, liver, kidney, and milk); action levels for nicarbazin (coccidiosat) and lasalocid (antibacterial and coccidiostat) in chicken eggs; and, new very im­portant Guidelines on recommended risk-based actions to address the detection of residues of a veterinary drug in food caused by unavoidable and unintentional carry­over of veterinary drugs in animal feed, where there is no applicable Codex MRL; and, on methods of analysis and sampling (i.e., methods of analysis, performance criteria, and sampling plans for provisions in Codex standards and revised methods for inclusion into CXS 294, as per Appendix II, Parts 1 and 3, and Appendix III of CCMAS45 report). Several reservations were expressed.⁴

ADOPTED AMENDMENTS TO EXISTING STAN­DARDS – All through untouched, with one reserva­tion on previous cargoes by the EU)

CAC49 agreed with the proposed amendments to ex­isting standards from the conclusions reached by the last meetings of the Codex Committees on fats and oils (i.e., to the list of previous cargoes included in Appendix II of the Code of practice for the storage and transport of edible fats and oils in bulk (CXC 36)); food hygiene (i. e., consequential amendments – from the work of CCFL on PAL – to the Code of practice on food allergen management for food business operators (CXC 80); amendments to the Annexes I and III of the Guidelines for the safe use and reuse of water in food production and processing (CXG 100); and, amend­ments to the Guidelines for the control of Taenia sag-inata in meat of domestic cattle (CXG 85), the Guide­lines for the control of Trichinella spp. in meat of Suidae (CXG 86) and the Guidelines on the application of general principles of food hygiene to the control of foodborne parasites (CXG 88)); residues of veter­inary drugs (i.e., harmonization of the names for tetracyclines and cypermethrin(s) in the database for MRLs (CXM 2)); food additives (i.e., consequential amendments resulting from the change into nisin A (INS 234(i)) (from nisin (INS 234)) to the GSFA (CXS 192)); and by the Commission itself (i.e., to correct wrong spelling of the word “hummus”, throughout the regional standard for canned hu[m]mus with tehena (CXS 257R)). A reservation was expressed by the European Union on maintaining two types of mineral oils on the list of permitted previous cargoes to fats and oils shipments — despite CCFO28’s amendment to these entries referring to “highly refined food grade” mineral oils and despite that some of them (high and medium viscosity) are duly listed in the Codex GSFA (CXS 192), as lawfully permitted food additive.⁵

ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE PROCEDUR­AL MANUAL – Adjustments to the risk analysis principles on residues of veterinary drugs.

CAC49 noted the corrections made in the 31^st edition of the French version of the Codex Procedural Manual and adopted the amendments proposed for the 32^nd edition of the Codex Procedural Manual. In particu­lar, it agreed with CCRVDF recommended editorial and substantive changes to the Annex A of the Risk analysis principles applied by CCRVDF with (a) an editorial amendment to the “Template for information recommended for consideration in the priority list by the Codex Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods” and (b) the inclusion of a new nomination tem­plate for Part V “Veterinary drug for extrapolation of MRLs to one or more species” covering a priority list for substances proposed to be subject to extrapolation.⁶

CAC49 further noted the process to monitor the implementation of the revised Part 7 of Section 2.1 of the Codex Procedural Manual and endorsed the Co­dex Executive Committee (CCEXEC) request to the Codex Secretariat to provide ongoing guidance to all Codex subsidiary committees for a consistent applica­tion of the revised Part 7 of Section 2.1.

The status of the Codex Committee on Processed Fruits and Vegetables was changed from adjourned sine die to active and to be hosted by the Republic of (South) Korea. CAC49 further agreed that future sessions be held in person with the possibility of remote participation to facilitate broad and inclu­sive engagement; that the terms of reference of the Committee remain unchanged (i.e., “To elaborate worldwide standards and related texts for all types of processed fruits and vegetables, including but not limited to canned, dried and frozen products as well as fruit and vegetable juices and nectars. (Amended 2011)”). CAC49 also reminded CCPFV to consult, as appropriate, with other international organizations during the standards development process, in line with Article 1(b) of the Statutes of the Codex Alimen-tarius Commission as set out in the Codex Procedural Manual and Strategic Goal 3 of the Codex Strategic Plan 2026– 2031. CAC49 also reminded CCPFV with the recommendations on other matters to be consid­ered by CCPFV as outlined in the supporting working document, i.e. (a) continuing to promote a horizontal approach to standards revision and development; (b) remaining open to consider complementary ap­proaches, where appropriate, to addressing emerging products, evolving technologies, and future challenges in the development of new standards for processed fruits and vegetables, while continuing to benefit from the horizontal approach; (c) completing the review of existing standards, consolidating those into group standards to the extent possible, in light with the work of the CCPFV before it was adjourned and promoting a group approach to any future new work taking into account the assessment and examples presented by the Codex Secretariat at CCPFV28; (d) considering the ongoing relevance of the codes of hygienic prac­tice developed by CCPFV, reviewing these taking into account the more recent Code of hygienic practice for low moisture foods (CXG 75) and the revision of the General principles of food hygiene (CXG 1), and to request CCFH, as the relevant general subject com­mittee for food hygiene, to endorse any revised texts, as appropriate; and, (e) supporting the work of other committees as required (e.g., CCMAS, CCFA), as they undertake revision and alignment of their standards.

