**Nils Th. Grabowski 1,\*, Séverin Tchibozo 2, Amir Abdulmawjood 3, Fatma Acheuk 4, Meriem M'Saad Guerfali 5, Waheed A.A. Sayed <sup>6</sup> and Madeleine Plötz <sup>1</sup>**


Received: 4 March 2020; Accepted: 13 April 2020; Published: 16 April 2020

**Abstract:** Entomophagy is an ancient and actually African tradition that has been receiving renewed attention since edible insects have been identified as one of the solutions to improve global nutrition. As any other foodstuff, insects should be regulated by the government to ensure product quality and consumer safety. The goal of the present paper was to assess the current legal status of edible insects in Africa. For that, corresponding authorities were contacted along with an extensive online search, relying mostly on the FAOLEX database. Except for Botswana, insects are not mentioned in national regulations, although the definitions for "foodstuff" allow their inclusion, i.e., general food law can also apply to insects. Contacted authorities tolerated entomophagy, even though no legal base existed. However, insects typically appear in laws pertaining the use of natural resources, making a permit necessary (in most cases). Pest management regulation can also refer to edible species, e.g., locusts or weevils. Farming is an option that should be assessed carefully. All this creates a complex, nation-specific situation regarding which insect may be used legally to what purpose. Recommendations for elements in future insect-related regulations from the food hygiene point of view are provided.

**Keywords:** entomophagy; food law; Africa; food hygiene; food policy

#### **1. Introduction**

#### *1.1. Entomophagy on the African Continent*

Some years ago, the FAO (Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations) recognized the potential of edible insects as one possibility to mitigate hunger and the effects of the climate change, and as a response to that, the discussion of establishing insect farms in traditionally entomophagous countries rather than increasing the extraction from the wild started [1].

Edible insects have been part of the human diet from the dawn of mankind on. However, food habits changed over the millennia, and while consuming insects was largely lost in Europe after the classical antiquity, the tradition lingered on in Africa. There are hundreds of insect species

consumed in Africa as foodstuffs or as traditional medicine [1–6]. The awareness of the benefits of edible insects has also reached non-traditional sectors of the African population, and web-based information sites like LINCAOCNET (http://gbif.africamuseum.be/lincaocnet\_dev/) provide searchable information on local species.

Insects are traded in a relatively small to medium level. The economic benefit varies with the species and is seldom accounted for, but one of the most significant ones seems to be the phane caterpillars of a saturniid emperor moth *Gonimbrasia belina* (ex "Imbrasia belina"), reaching a yearly trade value of more than \$85 million in Southern Africa.

Like with any other foodstuff, the consumption of edible insects may lead to consumer risks, typically allergens, foodborne diseases, food spoilage agents, and contaminants [7]. Being so, the tradition has developed a set of dos and do nots to ensure food safety to a certain degree. However, as traditions develop over long periods of time and tend to become inflexible, some parts of it may not cover "modern" risks like environmental pollution, or even packaging [3]. In fact, the traditional handling of African insect-based products has become submitted to scientific research, and results show that even processed products may contain pathogens. By means of illustration (and far beyond completeness of data), Table 1 provides a look into the microbiology of fresh and processed products from three African insect species.

**Table 1.** Selection of microbiological findings in three African edible insect species (African mole cricket (*Gryllotalpa africana*), cabbage tree emperor moth (*Bunaea alcinoe*), and African palm weevil (*Rhynchophorus phoenicis*)); based on [1]. Blank spaces either mean that the sample was negative for that pathogen or was not tested for it.


These results suggest that a stricter control of insect-based products is needed, moreover, if insect entrepreneurs and/or consumers lose this traditional knowledge. Implementing food legislation is a proven method to reduce food-related consumer risks.

#### *1.2. The European Union as a Starting Point for Legal Considerations*

In Europe and in terms of food legislation, a division can be made between EU member and non-member states, and within the EU, between EU law and national law. These food laws, along with a large number of related legal texts, represent the base of public health control of foodstuffs. It covers all the productions steps of the food chain from the primary production to the purchase of the product by the consumer. With the EU, community and national legislation was harmonized largely to pursue a maximum of congruency among laws and a minimum of features regulated twice (i.e., on EU and national level). The system has been established for the ordinary animal-derived foodstuffs and is in constant revision and improvement.

Europe is one of those geographical areas with no recent entomophagy tradition (despite some exceptions), and the discussion is moreover addressing the feasibility and the practical and legal framework to establish insect farms. This created a dilemma, because on one hand, entrepreneurs that wish to start an insect business depend on the certification by corresponding authorities. On the other hand, in many countries, insects are neither expressly allowed nor forbidden. So, there is no legal framework by which these authorities could certify this enterprise, even if there is good will to promote this development. Thus, authorities ask the entrepreneurs for more information on risk handling, etc., which in turn can only generate once the business is running. This creates a climate of legal uncertainty, which is perceived as obstacles by the insect business operators [8,9].

However, this is changing. In 2015, the EFSA (European Food Safety Authority) published the *Risk profile related to production and consumption of insects as food and feed*, coming to the overall conclusion that, when produced according to current law requirements, insects do not pose a major risk to consumers. However, knowledge on residues and contaminants was scarce, and EFFSA recommended more research. The second important EU publication is the amendment of the novel food regulation, i.e., *REG (EC) 2015*/*2283*. In it, insects are clearly classified as potential foodstuffs, but for each species and product, a separate authorization procedure must be followed, leading to the inclusion of the novel foodstuff in the so-called Union List. At present, there are several requests, which are being processed. Although this regulation does not contain specific requirements for insects as foodstuffs (e.g., primary production, processing, quality parameters, etc.), this regulation provides the base for a clearer, EU-wide regulatory frame for all sectors involved in insect production.

Finally, there is draft *Ref. Ares (2019) 382900—23*/*01*/*2019*, which proposes to add another Appendix A, specific for edible insects to the *REG (EC) 853*/*2004*. This regulation contains all regulatory issues about the production of animal-based foodstuffs along the production chain. The draft contains a definition of "insect" and proposals on the choice of allowed feedstuffs in insect farming. It has, however, not been ratified so far.

Until then, several nations issued national guidelines, which should be regarded as recommendations and interim solutions. However, there is a marked degree of heterogeneity in this process on the continent, ranging from utter rejection to a relatively developed legal framework to produce, sell, and monitor insect-based foodstuffs (IBF). In addition, not all European nations have issued official statements regarding edible insects so that for those countries, a grey zone is presumed. This current European situation is described in [7].
