LIVESTOCK DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE, BISHOFTU LIVESTOCKE

DEVELOPMENT CENTER

MEAT, HONEY AND BEESWAX PRODUCTION PROCESSING AND QUALITY

DESK

ASSESSMENT REPORT

ON

GOOD MANUFACTURING PRACTICE RED MEAT, FISH AND CHICKEN

PROCESSING PLANTS

By:-

Abebe Getachew

Girmaye Mulatu

Seyoum Hagos

MARCH/ 2023

BISHOFTU, ETHIOPIA
 1 INTRODUCTION

Meat, milk, honey, and beeswax processing industries have prospered as a result of rising
demand for food of animal origin, which is fueling population expansion, as well as
consumers' growing awareness of the nutritional value of animal products and changing
lifestyles (Thornton, 2010). Essential amino acids, lipids, carbohydrates, vitamins, and
minerals are all found in meat, which is a valuable food source (Ahmed et al 2018 and
Zerabruk et al 2019).

The major growth medium for microorganisms that pose a health risk to consumers is
food with an animal origin. As a result, concerns about the quality and safety of food are
spreading around the globe (OIE Terrestrial code, 2020). This is because processing
contamination occurs under unsanitary conditions in developing nations (Bello et al
2015). Cook et al. (2017) noted that meat is produced in less hygienic and safe conditions
in developing nations. Escherichia coli, Salmonella spp., Campylobacter, and Shigella are
the primary food safety concerns connected to eating beef (Maouafo et.al 2020). Meat
contaminated with unclean hands, clothes, tools and other processing facilities. Meat
contamination happens when the meat comes into contact with unclean hands, clothes,
tools, or other facilities. Meat is cross contaminated with microorganisms during
processing and handling processing if facilities are kept clean (FAO, 1991). Personal
hygiene, buildings, hygienic facilities, drainage and waste disposal, maintenance and
sanitation, pest control system, product information and customer awareness, equipment,
meat handling, and staff hygiene are challenges in meeting mandatory food safety
requirements and certification of HACCP and other international standards, particularly
in the chicken and fish meat processing industries. Thus, proper manufacturing practice
is a requirement for the HACCP certification and food safety management programs.
Consumers' understanding of food safety and quality requirements has grown recently,
while the demand for meat has been rising. Working to comply with international and
regulatory requirements for food safety is crucial. Ethiopia has a greater rate of food
borne illness due to a dearth of well-researched studies on food safety issues.

So, the current study's initial goal is to evaluate the good manufacturing state of red,
chicken and fish meat processing industries.
 1.1 Statement of the Problem
Ethiopia's government has prioritized agro-processing as a means of eradicating poverty
and addressing the issue of a lack of foreign currency for payment of commodities. One
of the top priority industries targeted for generating foreign money and job opportunities
is the meat processing sector. The country gained 849 million dollars in USD by
exporting 177,684 tons of meat and animal products between 2003 and 2012, the nation
earned 849 million dollars in USD. The country's economic contribution is also expected
to increase to 6.42 billion US dollars and 1.62 million tons by the end of the following ten
years. To accomplish this, 13 export-standard abattoirs have obtained licenses and have
been manufacturing and exporting chilled and frozen meat to markets across the world.
At the moment, the export abattoir can handle 200,000 tons of beef and shoat annually.

Despite the large number of meat processing businesses, the quality of the meat they
preserve and process for human consumption is poor. Due to, lack of a cold chain, poor
packaging materials (lack of food graded packaging materials), the use of plastic or
wooden cutting boards, employee hygienic condition, hygienic facilities, waste disposal
system, plant design ,infrequent cleaning of equipment and floors, and poorly trained
employees were all practices that could lead to unhygienic handling of meat. These
practices were major contributors to poor quality of processed meat and predisposed meat
to reduce the acceptance in international markets. Eshetie et al (2018) reported meat
produced in Ethiopia in slaughterhouses is poor hygienic standards. Additionally,
Abayneh et al. (2014) report states that food-borne bacteria have been found in meat from
retail shops and cattle at slaughterhouses. Other difficulties faced by the meat industry
include a lack of healthy animals and improper handling and transportation of animals.
There is little information available about the hygienic handling procedures used during
the manufacturing in meat processing industries. Therefore, the goal of this study was to
evaluate the hygienic practices and conditions of hygienic facilities in order to help and
identify intervention targets. Consequently, this study provides appropriate information of
good manufacturing practices in meat processing industries.
 1.2 Scope of the Assessment
The assessment was cover issues relating to good manufacturing practices of chosen red
meat, fish meat and chicken meat processing industries.

