By Cath Isabedra
Certification plays a vital role in the food and beverage (F&B) industry, offering assurances of safety, quality, and compliance. Yet the true credibility of a certification depends not just on the company or product being audited, but on the integrity of the certifier itself.
Understanding how certification bodies are monitored, accredited, and held accountable reveals the deep trust infrastructure behind the labels we rely on—especially across global markets, with Asia’s fast-growing F&B sector playing a pivotal role.
Here’s how the system of checks and balances works to safeguard credibility across borders.
Who holds certifiers accountable on the world stage?
Certification bodies don’t operate unchecked. They exist within a layered framework of global organizations, international standards, and national oversight authorities that ensure competence and impartiality.
At the international level, ISO (International Organization for Standardization) defines the operational standards for certifiers, such as ISO/IEC 17065 for product certification and ISO/IEC 17021-1 for management system certification.
The International Accreditation Forum (IAF) unites accreditation bodies worldwide through a multilateral recognition system, ensuring that a certification issued in Japan is trusted equally in Germany or the U.S.
At the national level, recognized bodies like CNAS in China, NABCB in India, and JAB in Japan audit and accredit certifiers within their borders. Industry-specific initiatives, like the Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI), provide an additional layer of scheme-specific surveillance.
Together, this global architecture creates a system where certifiers are continuously checked, ensuring that certifications carry real weight internationally.
The critical first test: How certification bodies prove they’re worth trusting
Before a certification body can issue a credible certificate, it must first prove its worth through an intensive accreditation process.
An accreditor conducts rigorous initial assessments, scrutinizing the certifier’s procedures, auditor qualifications, impartiality safeguards, and audit methodologies. Witness audits—where accreditors observe certifiers performing real-world audits—are critical to this vetting.
Only certifiers who meet stringent standards under frameworks like ISO/IEC 17065 are granted accreditation. Without this formal recognition, a certifier’s audit lacks international credibility, potentially leaving certified businesses exposed to reputational and compliance risks.
Staying vigilant: How certifiers are kept under continuous watch
Accreditation is not a one-time event. Accredited certifiers undergo regular surveillance audits, witnessed assessments, and periodic full reassessments to maintain their accredited status. Annual audits focus on the certifier’s recent activities, ensuring they continue to uphold impartiality, thoroughness, and procedural rigor.
Witness assessments, where accreditors observe auditors in action, are especially crucial for the food sector, where lapses could affect public health. Accreditation bodies also reserve the right to perform unannounced audits or demand corrective actions whenever discrepancies arise.
This ongoing vigilance ensures certification bodies maintain high standards over time, not just during their initial approval.
When certifiers fail: How the system responds to protect trust
Even with rigorous oversight, failures can happen. When a certification body underperforms—whether through negligence or malpractice—the system has clear remedies.
Minor issues trigger corrective actions, demanding rapid fixes. More serious breaches lead to suspension, preventing the certifier from issuing new certificates until problems are resolved. In extreme cases, accreditation is withdrawn, immediately nullifying the certifier’s authority and forcing companies relying on its certifications to seek reassessment.
Stakeholders, including clients and regulators, can file formal complaints, further reinforcing external accountability. In the food sector, scheme owners like FSSC 22000 also impose their own monitoring and sanctions to protect their program’s credibility.
The result is a system where certifiers know that lapses carry real, immediate consequences.
The invisible blueprint: How global standards anchor certification integrity
Behind every credible certificate stands a web of international standards ensuring consistency, transparency, and fairness.
Standards like ISO/IEC 17065 and ISO/IEC 17021-1 define how certifiers must operate—from auditor qualifications to impartiality procedures—providing a global common language for accreditation bodies.
Meanwhile, Codex Alimentarius principles, developed by the FAO and WHO, anchor food safety standards worldwide. Its guidelines on third-party assurance (CAC/GL 93-2021) reinforce the importance of accredited certifiers and voluntary assurance programs in supporting public health protection and fair trade.
By aligning with ISO and Codex frameworks, accreditation bodies ensure that the certification system operates predictably and fairly, regardless of geography.
Balancing global standards with local realities
Asia’s major economies have adapted the global certification model to their specific regulatory and cultural contexts.
In China, certification bodies must be accredited by CNAS and licensed by the central government (CNCA), adding a strong regulatory hand. India emphasizes accredited certification and aggressively combats fake certificates through NABCB-led market education.
Japan combines world-class accreditation oversight by JAB with cultural pressure for quality, making reputation a powerful self-regulator. Southeast Asia sees a blend of local accreditation and reliance on global accrediting bodies like JAS-ANZ, especially in smaller markets. Specialized sectors (like Halal certification) layer additional religious or governmental approvals.
