The 19th Dubai International Food Safety Conference made one thing unmistakably clear: food safety is no longer just about controls, checklists, and laboratories. It is about people, leadership, data, and how fast our systems can adapt to a world that is changing faster than our regulations were ever designed to handle.
Across three days of substantive sessions, keynotes, technical deep dives, regulatory discussions, and global case studies, a consistent story emerged. Technology is accelerating, risks are multiplying, and the success or failure of food safety systems increasingly depends on human behavior and institutional culture.
Technology Is No Longer Optional
One of the strongest messages throughout the conference was that artificial intelligence and digital systems have crossed a threshold. They are no longer experimental or “nice to have.” They are becoming foundational.
Dubai’s food safety leadership and the ambitious vision from Dubai Municipality describe a future built around AI-enabled inspection systems and agentic models capable of supporting real-time decision-making. The vision is not to replace human expertise, but to scale it, allowing inspectors and regulators to operate with greater consistency, speed, and foresight.
This theme was echoed by the FAO, which emphasized that tools such as whole genome sequencing, smart sensors, predictive analytics, and foresight methodologies are already reshaping how we detect, anticipate, and respond to food safety risks. These technologies allow systems to move from reactive crisis management to early warning and prevention.
Jordan’s experience showed how this transformation is not limited to well-resourced economies. Despite budget constraints, Jordan is building AI-driven risk engines, digital traceability systems, and data-informed border controls, demonstrating that strategic adoption matters more than scale.
But Technology Alone Won’t Save Us
If there was a counterweight to the enthusiasm around AI, it came from sessions focused on people, particularly auditing, leadership, and organizational behavior.
Global research presented by World of Auditing revealed a sobering reality: a majority of professionals hesitate to fully disclose issues during audits due to fear, pressure, or lack of psychological safety. Audits, while widely seen as valuable, are still structured in ways that prioritize compliance over learning.
Again and again, speakers returned to the same idea: leadership defines outcomes. When leaders ask, “How many findings did we get?” they reinforce fear. When they ask, “What did we learn?” they unlock improvement.
Auditors themselves remain deeply motivated by purpose, they know they are preventing harm, but many feel undervalued, underdeveloped, and overstretched. Without addressing these human factors, even the most advanced digital tools will underperform.
“The industry overwhelmingly believes audits could add far more value, but current structures reward compliance over learning” – Tülay Kahraman and Marc Cwikowski.
Regulation Is Struggling to Keep Pace with Innovation
Perhaps the most uncomfortable, but necessary, conversation came from sessions focused on regulation and innovation.
Startups and innovators are not trying to bypass regulation. They are trying to understand it. But regulatory uncertainty, delayed feedback, and overlapping classifications can be fatal for small companies. A single phrase on a label can move a product from “supplement” to “novel food,” multiplying costs and timelines overnight.
The science is moving quickly, AI, synthetic biology, cellular agriculture, but regulatory architectures remain largely static. This mismatch does not just slow innovation; it risks discouraging it entirely.
Encouragingly, examples such as the UK’s Innovation Research Program show that regulators can experiment too. Adaptive pathways, early engagement, and iterative assessment models offer a way forward that protects consumers without suffocating innovation.
At the global level, speakers called for benefit–risk frameworks that assess not only what could go wrong with novel foods, but also what society stands to gain, from sustainability to nutrition to food security.
The Risk Landscape Is Expanding
The conference also served as a reminder that food safety risks are becoming more complex, not less.
From emerging Listeria species that challenge traditional detection methods, to illegal pesticides crossing porous borders, to climate-driven contamination risks, the threats are increasingly interconnected. Technical sessions highlighted how advanced molecular methods can detect risks faster, but also how they introduce new challenges, such as distinguishing live pathogens from residual DNA.
Case studies from Africa illustrated the devastating human and economic consequences when systems fail. Large-scale outbreaks, illegal chemical use, and informal food markets expose vulnerabilities that cannot be solved by testing alone. They require governance, enforcement, education, and leadership.
Professor Samuel Godefroy called for global benefit-risk assessment frameworks to evaluate both the risks and the societal advantages of novel foods.
The Future Depends on People, and the Next Generation
One of the most human moments of the conference came from discussions about inspiring the next generation of food safety professionals.
Young people, we were reminded, do not engage with procedures, they engage with stories. Food safety has an image problem: when it works, nothing happens. When it fails, it makes headlines. This makes recruitment and public trust harder than it should be.
“The next generation responds to stories, not manuals” – Julian Cox
There was a strong call for professionals to step into the public space, to use media, storytelling, and social platforms to explain why food safety matters and why it is a career with real purpose. The future workforce will not be built through manuals alone.
So What Does This All Mean?
For industry, the message is clear. AI adoption is accelerating, and expectations are rising. Auditing models must evolve from box-ticking to learning. Traceability, transparency, and leadership capability are no longer differentiators, they are baseline requirements.
- Adopt AI early to stay compliant as regulators digitize.
- Shift internal auditing from compliance to learning.
- Invest in traceability and transparency, regulators expect it.
- Prepare for novel foods scrutiny and classification risks.
- Develop leadership and communication skills in technical teams.
“Singapore is a global model for aligning innovation with regulation, especially in cellular agriculture” – Professor William Chen, NTU
For regulators, the challenge is balance. Innovation-ready frameworks must be built without compromising consumer protection. Behavioral insights must inform inspection and auditing approaches. Cross-border data sharing and collaboration will determine how well systems cope with globalized risks.
- Build innovation-ready frameworks with flexible pathways.
- Improve feedback speed to startups to reduce uncertainty.
- Use behavioral insights to strengthen auditing and reporting culture.
- Expand cross-border data sharing to detect fraud and outbreaks.
- Adopt AI systems with human-centered oversight.
One Final Thought
Food safety is entering a new era where human behavior, leadership and regulatory agility matter as much as the technology itself.
Images courtesy of Dr. Darin Detwiler and GFORSS.