CAC49 also agreed to amend the terms of reference of the Codex Committee on Fish and Fishery Products (CCFFP) to include the term “aquatic” to read: “To elaborate worldwide standards for live, fresh, frozen (incl. quick frozen) or otherwise processed aquatic food products”, so that organisms like macroalgae, or better known as “seaweed”, could be part of the scope of the Committee. CAC49 has had formally to vote by secret ballot (which is a first in the recent Codex history) for the designation of the host country of CCFFP and Spain won that election over the Republic of South Korea.

CAC49 also praised the work of the CCFA to have adopted an information document containing new working practices for the incorporation and endorse­ment of food additive provisions by the horizontal committees (CCFA and CCNFSDU), by all commod­ity committees and by regional coordinating com­mittees developing regional food standards. CAC49 encouraged all committees to implement the working practice in an effective and consistent manner; and encouraged Members with relevant expertise in the work of CCFA to support the implementation of the new working practices in these other Codex Commit­tees. Such new working principles have been devel­oped to strengthen the GSFA as the single reference for food additives in the Codex system and prevent further divergence between provisions included in the GSFA and those referred to eventually in food stan­dards. The working practices also provide guidance to facilitate collaboration between CCFA and other Codex subsidiary bodies, based on key principles including the use of a general reference to the GSFA in commodity standards and the concurrent adoption of GSFA amendments and commodity standards by CAC. It was noted that the last CCFA meeting already started to put the new working practices into effect with the standard on baker’s yeast. CAC49 noted that navigating through the various parts and tables of the GSFA required specialized expertise and that enhanced coordination between CCFA experts and commodity specialists would promote technical con­sistency across all Codex subsidiary bodies. A special tribute was given to Dr Steve Crossley (Australia, retired expert), who contributed deeply to the success of the development of these working principles, which have been published under the “Resources” Codex web page.

LIST OF APPROVED NEW WORK – All through, but one on NFPS subject to a specific interim work before new work is formally approved possibly at CAC50

CAC49 agreed with the proposed new work coming from CCFO (addition of shea butter, sea buckthorn pulp oil, and sea buckthorn seed oil to the Standard for named vegetable oils (CXS 210), and adjustment of the stearic acid content for high oleic sunflower seed oil (in CXS 210)), CCPFV (two new commodity standards for “cashew kernels” and for “flours from some roots and tubers”, from sweet potato and yam as a starting point), CCRVDF (revised priority list for evaluation by JECFA of some veterinary drugs (see Appendix VIII of the last CCRVDF Report)), and CCFA (new provisions introduced as draft MLs for future possible inclusion into the General Standard on Food Additives (GSFA), as well the revised priority list for evaluation and re-evaluation by JECFA of several food additives (see Appendix XI of the last CCFA re­port)). In addition, CAC49 requested the Committee on fish, fishery and other aquatic products (CCFFP) to take up the work on the development of the appro­priate sampling plans for histamine for the eleven fish and fishery product commodity standards.

The proposal put forward by the European Union for the development of the Principles for the risk analysis of new food sources and production systems (‘NFPS’) was one of the most disputed and discussed topic during the CAC49. Noting the extensive discussions and the range of views expressed (see endnote viii of this article), and given the recommendations of CCEXEC90 on the new work proposal, while recog­nizing that further discussions were probably need­ed, CAC49 did not approve the new work proposal. However, it agreed to establish an EWG, chaired by the European Union and co-chaired by India, Panama, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, the United States of America, and Zambia, working in all the official Codex languages but Chinese, with the fol­lowing terms of reference (as previously agreed by the CCEXEC90): (i) stocktaking of existing regulatory frameworks with experience dealing with foods de­rived from innovative technologies, identifying their benefits and challenges, and considering the work of FAO and WHO in this area, with a view to identifying gaps, in CXG 62-2007 for application to these types of foods; (ii) identifying areas, if any, where CAC could elaborate guidance related to foods derived from innovative technologies; and (iii) preparing a report for CAC50, with a revised project document as appropriate, taking into account the outcomes of the stocktaking, and the written comments submitted to, and discussions at CAC49. To facilitate and advance the work of the EWG, CAC49 further agreed that the EWG should have the flexibility to convene virtual or hybrid meetings, as appropriate, in English only. CAC49 further agreed that consistent with the con­clusion of CAC48, the work of the EWG should not delay the consideration of on-going work on NFPS in Codex subsidiary bodies.⁷

