triangulation can be used to improve the robustness of inspections. Investigator triangulation and theoreti- cal triangulation, however, are not simply incorporated into existing approaches to food safety inspection. Although investi- gator triangulation might be accessible in some situations, resource limitations and political desires to reduce regulatory impost (Borraz et al., 2022) likely are prohibitive in most instances. Similarly, theoretical trian- gulation is largely unfeasible for small-scale research projects, as it requires considerable resources and training but yields little value for inspections from a pragmatic standpoint. Thus, Fielding and Fielding (1986) caution that triangulation is not a complete means of overcoming bias, identifying that its utility is best realized where it incites critical assess- ment of strengths and weaknesses of data and research design by the researcher. Hence, reorienting perspectives of the industry that inspection is synonymous with research, along with shaping inspector training syl- labuses to include research methods and design, are additional means to improve the rigor of food safety inspections. Implications for Practice Establishing and implementing a food safety inspection methodology that is equipped with mechanisms to overcome the limita- tions of comprehensiveness, coherence, and bias will improve the eectiveness of food safety inspection as a health protection mea- sure. A summary of recommended attributes for a robust methodology resulting from our research is provided in Table 6. Strengths and Limitations Our research was subject to limitations, par- ticularly pertaining to the representativeness of the sample. Furthermore, self-reporting and a survey design that required respon- dents to generalize their practices are likely to diminish the fidelity of the data gathered in our research study. Despite these limitations, our research provides a new perspective on the methods that food safety inspectors use to assess food safety. Our research contrib- utes a vital critique of food safety inspection approaches and identifies the components necessary to strengthen and improve food safety inspection as an eective health pro- tection measure.
TABLE 6
Summary of Recommended Attributes for a Food Safety Inspection Methodology
Phase
Recommendation
Research design
Construct a research question that is responsive to the theoretical perspective. For example, “Is food contamination adequately and sustainably controlled by the food business to prevent incidences of foodborne illness?” Adopt the hypothesis that all food contamination is controlled by the food business. Apply a hypothetico-deductive approach to nullify the hypothesis (i.e., look for evidence and examples of where food contamination is not being controlled by the food business). Deploy data-gathering methods—including those methods already in use—to satisfy the seven decision criteria derived from HACCP principles. Apply a variety of methods to gather data (i.e., method triangulation). Assess every point, process, and source where food contamination must be controlled to keep food safe with equal priority and emphasis. Make the determination of control for each point, process, and source by examining data corresponding to the seven decision criteria derived from HACCP principles. Gather, examine, and compare a variety of data when determining if food contamination is controlled by the food business (i.e., data triangulation).
Data gathering
Data analysis
Note. HACCP = hazard analysis critical control point.
food safety inspection, such as triangulation of methods, data, investigators, and theory (Denzin, 1989; Fielding & Fielding, 1986; Patton, 2002). Data triangulation is the form of trian- gulation that can be most readily adopted by jurisdictions, building on inspection approaches already in place. Here, multiple data sources relating to the one object or phe- nomena are gathered and compared (Denzin, 1989; Fielding & Fielding, 1986). Findings of this inquiry show that inspectors already are gathering data from multiple sources to inform their determination of control. Addi- tionally, method triangulation is another form of triangulation that can be integrated into food safety inspection practice. More specifically, between-method triangulation involves gathering and interpreting data with the use of multiple methods (Denzin, 1989). Inspectors report that they are already taking a multiple-method approach when assessing adequacy of control by combining observa- tion, interviewing, measurement, and docu- ment analysis. By formalizing investigative and interpretive procedures in the form of an inspection methodology, data and method
likely further exacerbated in the current con- text of food safety inspection (Dror, 2020; MacLean, 2022). Thus, being situated within a regulatory-politico environment (MacLean, 2022), along with an absence of universal training or guidance for calibration of inspec- tors (Almanza & Ghiselli, 2014), an absence of comprehensive and coherent inspection methodology to promote systematic and rigorous praxis (Dien et al., 2012), and no attempt to acknowledge and counteract bias (Dror, 2020) within the discipline all likely compound this issue. Drawing from qualitative field research, triangulation provides a means to enhance the rigor and trustworthiness of inspections. Triangulation involves combining methods, perspectives, investigators, or information sources to strengthen inquiry and interpreta- tion (Patton, 2002). Triangulation achieves this result by counteracting the unique strengths and limitations of an approach to inquiry with those strengths and limitations of other approaches (Denzin, 1989) while providing an opportunity for corrobora- tion (Silverman, 2002). This approach can be adopted in several forms to strengthen
33
May 2024 • our6*l o/ 6=2ro6me6;*l e*l;1
Powered by FlippingBook