1.1. Limitation of the study

The main reason for the assessment's scheduled program's delay was a lack of logistical
(transportation facilities). In order to gather the necessary information for the assessment,
the specialists from the Agricultural Authority were not allowed to access the Modjo Hala
export abattoir.

1.3 Objectives

1.3.1 General Objective

1.4 To assess good manufacturing practices (GMP) of red meat, chicken and fish
processing industries.
1.4.1 Specific objectives
 To evaluate level education and training of employee in meat processing industries

 To assess personal hygienic practice of employees meat processing industries.

 To assess waste disposal system red meat, fish and chicken processing industries

 To assesses pest control system of meat processing industries

3. Methodology

3.1. Study site

The study areas are located, Arab Minch at 427 km at 9° 1 ́ 29.8920'' N 38° 44 ́ 48.8040''
E, Hawassa is found 282 Mojo 64 km 8°58 ́ 50.1600''N, 38° 45 ́27.9360''E and Zeway
located at 7°55′59′′N 38°43′0′′E (Sources: https://www.aroundtheworld360.com/distance)

3.2. Study Design

3.2.1. Data collection and Sampling Technique

Qualitative and quantitative data d was collected through on site observation, focus
group discussion and face to face interview using structured questionnaire and
observation check list. Total of ( N= 18) meat processing industries, elven red meat ,
chicken and fish processing industries randomly selected samples were (n=11) processing
industries were randomly select of which six (6) respondents were selected from each
processing plants . Totally (68) respondents were selected randomly for interview. (n=32)
respondents were chosen randomly from red meat, (n=18) respondents were from fish
meat and chicken meat industries.

3.3. Data Analysis

The data was entered to Excel and analyzed using statically package for sequence (SPSS)
version 23. The descriptive statistics like percentages, tables, charts and figures was used
to present the collected data.
2 RESULT AND DISCUSSION
2.1 Sociodemographic Data of Meat Processing Industries
2.1.1. Employment opportunity in meat processing industries

The result in the finger 1 indicated that the meat processing industries had a great
potential job opportunities for both permanent and contract worker. Compared to other
meat processing industries chicken processing industries employed many worker than
others meat processing industries.

Figure 1.Permanent job opportunity in meat industries

Figure 2 . Contract job opportunity by meat industries

4.2. Employe Education Level

The result of the study in the Table 1 below showed that 53.6%, 46 %, 35.6% employee
in red meat,fish and cheicken processing industries are primary schools grade (1-8)
respectively. Dgree holders are higher in red meat processing industries than fish and red
meat processing industries.

Table 1. Education level of Employee

Education level Red meat Fish meat Chicken meat

Illiterate 12 (2%) 0 (0%) 92 (8.8%
Primary (1-8) 313 (53.6%) 35 (46%) 348 (35.6)
Secondary (9-12) 151 (25.9 %) 19 ( 25) 321 (30.98)
Certificate 13 (2.2%) 12 (15.8%) 34 (3.2%)
Diploma 50 (8.5%) 7 (9.2%) 94 (9.1%)
Degree 43 (7.3%) 1 (1.3%) 140 (13.51%
M.Sc. 0 (0%) 1 (1.3%) 6 (0.6%)
PhD 2(0.3%) 1 (1.3%) 1 (0%)
Total 584 76 1036

2.2 Production capacity and

Achieved performance
The the result of the study showned in Fig. 3 below revealed that Alema Farms Plc had
higher (95.5%) production performance which higher than other red meat processing
industries. On other hand Jacobs integrated farm and Elfora agro- industry Plc performed,
77.9% and 65.7% their pland capacities respectively. In contrust fish processing industis
had lower performance production processing capacities.

Figure 3. Production capacity of each industries

4.3. Type of Product Produced In Meat Processing Industries

The study finding of Table 2 revealed, fish processing enterprises has been produced
filleted, gutted, and cotelet forms of fish species such as Tilapia, Nile perch, Catfish,
Barbus, and Kerkero for local market. Chilled chicken processing industries produced
chicken meat, table eggs, and day-old chicken. Chilled goat, mutton, and beef meat are
produced by red meat processing industries in for export market.