Across Asia, the goal is the same: align local systems with global trust frameworks while addressing unique market needs and risks.
Inside the oversight of global certifiers
Leading certification bodies like SGS, Bureau Veritas, and Intertek aren’t exempt from scrutiny—far from it.
They hold multiple accreditations across countries, facing dozens of audits, witness assessments, and scheme-specific reviews each year. Their internal compliance systems often exceed minimum standards to avoid risk.
Global scheme owners like FSSC 22000 and BRCGS also actively monitor their performance, ensuring auditors maintain impartiality and rigor worldwide. Any slip, even in a small regional office, can trigger sweeping consequences across the network, reinforcing why even the most established certifiers must remain vigilant.
Beyond the auditors: Why vigilance from consumers and businesses matters too
Trust in certification is a shared responsibility. While oversight agencies and accreditors provide the backbone, manufacturers, retailers, and consumers play a crucial role in demanding transparency and holding certifiers accountable.
For food manufacturers and B2B buyers, that means verifying that certifications come from accredited bodies, not simply accepting documentation at face value. Many procurement teams now include accreditation checks, audit summary requests, or even independent site assessments to validate that standards are being upheld.
On the consumer side, growing awareness around food safety, environmental claims, and ethical sourcing has made certification scrutiny more mainstream. Brands that fail to vet their certifiers—or rely on questionable certification bodies—risk public backlash and reputational harm.
When businesses and individuals ask tough questions—Who issued this certificate? Are they accredited? Have they been sanctioned before?—they become part of the system’s self-correction mechanism. This pressure not only helps weed out bad actors but also reinforces the integrity of the certification ecosystem as a whole.
The real seal of trust: Why accredited certification isn’t optional
Accredited certification is more than a formality—it’s a hard-earned assurance backed by rigorous, multi-layered oversight.
For businesses, choosing a certification body accredited by a recognized authority is the clearest way to ensure certifications are credible, internationally accepted, and resilient under scrutiny. For consumers and regulators, it’s a vital safeguard protecting health, safety, and fair trade.
In the complex global food supply chain, trust travels with every certification mark. And that trust is protected because the certifiers themselves are certified, watched, and held to the highest standards—day after day, audit after audit.
References:
Assent Risk Management. (n.d.). UKAS accreditation withdrawal explained. Retrieved April 2025, from https://www.assentriskmanagement.co.uk/knowledge-base/ukas-accreditation-withdrawal-explained/
Codex Alimentarius Commission. (2021). Principles and guidelines for the assessment and use of voluntary third-party assurance (vTPA) programs (CAC/GL 93-2021). Retrieved April 2025, from https://www.fao.org/fao-who-codexalimentarius/codex-texts/list-standards/en/
Covington & Burling LLP. (2021). China’s 2021 implementing rules for food safety management system certification. Retrieved April 2025, from https://www.cov.com/en/news-and-insights/insights/2021/07/chinas-2021-implementing-rules-for-food-safety-management-system-certification
Financial Express. (2018, July 6). Fake certificates: Industry must insist on certificates only from NABCB-accredited bodies. Retrieved April 2025, from https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/fake-certificates-industry-must-insist-on-certificates-only-from-nabcb-accredited-bodies/1234567/
FSSC 22000. (n.d.). Integrity program overview. Retrieved April 2025, from https://www.fssc22000.com/about-fssc-22000/integrity-program/
International Accreditation Forum (IAF). (n.d.). Introduction to the IAF multilateral recognition arrangement (MLA). Retrieved April 2025, from https://iaf.nu/en/iaf-documents/iaf-mla/
ISO. (2012). ISO/IEC 17065:2012: Conformity assessment – Requirements for bodies certifying products, processes and services. International Organization for Standardization.
ISO. (2015). ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015: Conformity assessment – Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of management systems – Part 1: Requirements. International Organization for Standardization.
JAS-ANZ. (n.d.). Food safety management system certifications and the IAF MLA. Retrieved April 2025, from https://www.jas-anz.org/food-safety-certifications
National Accreditation Board for Certification Bodies (NABCB). (n.d.). About NABCB and accredited certification bodies. Retrieved April 2025, from https://nabcb.qci.org.in/
QAssurance. (n.d.). Suspension of certification bodies in FSSC 22000 program explained. Retrieved April 2025, from https://www.qassurance.com/fssc-22000-suspension-certification-body/
SGS Group. (n.d.). Certification code of practice. Retrieved April 2025, from https://www.sgs.com/en/certification/code-of-practice
This story first came out in our May/June 2025 issue.