REVOKED STANDARDS AND DISCONTINUED WORK

CAC49 agreed with the proposed CCFA revocation of previously approved specific food additive maximum level provisions as well as with the proposed CCMAS revocation of previously approved methods of analy­sis, replaced by more recent ones. CAC49 also noted the list of provisions that CCFA agreed to discontinue working on, either because they were replaced by other provisions or lack of support.⁸

ADVANCEMENT OF DRAFT STANDARDS FOR FUTURE FINAL CONSIDERATION BY THEIR RELEVANT COMMITTEES.

CAC49 agreed to advance the standard for the re­quirements for sweet marjoram, the standard for microbial omega-3 oils and the standard for laver products for their finalization by the relevant Codex Committees, respectively CCSCH (spice and culinary herbs), CCFO (on fats and oils), and CCFFP (on fish, fishery, and algae products). These respective draft texts will be subject to further elaboration through dedicated EWGs or/and to circular letters seeking comments before their final review by these three active committees.⁹

JOINT CCPR/CCRVDF ELECTRONIC WORKING GROUP

CAC49 reviewed the recommendation from CCEX-EC90 to adopt the revised Terms of Reference of the Joint CCPR/CCRVDF EWG. CAC49 agreed to further amend these ToRs, to clarify that the EWG goal is to “explore and possibly develop pathways that promote the development of harmonized MRLs at the risk assessment (JMPR and JECFA) and risk manage­ment (CCPR and CCRVDF) stage, when applicable, before JMPR and JECFA recommend MRLs to CCPR and CCRVDF.” CAC49 also approved the provisional agenda for the virtual session of the joint meeting of CCPR and CCRVDF as included in Appendix IX of CAC49 report.¹⁰

OTHER MATTERS
Observer Status

As regard the review of applications submitted by in­ternational NGOs for Observer status with the Codex Alimentarius Commission, CAC49 noted CCEX-EC90’s view that every effort should be made by WHO and FAO to expedite the review process, noting the important role played and expertise brought by those Observer organisations that are active in the Codex standard-setting work process.

Use of Country of Harvest in Food Labelling of Spices – CCSCH requested to use the nine principles devel­oped by CCFL

This topic was the second most intensively discussed topic ex-aequo with the topic on NFPS, and it is an equally complex matter. CAC49 expressed its appreci­ation for the work done by Members to find a solution to this issue since the CAC47 meeting. CAC49 agreed to forward the nine conclusions presented as new principles in the report of the CCFL49 meeting which had considered their content in CX/CAC 26/49/14 Add.2, as agreed by CCFL49, to the Committee on Spices and Culinary Herbs (CCSCH), to be used as guiding principles by CCSCH when determining origin-related labelling provisions for spices and culinary herb commodities. CAC49 also formally requested CCSCH to reflect on how the relevant nine conclusions could be practically applied to the section on country of harvest and origin in the just approved Codex Standard on Vanilla (also in the light of the compromise text found on the finally agreed sec­tion on country of harvest and country of origin for Dried Saffron). CAC49 highlighted the importance of building further knowledge and capacity, for example during a workshop on the side of the next CCSCH session, to enhance coherence and consistency in the application of CCFL labelling texts and that would contribute towards improving the efficiency of the endorsement process.¹¹

Ultra-Processed Foods (UPF) – No specific new work (for now), but WHO confirmed its own

CAC49 noted the information provided by a represen­tative of the WHO about ongoing work undertaken by WHO expert groups on ultra-processed foods (UPF), including a global food profiling model and an associated Q&A which were planned for a public release before end 2026, and a new guideline on UPF consumption, health-related matters, and associated dietary recommendations, expected now to be re­leased in 2028. This topic was subject to many inter­ventions by Codex members seeking additional clarifi­cations from the WHO, and consistency with CAC48’s recommendations already stated last year.. ¹² In response to the views expressed by Codex members, another representative of the WHO clarified that there were two separate work streams underway: 1) the development of a food profiling model for regulatory purposes; and 2) the development of a guideline on the consumption of UPF. The representative explained that the guideline development process was at an early stage and currently focused on establishing an expert group, highlighting that no final definition had been adopted, that the process would follow WHO’s estab­lished procedures, including public calls for experts and consultation opportunities, and that the available scientific evidence and relevant definitions would be reviewed as part of the guideline development pro­cess. It was also noted that the NOVA classification was one source of information under consideration, but not the sole basis for the work, and reiterated its commitment to transparency and continued engage­ment with (Codex) Members.