Table 2. Meat processing companies and type of product producing

No Meat industries Type of product

1 Arba Minch Fish Trade Enterprise Nileperch,Tilapia,Kerkro,fish filleted,gutted,cottelet
2 JEBM Fishery Nile perch, Tilapia, Kerkro (filleted, gutted)
3 Arba-Minch fishery association Nile perch, Tilapia, Kerkero,Catfish, Barbus
5 Elfora Agro industry poultry Table egg, Chicken meat and day old chicken(DOC)
(gutted,filletted)
6 Jacobs integrated farm P.L.C Chicken meat
7 Abyssinia slaughter service house Goat ,Mutton and beef
8 plc
Modjo modern export abattoir P.L.C Chilled Goat, Mutton meat
9 Organic Export abattoir P.L.C Goat and Mutton meat
10 Maereg Agro industry P.L.C Goat,Mutton,Beef carcass production
11 Elfora export abattoir P.L.C Shoat and beef meat

2.3 Hygienic Practices of Meat

Processing Industries
Among a total of 68 interviewees, (n=32), (n=18), and (n=18) were chosen to be
interviewed from red, fish, and chicken meat, respectively. The majority of respondents
admitted to washing their hands before and after work and trimming their nails once a
week. Yet, there was a gap in terms of facilities hygiene. Out of 32, 18, 18 respondents, 2
84.4%, 22.2% and 6 (33.3%) respectively, were interrogated about their consumption of
red, fish, and chicken meat in relation to their pre-employment health check. There were
30 (93.8%), 9 (50%) and 10 (55.6%) from red, fish, and chicken meat, respectively, at the
time of the post-employee health check. In terms of staff health checks fish and chicken
meat processing industries were lower different than red meat industries.
Table 3: Employee hygienic practices

No Activities Number (%) of respondents

Red meat Fish Chicken

(n=32) meat(n=18) meat(n=18)

1 Wash hands before work 32 (100%) 18 (100%) 18 (100%)

2 Wash hands after work 32 (100%) 18 (100%) 17 (94.4%)
3 Wear clean color coded 30 (93.8%) 9 (50%) 15 (83.3%)
4 protective
Keep fingercloth
short 32 (100%) 18 (100%) 16 (88.9%)
5 Checked health before 27 (84.4%) 4 (22.2%) 6 (33.3%)
6 Checked health after employee 30 (93.8%) 9 (50%) 10 (55.6%)
7 Adequate hygiene facilities 29 (90.6%) 11 (61.1%) 13 (72.2%)

4.5. Design of waste disposal system, product storage condition and ventilation

All meat processing industries had their own drainage systems to facilitate drainage.
However, the results indicated that 60%, 33.3%, and 33.3% of the red, chicken, and fish
meat processing industries had well-designed drainage system and mechanical
ventilation. Solid and liquid waste disposal system was poor in chicken processing
industries. The liquid from pig farm and solid waste of chicken processing of Alema farm
were collected near production area so that, many bird was observed on the roof of
processing plant .Similarly Elfora agro- chicken processing industry disposed
condemned and inedible chicken by product in open filed in processing area as the result
birds were observed in processing plant in all meat processing plant there is no separation
of light such as inspection, working and other area based on standard given to minimize
its effect.

Table 4: Meat industries waste disposal and chilling system

 Adequate natural
chemical storage

and mechanical
Meat Industries

Freezing room
waste disposal

Well designed

Suitability of
Chilling and
Drainage of

ventilation
Non food
designed
Not well
No

1 Red 5(100% 3(60%) 2(40%) 5(100% 4(80%) 3(60%) 0

2 meat
Chicke )3(100% 1(33.3% 2(66.7% )3(100% 1(33.3% 1(33.3% 0
3 n meat
Fish )
3(100% )1(33.3% )2(66.7% )
3(100% )1(33.3% )1(33.3% 0
meat ) ) ) ) ) )

4.6. Delivery of training and water accessibility in meat industries

According to the respondents' responses and the data collected, there was a training gap in
the fish (22.2%) and chicken (33.3%) businesses compared to the red meat (71.9%)
industry. There was a significant gap in the results of the water quality test, which showed
levels of red meat of 62.5%, fish of 38.9%, and chicken of 38.9%, respectively. It is
evident from the data that most meat industries did not examine the water quality. The
finding that most meat companies did not keep records of water quality tests was
supported by their record-keeping.

