Highlights from the GFSI “A Culture of Food Safety” Version 2.0 Position Paper
Food safety is not merely a technical field managed through procedures, standards, audits and records. The sustainability of food safety performance is directly linked to how people within an organisation think, how they make decisions, how they perceive risks and how they perform their daily work. For this reason, the concept of “food safety culture” has become one of the most critical topics on the food industry agenda in recent years.
Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI), aimed to establish a common global language for food safety culture through its first position paper published in 2018. Over the last eight years, the concept of Food Safety Culture has become an integral part of audit standards such as FSSC 22000, BRCGS, IFS and SQF.
However, several challenges emerged in practice:
- Organisations often associated culture mainly with training activities.
- A common language for measuring culture did not fully emerge.
- While many efforts focused on the question “How do we build culture?”, the question “What exactly is culture?” was not sufficiently clarified.
Published in 2026, “A Culture of Food Safety – Version 2.0” updates this common-language approach and provides a more evidence-based and measurable framework. The document treats food safety culture not as a “soft topic”, but as a strategic element that directly influences food safety outcomes.
What Is Food Safety Culture?
In GFSI Version 2.0, food safety culture is defined as a set of deeply rooted beliefs, behaviours, values and assumptions that exist in all food businesses, are learned and shared by employees, and influence an organisation’s food safety performance.
The important point in this definition is that culture is no longer viewed only as management messages or training programmes.
Culture is associated with;
- what people think,
- what they feel,
- how they perceive risks,
- how they make decisions under pressure, and
- how they shape their daily behaviours.
In other words:
“Culture is what people do when no one is watching.“
Culture is a structure that is learned and shared over time. Therefore, it is shaped not by short-term campaigns, but by continuous leadership, consistent practices and systematic improvement.
GFSI’s approach does not treat food safety culture as separate from food safety management systems. No matter how strong HACCP, prerequisite programmes, critical control points, verification activities and record systems may be, their accurate and consistent translation into daily practice depends on human behaviour and organisational culture.
GFSI’s Updated Framework
GFSI Version 2.0 addresses food safety culture under two main groups:
1. Organisational Culture Foundations
2. Manifested Cultural Essentials for Food Safety
These two groups are not independent of one another. Organisational Culture Foundations establish the organisation’s values, direction and people-centred basis in relation to food safety. Manifested Cultural Essentials for Food Safety show how this foundation is reflected in daily behaviours, practices and performance.
1. Organisational Culture Foundations
This group includes two key dimensions:
1.1. Company Values, Vision and Mission
An organisation’s food safety culture begins with its company values, vision and mission. Is food safety truly regarded as a strategic priority? Does senior management view food safety only as regulatory compliance or audit success, or does it position food safety as a fundamental condition of consumer trust and business continuity?
Culture should not remain only in written statements; it should be reflected in management decisions, resource allocation, performance objectives, communication language and operational priorities.
The fundamental question here is:
“What does the company truly value?”
For example:
- Profitability?
- Speed?
- Efficiency?
- Food safety?
If managers discuss cost at every meeting and raise food safety only when a problem occurs or before an audit, the message perceived by employees becomes clear:
“The production target is what really matters“
For this reason, food safety must be a visible part of the company strategy.
Conversely, in a strong food safety culture, leaders clearly demonstrate that food safety is not negotiable, even under commercial pressure.
1.2. People: Commitment, Empowerment and Accountability
The second core dimension of food safety culture is people. The systems that ensure food safety are ultimately implemented by people. Therefore, employees’ commitment, empowerment and accountability are critical.
“Commitment” refers to the genuine commitment of employees and managers to food safety objectives. This commitment is not limited to complying with procedures; it also means recognising risks, reporting nonconformities, defending the right behaviour and taking action when necessary.
“Empowerment” means that employees have the knowledge, authority and environment of trust required to make the right decision regarding food safety. If an employee can stop a line when they identify a potential food safety risk, report it comfortably to their manager and do so without fear of punishment, this is a strong cultural indicator.
“Accountability” means that responsibilities are clearly defined. Food safety is not the responsibility of the quality or food safety departments alone. It is a shared responsibility across the entire organisation, including production, maintenance, procurement, R&D, logistics, human resources, senior management and frontline employees.
In summary, this dimension examines employees’ ability and willingness to;
- take responsibility,
- exercise authority,
- report problems, and
- respond appropriately when mistakes occur.
In mature cultures, employees can:
- stop the line,
- report a nonconformity, and
- reach senior management comfortably.
In weak cultures, employees tend to:
- hide problems,
- hesitate to stop production, and
- fear management reaction.