HOST COUNTRIES FOR ACTIVE COMMITTEE – historical vote for the designation of the host country of CCFFP.

CAC49 designated Spain as the new host country of the Codex Committee on Fish and Fishery products (extended to seaweed and other aquatic products), following a 60 year dedicated lead ensured by Norway. That designation had to be based on a secret ballot vote by all Codex member countries present, ulti­mately won by Spain (over the Republic of Korea) by a safe margin. A discussion followed on the working modalities, which will be further clarified by Spain in near future, noting that Spain’s preference would be to convene CCFFP meetings in a physical format, ideally with a hybrid option, while working by correspon­dence was not totally excluded.¹³

The publication is posted in the July 2026 World Food Regulation Review. Find the full WFRR library here.

ENDNOTES

1. CAC49 was held in a hybrid format (in person in Geneva (Switzerland) at the CICG and remotely using Zoom as an interface) from Monday July 6th to Fri­day July 10th, 2026, as well as broadcast live online. The next CAC meeting (CAC50) will be held likely in July 2027, in Rome (Italy). CAC49 was chaired by Dr Allan AZEGELE and was in part co-chaired by CACs’ Vice-Chairpersons Mrs Jing Tian, Mrs Betül Vazgeçer, and Mr Khalid Alzahrani. CAC49 was overall attended by about 600 Delegates from 119 Member countries, one Member organization (the European Union), and 46 Observer organizations (from 13 international governmental organizations (iGOs), 29 international non-governmental organizations (iNGOs) and 4 United Nations Agencies), and Palestine. ↩︎
2. See https://www.fao.org/fao-who-codexalimentarius/ meetings/detail/en/?meeting=CAC&session=49& ↩︎
3. See https://www.fao.org/fao-who-codexalimentarius/ meetings/en/ ↩︎
4. See Appendix III of CAC49 report. Reservations on Precautionary Allergen Labelling: Thailand expressed concerns, with regards to the mandatory application of the reference dose set out in Table 4.3.1 as the sole criterion for precautionary allergen labelling may not in their view be practical, particularly for small businesses and, furthermore, the currently available analytical methods were largely proprietary, matrix-dependent and not widely accessible, which could create technical barriers to trade and may result in the inappropriate application of precautionary allergen labelling. The rep­resentative of the Institute of Food Technologists noted that scientific knowledge on food allergenicity and food consumption patterns continued to evolve and therefore suggested that CCFL consider reviewing the scientific basis for precautionary allergen labelling, including ref­erence doses and threshold action levels, within a five-year timeframe in collaboration with an FAO/WHO scientific expert body, so that future updates could incorporate emerging scientific evidence and revised food consumption data; in response to which WHO highlighted that the framework established by the FAO/ WHO expert meetings on food allergens would allow Members to consider new scientific evidence and adjust reference doses and action levels as appropriate, hence a timeframe for revision may not be needed. Reserva­tions on the guidelines on labelling flexibility during emergencies: On the guidelines on emergencies, Cabo Verde expressed its reservation to the final adoption of the Guidelines. While recognizing the importance of the guidelines in supporting competent authorities and ensuring continuity of food supplies during crises, Cabo Verde considered that the text was not fully ready for adoption. Cabo Verde emphasized that any labelling flexibilities in emergency situations should be strictly limited, risk-based, temporary, and authorized by the competent authority, and should not compromise essen­tial health and safety information, including allergen information, ingredient lists, preparation instructions, lot identification and traceability elements. Cabo Verde further highlighted that infant formulas and foods intended for infants and young children should not be subject to emergency labelling flexibilities that may affect mandatory health and safety information. The representative of WHO expressed support for the purpose of the guidelines to facilitate access to safe and nutritious food during emergencies, while noting that in their view further discussion was needed before adop­tion. The representative of WHO emphasized that any labelling flexibilities should not compromise the protec­tion of consumer health and highlighted several areas of concern, and proposed the exclusion of infant formula, foods for infants and young children, foods for special medical purposes, and products for individuals with specific dietary needs from the scope of the Guidelines. The representative of WHO also stressed the need to give greater consideration to nutrition and diet-related health risks, including potential impacts on noncommu-nicable diseases, to address the challenges of protracted emergencies where temporary measures may become long-term practices, and to provide clearer provisions for post-emergency management, including traceability, re-labelling, and market placement of products. On this basis, the representative of WHO saw merit in returning the text for further discussion before adoption. Reser­vations on Vanilla: Madagascar, supported by Cam­eroon, and the USA expressed their reservations for the final adoption of the standard for vanilla, for different set of reasons (Madagascar, noting that the provisions relating