Table 5: Training of employee

No Meat industries Training program Trained on personal hygiene Training record

1 Red meat 22(68.8%) 22(68.8%) 23(71.9%)
2 Fish meat 7(38.9%) 7(38.9%) 4(22.2%)
3 Chicken meat 7(38.9%) 7(38.9) 6(33.3%)

Table 6: Access to water supply

No Meat industries Access to potable water Water quality test

1 Red meat 32(100%) 20(62.5%)
2 Fish meat 18(100%) 7(38.9%)
3 Chicken meat 16(88.9%) 7(38.9%)
4.6. Pest control system of red meat, fish meat and Chicken meat industries

The outcome showed in Table (7) below demonstrated how different each industry's pest
management strategies were. Fish meat (100%) had a higher chemical method pest
control system than chicken meat (16.7%) and red meat (50%). Physical methods of pest
management are relatively low in red meat (40.6%), fish meat (22.2%), and chicken meat
(55.6%). Red meat (100%) and chicken meat (94.4%) are used for pest management more
often than fish meat (11%). Data from pest site logs revealed the same pattern. Cross-
check observation revealed that the majority of the chosen industries lacked a pest site log
map.

Table 7: Methods of Pest control

No Meat industries Pest control systems

Chemical Physical Light insect Pest site log

1 Red meat(n=32) 16(50%) 13(40.6%) 32(100%)
trap 30(93.8)
2 Chicken 3(16.7%) 10(55.6%) 17(94.4%) 6(75%)
3 meat(n=18)
Fish meat(n=18) 18(100%) 4(22.2%) 2(11.1%) 2(11.1%)
4.7. The main challenges of meat processing industries

Table 9: Challenges of each meat Industries

No Meat industries Challenges

1 Red meat Animal supply (drought), electric power, Order (demand) of

foreign customer (Market destination), Security (current
political issues), lack of government support on supply and
export related issues, illegal market of supply through borders
and with brokers that makes a lot of problem to get supply and
on the scaling of price day to day, Lack of traceability of
incoming animals, Lack of food graded packaging material,
food graded organic acid, food graded liquid and solid
detergents.
2 Chicken meat Poultry disease, shortage of import materials (Lack of foreign
currency), feed cost, Skilled man power, ERCA (Ethiopian
revenue & custom authority) ,Unfair competition back yard
slaughter.

3 Fish meat Fish supply, transportation(cold-truck), construction material,

delaying of finance, Skilled man power, Power supply
instability and water supply, fish processing facilities (crates),
Overfishing, Climatic change, informal fishing activities,
increased un-recommended nets, increased agricultural
activities around the lake.
5. CONCLUSION AND RCOMMENDATION

The goal of the current study was to look into the expertise and good manufacturing
processes in the red, fish, and chicken meat processing industries. Eleven (11) meat
processing industries were chosen for the assessment, of which (n=5, 3, 3) were from the
red, fish, and chicken meat industries. Each meat processing industry offers employment
prospects to the community (fig.1, 2, 3 & 4). According to Sociodemographic data, there
is a shortage of skilled workers in the meat industry. As compared to other meat
businesses, Alema Farms Plc's (chicken meat) production capacity and performance were
higher. The second and third stages are where you may find the Jacobs and Elfora
agricultural industries (Fig.5). Each meat industry generated its own goods, according to
the most recent analyses. Industries that process fish provide diverse fish species in
filleted, gutted, and Cottelet forms. Whereas the industries that process chicken create
chicken meat, table eggs, and day-old chicken, those that process meat provide goat,
mutton, and beef for both the domestic and international markets.

Among a total of 68 interviewees, 32, 18, and 18 were chosen to be interviewed from the
red, fish, and chicken meat industries, respectively, in connection to good manufacturing
processes in the chosen meat industries. The vast majority of respondents acknowledged
cutting their nails once a week and washing their hands before and after work. Facilities
for health inspection and cleanliness were found to be lacking. The industries that
produce fish and chicken meat notably differ from those that produce red meat in terms of
employee health inspections and hygienic facilities (Table 3).