2. Manifested Cultural Essentials for Food Safety
This group includes three key dimensions:
2.1. Hazard and Risk Awareness
One of the most important areas where food safety culture becomes visible is hazard and risk awareness. Do employees truly understand which food safety risks are associated with the work they perform?
It should be questioned whether employees genuinely understand:
- microbiological risks,
- allergens,
- foreign-body hazards, and
- chemical and other relevant risks.
GFSI’s approach focuses more on understanding risks than on memorising procedures.
For example, the answer to the question “Why do you wash your hands?” is important.
An example answer in a mature culture could be:
“To prevent contamination with pathogenic microorganisms such as Listeria, Salmonella and similar hazards.”
An example answer in a weak culture could be:
“Because the quality department told me to.”
Employees need to know that practices such as handwashing, prevention of cross-contamination, allergen segregation, cleaning verification or temperature control are performed not merely “because they are rules”, but to protect consumer health.
Risk awareness is particularly critical in routine activities. This is because food safety incidents often result not from a single major failure, but from the normalisation of small deviations over time. In a strong culture, employees identify these deviations early, report them and become part of the corrective action process.
2.2. Consistency for Food Safety
One of the most important indicators of food safety culture is consistency. GFSI emphasises that culture is not only about good intentions or awareness.
The critical question is: “Does the system operate with the same discipline every day, on every shift and on every line?“
The real indicator of culture is maintaining the same standard on every shift, not only when an auditor is present.
This dimension covers the consistent implementation of:
- HACCP practices,
- CCP management,
- operational prerequisite activities,
- cleaning activities,
- measurements and records, and
- traceability activities.
Consistency is the operational expression of culture in daily work.
- If procedures vary from shift to shift;
- if records are completed merely to appear complete;
- if cleaning, maintenance or verification activities differ depending on individuals, this indicates a cultural weakness.
In a strong food safety culture, standards are clear, expectations are understood, practices are monitored and deviations are made visible.
2.3. Adaptability, Change and Continuous Improvement
This is one of the most strategic dimensions of the new model. Food safety culture is not static. The food sector is constantly changing due to new raw materials, new processes, new technologies, climate-related risks, changing consumer expectations, supply chain vulnerabilities and new regulations. Therefore, it is not enough for organisations merely to comply with existing procedures; they must also be able to adapt to change and learn continuously.
Through the “Adaptability, Change and Continuous Improvement” dimension, the organisation’s ability to do the following is assessed:
- adapt to emerging risks,
- use new technologies,
- learn from crises, and
- draw lessons from recalls and nonconformities.
The 2026 approach particularly asks the following question:
“Does the organisation merely comply with rules, or does it learn?“
This dimension becomes especially important after recall cases, foodborne outbreaks, allergen errors, environmental pathogen findings or supplier-related nonconformities. Organisations with a strong culture do not view these events merely as problems to be closed; they treat them as opportunities for root cause analysis, system-level learning and preventive improvement.
Systems and Culture Should Be Considered Together
One of the most important messages of GFSI Version 2.0 is that food safety management systems and food safety culture should not be evaluated separately.
Food Safety Systems consist of;
- procedures,
- controls,
- records,
- verification mechanisms, and standards
Cultural elements include more visible or less visible factors such as;
- leadership approach,
- employee behaviours,
- communication,
- empowerment,
- risk perception, and
- learning capacity.
A good Food Safety Management System cannot be sustained without a strong culture.
Because:
- People implement the HACCP plan.
- People monitor CCPs.
- People carry out allergen segregation.
- People make recall decisions.
Therefore, systems cannot replace culture. Culture determines the effectiveness of systems.
For this reason, GFSI strongly emphasises the “Systems + Culture” approach.
Systems show employees what needs to be done; culture determines why it matters and how it will be sustained under difficult conditions.
Key Takeaways for the Sector
Food safety culture is not solely the responsibility of the quality or food safety department. It should be addressed at board level.
In particular, the following indicators should be monitored regularly:
Leadership Indicators
- Management site visits
- Frequency of food safety agenda items
- Effectiveness of management review
Employee Indicators
- Near-miss reporting
- Nonconformity reporting rate
- Employee engagement scores
Risk Indicators
- Allergen incidents
- CCP deviations
- Environmental pathogen results
- Recall performance
Learning Indicators
- CAPA effectiveness
- Quality of root cause analysis
- Rate of recurring nonconformities
Conclusion
Food Safety Culture is no longer viewed as a behavioural programme, but as an organisational performance system.
Successful companies:
- shape culture through leadership, not only through training;
- monitor behavioural indicators rather than relying only on audit scores; and
- move from a compliance-oriented approach to a learning-organisation model.
Food safety culture is not only an indicator of how well an organisation manages risks; it is an indicator of how correctly the organisation behaves before risks materialise.