to the declaration of country of harvest (COH) and country of origin (COO) had not been sufficient­ly considered, unlike the approach taken for saffron; Madagascar stressed that vanilla was a unique prod­uct noting that in most cases COH and COO were the same, and that the absence of harmonized provisions on these aspects could have implications for traceability, transparency, and consumer information, and requested that the matter be further considered by CCSCH — USA on several sections of the standard: Section 2.2 (Styles), for not retaining the original naming/order where the term “vanilla caviar” appears before the term “vanilla pulp and seeds” and argued that changing the name could create economic impacts and confusion in trade; Section 8.1.3 (Name of Product), to the mandatory declaration of trade name i.e. for not using the word ” instead of the word “shall”, noting that most Codex commodity standards make trade names option­al; Annex I (Chemical and Physical Characteristics) by including a table with chemical characteristics per species in the vanilla standard, which did not reflect current international trade practices and could become a barrier to international vanilla trade). Reservations  on MRLs for veterinary drugs: The Russian Federation and/or Kazakhstan on several MRLs for some active pesticide matters (Ivermectin in milk, tetracyclines (chlortetracycline, oxytetracycline, and tetracycline) in muscle, liver, kidney, milk; and “action level” for nica-rbazin and lasalocid in chicken eggs). The Philippines expressed concern about the 10-fold threshold above the Codex action level, which the guidelines used as an indicator that carryover may not be the cause of residue detection. While it recognized the value of this threshold as a screening tool to trigger traceback investigations, it considered that applying a single fixed multiplier across all veterinary drugs may not adequately reflect differ­ences in the stability, persistence, and carryover charac­teristics of individual compounds in feed manufacturing systems. Given the wide variation in the carryover potential of veterinary drugs, using a universal thresh­old could lead to inconsistent interpretations of residue findings. ↩︎
5. See Appendix VIII of CAC49 report. Reservations on previous cargoes: The EU, supported by Colombia, Norway, and Switzerland, reiterated its reservations for the adoption of an updated list of acceptable pre­vious cargoes in the Code of practice for the storage and transport of edible fats and oils in bulk (CXC 36) to the transportation of fats and oils, with regards to the retention of highly refined food-grade high viscosity (CAS R.N. 8012-95-1) and medium viscosity mineral oils on that list, due to EU concerns that the mineral oil aromatic hydrocarbon (MOAH) fraction of mineral oils contained certain genotoxic carcinogens and would present potential health risks associated with consumer exposure, and that food grade quality provided no guar­antees on the absence of MOAH. ↩︎
6. See Appendix II of the CAC49 report. For the “Nom-ination template for veterinary drugs for evaluation by JECFA”, under “Administrative Information”, the following points 6 and 7 were added to read “6. Is this nomination for a parallel review (Yes/No)”, and “7. Is this compound also used as a pesticide (Yes/No)”. Part V of the Priority list is amended to read “Nomination template for veterinary drug extrapolation of MRLs to one or more species” and is composed of 5 new elements that read: “1. Member(s) submitting the request for extrapolation”, “2. Veterinary drug name, or group name”, “3. Species and tissues/food commodities for which MRLs have been established on the basis of a JECFA evaluation”, “4. Species or class of species to which extrapolation is proposed”, and “5. Additional information (optional), such as an initial assessment of whether the nomination is likely to meet the agreed approach for extrapolation of MRLs of veterinary drugs to one or more species.” ↩︎
7. See Appendix VI of the CAC49 report. The EU introduced the proposal for the development of overarching principles for the risk analysis of new food sources and new food production systems (NFPS), indicating that such a Codex guidance would support the establishment of national regulatory frameworks, while providing sufficient flexibility for application in different national contexts. The EU clarified that the proposed work was not intended to provide guidance for the development of Codex standards for individual NFPS but rather to complement the existing Working principles for risk analysis for food safety for application by governments (CXG 62) by addressing regulatory challenges specific to NFPS. The EU further noted that the proposed work would support capacity building and information exchange, particularly for low- and medium-income countries (LMICs). The EU further informed that, after considering the comments received in response to CL 2026/44-CAC and relevant CRDs, it had prepared a summary of the issues to be addressed when revising the new work proposal (contained in CAC49s’ CRD44), including matters relating to the identification of regulatory gaps, the scope and definitions, and the format of the proposed Codex text. CAC49 noted the following views: (a) existing Codex risk analysis principles and guidance, including CXG 62, already provided a robust framework, and the EWG should first assess whether regulatory gaps existed and whether additional Codex work was needed, considering national regulatory experiences; (b) the