On 1 September 2026, at the Global Shrimp Forum in Utrecht, SIPA hosted a side event for the seafood trade. Around 30 participants joined us to consider a question the sector rarely asks in calm times: what happens when the next food-safety issue arrives, and who will speak for the trade? 

Why SIPA exists

SIPA’s president, Ivan Bartolo, opened the session with the story of the Alliance’s origins and early direction. SIPA was founded during the chloramphenicol crisis of the 1990s, at a moment when the seafood sector felt it needed to collectively challenge the European Commission with scientific data and evidence.

That challenge was the first of many. Regulation protects public health, and no one disputes that. But rules drafted under pressure, without a grasp of their practical consequences, produce disproportionate rejections, avoidable food waste and real economic damage.

What SIPA has delivered

•  Chloramphenicol: A workable threshold value, ending rejections unrelated to real risk.
•  Nitrofurans: Work on false positives and disproportionate testing.
•  Semicarbazide (SEM): Shown to occur naturally in shell; testing now limited to the edible portion.
•  PFAS: Ongoing work on maximum levels in the EU market.
•  PAH in smoked fish: Anonymised member data answering an EU consultation via FRUCOM.
•  Vibrio & added water: Challenging disproportionate testing and unclear methods.

The panel: setting research priorities

The second half was a panel discussion on scientific research priorities for food safety and imported seafood, feeding directly into SIPA’s research programme. It was moderated by Jan Kwakman, joined by Bert Van Loock (Aquamarine-Tradimer) and Volker Loock (German Seafood Association).

Rather than settling on conclusions, it opened up practical issues the trade lives with daily — exactly the ground where SIPA works:

• Sampling at import. A sample that misrepresents the consignment as a whole can condemn goods that are legally compliant. There are inconsistencies between member states on official retests and sampling procedure reviews.
• Testing for geographical fraud. What is the state of play with methods for identifying potential geographical fraud in crustaceans?
• Vibrio, naturally present semicarbazide residues and mineral oil hydrocarbon residues. These areas of research were highlighted as ongoing or upcoming issues of concern.
• Horizon scanning. SIPA should retain the capacity for reactive work.

Around thirty participants joined the SIPA side event on 1 September 2026.

Consider joining us

SIPA is deliberately low-threshold: the annual contribution is modest, and cost should never keep a company outside. The benefits are collective:

• Broader knowledge: The more members, the better we read the sector.
• A discussion platform: Exchange views with peers facing the same issues.
• Better funding: More research where it counts.