All of the chosen meat companies had their own drainage systems, according to the
drainage systems findings. The findings showed that there were not many well-designed
drainage systems. The findings revealed a significant disparity in the suitability of light
for food. In comparison to other industries, the waste disposal system for the chicken
meat industry was not very good. By itself, it had a negative impact on the environment
and the meat industries. In contrast to the red meat industries, there was a training deficit
in the fish and chicken meat businesses, according to the respondents' comments.
Moreover, there was a substantial gap in the water quality test findings, indicating that
most meat firms did not routinely check the water quality. In the majority of industries,
there were no records to support water quality testing.

The results demonstrated that each industry has its own approaches to pest management.
The majority of the chosen industries lacked a pest site log map, according to cross-check
observation. This suggests that businesses have poor attitudes toward pest control
methods. In addition, various conditions that favor insect infestation were observed in and
around the industries. The main causes of pest infestation include a poor outside fence
system, a poor waste disposal system, and a poor processing plant design.

The primary difficulties faced by the industries that prepare red and white meat were also
noted in the current study. The issues that were noted were, Instability in the supply of
water, electricity, and livestock (shoat, ox, fish, and chicken), Market destination, security
(current political), lack of government support on supply and export-related issues, illegal
market, traceability of incoming animals, lack of packaging materials that are food-
graded, lack of organic acids that are food-graded, lack of liquids and solid detergents that
are food-graded, poultry disease, lack of foreign currency to import parent stock, skilled
labor, Unfair competition brought on by backyard slaughter, cold trucks, building
supplies, fish processing equipment (crates), overfishing, climate change, unregulated
fishing, and agricultural activities near natural lakes (fish habitat) were the main obstacles
facing the meat processing industry as a whole.

The recommendations below are made in light of the aforementioned conclusion.

 Meat processing enterprises need to take corrective action in regard to the

deficiencies in hygienic facilities and health inspection (employee health checks
before and after employed).
 The waste disposal and drainage systems of the meat industries should be well
constructed in accordance with the new food safety design standard, and the waste
products of meat processing should be recycled or utilized rather than thrown
away and polluting the environment and industries.
 All meat processing industries should monitor the water quality, and record-
keeping practices should be enhanced across all businesses.
 Government should announce and implement the legislation on excellent
manufacturing practices.
 The effects of elements affecting excellent manufacturing practices, such as food-
graded packaging materials, food-graded organic acids, and food-graded
detergents, should be further investigated.
 Government intervention in illegal commerce should be prioritized, and market
destination should be evaluated and expanded by improving product quality rather
than quantity.
 It is important to identify and address the problems facing the meat processing
sectors through follow-up, assistance, and feedback.
 By allowing foreign exchange to be used to easily import critical industrial inputs
tax-free, the government should encourage the meat processing industry.
 ANNEX

Summarized data of Production and employment opportunity from meat processing

industries

Table 1: Production capacity and performance of meat industries (t/year)

No Meat industries Capacity/tonne/year Performance/tonne/year %

1 Arba Minch Fish Trade

200 20 10
Enterprise

2 JEBM Fishery 30 15 50

3 Arba minch fishery

18 18 100
association

4 Alema farms plc 838 800 95.5

5 Elfora agro-industry plc 460.658 359.313 77.9

6 Jacobs integrated farm plc 300 197 65.7

7 Abyssiniya slaughter
7200 400 5.6
service house plc

8 Modjo modern export

1500 240 16
abattoir

9 Organic Export abattoir

2880 1200 41.7
P.l.c

10 Maereg Agro industry Plc 2750 987 35.9

11 Debrezeit export abattoir 1825 12 0.66

Table 2: Employment opportunity by meat processing industries

No Meat industries Permanent Contract

Male Female Total Male Female Total

1 Arba Minch Fish Trade Enterprise 17 0 17 6 0 6

2 JEBM Fishery 10 16 26 0 0 0

3 Arba minch fishery association 5 4 9 8 9 17

4 Alema farms plc. 345 276 621 0 0 0

5 Elfora agro-industry plc. 170 144 314 36 82 118

6 Jacobs integrated farm plc. 22 20 42 0 0 0

7 Abyssiniya sloughter service house plc. 58 38 96 19 12 31

8 Modjo modern export abattior 73 50 123 1 2 3

9 Organic Export abattior P.l.c 112 32 144 0 0 0

10 Maereg Agro industry Plc. 36 40 76 6 0 6

11 Debrezeit export abattior 63 42 105 3 0 3

Picture presentation of the observation