new work proposal was supported as it would provide added value to Codex Members and support and guide competent authorities when developing and implementing national regulatory frameworks on how to regulate foods derived from new technologies; (c) the new work proposal was not supported as currently proposed, (d) any consideration of possible new work should be based on the outcome of the gap analysis by the EWG and should not be prejudged, (e) the need to examine the concept of NFPS and support for the intent of the proposal, (f) as innovation in food production evolves, it is important for Codex to ensure that existing risk analysis principles remain fit for purpose, (g) the new work could provide a trusted global reference for proportionate, consistent, and effective risk analysis worldwide, (h) concerns were expressed that these initiatives could become a means of legitimizing the introduction of barriers to trade affecting traditional products of some regions (i.e., considered “novel” or ty-building and information exchange in an area where existing national frameworks differ, (j) further clarification was needed regarding the scope, definitions, objectives and regulatory challenges associated with NFPS, as well as the specific issues that might warrant additional Codex guidance, (k) future work should remain within the Codex mandate of protecting consumer health and ensuring fair practices in food trade, focus on foods derived from innovative technologies, and exclude ethical, environmental and other non-food safety considerations, (l) any future work should complement existing Codex texts, avoid duplication, and not delay any related work in Codex subsidiary bodies, (m) any future work should provide regulatory and practical approaches that address real-world challenges faced by competent authorities rather than speculate on possible risks or gaps, (n) mechanisms or tools, e.g. a decision-tree, that could be used within Codex, to clarify where and how the cross-cutting nature of NFPS-related issues could be optimally addressed, should be considered, (o) a scientific advisory mechanism could be considered to address the complex and cross-cutting nature of NFPS issues, (p) any future guidance should ensure that traditional foods and countries were not adversely affected and ensure that traditional foods with a history of safe use were not subject to additional requirements solely because they were unfamiliar in certain markets, (q) any future work should facilitate innovation and regulatory predictability while maintaining a high level of consumer protection, (r) the need to reflect differing national capacities and ensure that developing countries could participate effectively and implement any resulting guidance. Other new work proposals: In response to the suggestion to consider new work on inland fish species, particularly smoked fish and dry salted fish, in the future work of CCFFP, the Codex Secretariat encouraged active engagement in CCFFP and the ongoing work in CCAFRICA on a regional standard for dried fish, recalling that Members could submit proposals for revisions to existing standards if the need arises. Brazil, referring to CAC49’s CRD49, indicated the need for revising the Standard for sugars (CXS 212), which was under the auspices of a committee adjourned sine die, and proposed that CAC49 request a CL be issued to seek Members’ feedback on this proposal. The Chairperson recalled that at CCEXEC90 the Codex Secretariat had reminded Members that the Codex Procedural Manual included procedures for revising standards developed by subsidiary bodies that had been abolished, dissolved, or adjourned sine die, and proposed that Members might bring the matter to a future session of CAC, thereby allowing sufficient time for its consideration. ↩︎
8. See respectively Appendix V and Appendix VII of the CAC49 report. See also the reports of CCFA56 (Appen­dix VIII) and CCMAS45 (Appendix II). ↩︎
9. See Appendix IV of the CAC49 report. ↩︎
10. See Appendix IX of the CAC49 report. The final ToRs of the Joint EWG read as follows: “1. Review work already done cooperatively between the Codex Committees on Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Foods (CCRVDF) and Pesticide Residues (CCPR) and will identify, and if possible, prioritize areas of possible further collaboration between CCRVDF and CCPR and how this could be carried out (e.g. jointly, in parallel, etc.) to facilitate the consideration of compounds with dual uses by both committees and the possible harmo­nization of maximum residue limits (MRLs). This may include reflections on improved synchronization of work between CCPR and CCRVDF as well as collaboration between CCPR/CCRVDF and the Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR)/Joint FAO/ WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA); 2. Provide an update on their preliminary findings to CCRVDF and CCPR; 3. Develop a list of compounds with dual use as a pesticide and veterinary drug for which no or only one Codex MRL has been established and that member countries will provide the information to populate this list; 4. Identify dual-use compounds that have different Codex MRLs for a similar edible commodity of animal origin and recommend on a case-by-case basis, a single, harmonized MRL(s) for the compound(s) and affected commodity(ies). The EWG might recommend that CCRVDF/CCPR consider selecting the higher MRL value; 5. Consider the mat­ter related to harmonized food descriptors to be used by JECFA/JMPR; and 6. Explore and possibly develop pathways that promote the development of harmonized MRLs at the risk assessment (JMPR and JECFA) and risk management (CCPR and CCRVDF) stage, when applicable, before JMPR and JECFA recommend MRLs to CCPR and CCRVDF.” The provisional agenda for the joint CCPR/CCRVDF virtual session will cover (a) harmonization of MRLs for dual-use compounds; and, (b) harmonization of food descriptors to be used by JECFA and JMPR when recommending MRLs for pesticides and veterinary drugs. It will also consid­er matters referred by the CAC and other subsidiary bodies to it, as well as matters of interest arising from FAO/WHO, including JECFA and JMPR. CAC49 noted that the priority list to be agreed by the 57th session of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues (CCPR57) (2026) would constitute the work agenda for the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR) for 2027, with the resulting recommendations for maximum residue levels (MRLs) forming the core work of CCPR in 2028. It was further noted that with CCPR57 scheduled to meet in September 2026, delaying approval of this priority list until CAC50 (July 2027) would impede JMPRs’ ability to progress work efficiently and might jeopardize efforts to return the CCPR and JMPR meeting cycles to their regular schedules in the first and second half of 2027, respectively. On this basis, CAC49 agreed to delegate approval of the priority list of pesticides for JMPR evaluation to CCEXEC91, thereby enabling timely progress on the evaluation of pesticides by JMPR and the subsequent establishment of MRLs by CCPR, which would also enable timely synchronization of the work between JMPR and CCPR. ↩︎
11. It was recalled that the mandatory declaration of country of harvest (COH) had been discussed extensively by both CCSCH and CCFL, and that CAC47 had agreed to establish an EWG reporting to CCFL, to review the comments received through a CL and explore potential approaches to address the issue. CCFL49 had considered the outcome of the work of the EWG, agreed on the nine conclusions to be used as guiding principles, and recommended that these conclusions be shared with CCSCH. In addition, CCFL49 forwarded the draft provisions on country of origin (COO) and COH for inclusion in the Standard for dried Floral Parts – Saffron (CXS 351) for consideration and adoption by CAC. It was noted that CCEXEC90 had recommended that CAC49 share the nine conclusions with CCSCH and adopt the provisions on COO and COH for inclusion in CXS 351. Canada, speaking as chair of the EWG on COH and chair of CCFL, thanked the joint chair, co-chairs and all participants to the EWG for their constructive engagement in addressing a complex issue and noted that the outcome was an example of the Codex core values in action, demonstrating the value of identifying and addressing underlying concerns as a key to opening the pathway to consensus-building; and expressed full support for the recommendations of CCEXEC90. CAC49 acknowledged the work undertaken by CCFL and the EWG and noted broad support for the conclusions of CCFL49 and recommendations of CCEXEC90 concerning the use of COH in the labelling of spices. Delegations provided the following comments: (a) the conclusions of CCFL49 provided useful guidance and advice for CCSCH, particularly regarding consideration of origin claims and supporting fair practices in food trade; (b) the importance of clear origin-related information to enhance transparency in trade and protecting consumers was highlighted; (c) the conclusions provided sufficient guidance to CCSCH on origin labelling while taking into account the existing labelling standards and the Codex mandate; (d) declaration of COO should be mandatory, while declaration of COH and year of harvest should remain optional, thereby providing flexibility for countries wishing to include such information; (e) CCSCH should consider how the relevant conclusions could be applied in its future work on spices and culinary herbs; and (f) discussions on COH and COO in relation to vanilla should continue within CCSCH, given its technical expertise on the matter was emphasized. Dried Saffron: With regards to the past unresolved sections on COH for Dried Saffron (published as CXS 351), the efforts and contributions made at CCSCH and CCFL to address the labelling provisions on COH and COO in the standard for saffron were commended and delegations unanimously supported the adoption of the labelling provisions for Section 8.2, “Country of origin and country of harvest”, as proposed by CCFL49 (see WFRR Article May 2026). It was reaffirmed that, for dried saffron, COH and COO were the same, and that packaging activities did not alter the origin of the product. They also stressed that the nine conclusions developed by CCFL provided the basis for the recommended provisions for CXS 351. Vanilla: With regards to similar discussions for vanilla in the Codex standard for spices derived from dried or dehydrated fruits and berries, CAC49 recalled that Madagascar and Cameroon requested the reconsideration of COH for vanilla by the CCSCH, in light of their reservation expressed during the adoption of the new Codex Standard for Vanilla. Madagascar took note of the nine conclusions of CCFL and illustrated how they could be applied to vanilla, emphasizing the need to reconsider the provision on COH for this commodity. Referring to conclusions 2, 5 and 6 of CCFL49, Madagascar noted that: (a) declaring only COO for vanilla processed in another country could mislead consumers and be inconsistent with Codex principles on fair practices in food trade (Conclusion 2); (b) as 80 percent of their vanilla beans were processed outside Madagascar, labelling should distinguish between vanilla beans traded as commodities and processed vanilla-derived products (Conclusion 5); and (c) CCFL49 concluded that technical discussions on COH should continue in CCSCH, as the relevant technical committee (Conclusion 6). Madagascar therefore requested that the labelling provisions for vanilla be rediscussed in CCSCH. It was suggested that CCSCH, where appropriate, consider the application of these principles not only in future spice and culinary herb standards but also in existing standards for spices and culinary herbs, in order to promote consistency across its work. It was clarified that CCSCH should examine the practical application of the nine CCFL conclusions, while ensuring that these conclusions were not interpreted as reopening adopted standards. Members sought clarification on the implications of referring discussions on the application of the nine conclusions on vanilla, as regard revisiting the labeling provision for COH, noting that the draft standard already provided for mandatory declaration of the COO and optional declaration of the COH, which was endorsed by CCFL49 and recommended for adoption at Step 8 by CCEXEC90. Some Members recalled that CCSCH8 had stated that it could revisit the issue of COH in vanilla at a later stage, if mandatory declaration of COH would become acceptable. Noting that CCFL49 had not endorsed mandatory declaration of COH, the need to revisit the vanilla standard was thus questioned. The Codex Secretariat clarified that the EWG established by CAC47 had originally been mandated to consider food labelling of spices including saffron and vanilla. CCFL applied the conclusions to the case of saffron. It was recalled that CCSCH had indicated that it could revisit the issue of COH in vanilla at a later stage, if mandatory declaration of COH would become acceptable. The Codex Secretariat further explained that the nine conclusions developed by CCFL were intended to serve as guiding principles to assist CCSCH when determining origin-related labelling for specific spices and culinary herbs and as these were guidance rather than a direct statement on whether COH could be mandatory or not, there was no impediment to further discussion in CCSCH. CAC49s’ Chairperson proposed that CAC49 endorse the recommendations of CCEXEC90 but with revision to include a request to CCSCH to reflect on how the relevant CCFL49 conclusions could be practically applied to vanilla. The CCFL49s’ Chairperson considered that the proposal put forward by the CAC Chairperson represented the best available solution, as it balanced the views on the matter regarding vanilla with the outcome of the work undertaken by CCFL on COH and COO. ↩︎
12. The following views were expressed: (a) the update provided by WHO was welcome and it underscored the importance of ensuring that any future guidance be developed through a transparent, inclusive and scientif­ically robust consultation process; (b) clarification were requested on the conceptual framework underpinning WHOs’ work, noting the views expressed at CAC48 that consideration of definitions should be based on robust scientific data and that there would a transparent establishment of a multidisciplinary expert group (which would precede the development of any guidance); (c) additional information were sought regarding the defi­nitions and classification approaches being used in the ongoing work; (d) references to the NOVA classification in the WHO work were noted and clarification was sought on how it was being used in the development process. Members emphasized that the work should not rely solely on the NOVA classification and that a broad range of scientific evidence should be taken into consid­eration; (e) importance of transparency, scientific evi­dence and broad participation throughout the guideline development process was emphasized; (f) need to ensure coherence between WHO initiatives and Codex pro­cesses was highlighted, particularly given the potential implications that definitions and classifications could have for international trade; (g) WHO was requested to continue to provide regular updates to Members as the work progresses; and, (h) importance of maintaining a sound scientific basis for any future recommendations on the consumption of UPF was stressed. ↩︎
13. See Appendix X of the CAC49 report. Active Com­mittees: General Principles (France), Food Hygiene (USA), Food Labelling (Canada), Food Import and Ex­port Certification and Inspection Systems (Australia), Methods of Analysis and Sampling (Hungary), Food Additives (China), Contaminants in Foods (the Nether­lands), Pesticide Residues (China), Residues of Veter­inary Drugs (USA), Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses (NFSDU), Processed Fruits and Vegetables (South Korea), Fats and Oils (Malaysia), Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (Mexico), Spices and Culinary Herbs (India). Active Committees working by correspondence: Milk and Milk Products (New Zealand), Fish and Fishery Products (Spain)*, Cereals, Pulses and Legumes (USA). Committees adjourned sine die: Cocoa Products and Chocolate (Switzerland), Natural Mineral Waters (Switzerland), Sugars (Colombia), Meat Hygiene (New Zealand), Vegetable Proteins (Canada). *Based on the discussion held during CAC49, Spain may decide to convene meetings in person and hybrid format. ↩︎