July 28, 2026

, Posted in News & Resources

Background and Development of the Australian Standard

AS5812 – Manufacturing and Marketing of Pet Food

Updated: 14-4-2026

1. Origins and Early Policy Context (Pre-2009)

Prior to the development of the Australian Standard AS5812, Australia did not have a nationally consistent framework governing the safety of manufactured pet food. Responsibility for pet food safety sat across a fragmented set of arrangements, including quarantine controls focused on biosecurity, state-based meat legislation primarily aimed at human food safety, and generic consumer law. None of these frameworks were designed specifically to manage animal health risks arising from pet food.

During the early and mid-2000s, Australia experienced repeated and sometimes severe pet food safety incidents, including:

  • illness and deaths linked to irradiated imported cat food,
  • kidney disease in dogs associated with imported treats and chews,
  • long-standing thiamine deficiency linked to sulphite-treated pet meat and some pet foods,
  • toxicity from excessive vitamin D,
  • exposure to naturally occurring toxins such as indospicine through pet meat.

These incidents caused significant animal suffering and public concern, and exposed the absence of preventive controls, coordinated reporting mechanisms, and nationally recognised safety benchmarks specific to pet food.

2. Establishment of the Pet Food Controls Working Group (2009–2012)

In response to these events, the Primary Industries Ministerial Council (later the Standing Council on Primary Industries, SCoPI) established the Pet Food Controls Working Group in May 2009.

The Working Group comprised representatives from:

  • Commonwealth and state government agencies,
  • the Australian Veterinary Association (AVA),
  • the Pet Food Industry Association of Australia (PFIAA),
  • RSPCA Australia.

Its mandate was to examine mechanisms to manage the safety of imported and domestically produced pet food, including whether governments should have authority to mandate testing or recalls, and to assess whether regulatory intervention was justified.

3. Transition from Industry Code to Australian Standard (2011)

Shortly after the Working Group commenced, the PFIAA announced its decision to convert its long-standing industry Code of Practice (in place since the 1970s) into a formal Australian Standard through the Standards Australia process.

This transition had several important objectives:

  • to strengthen the technical rigour of the existing code,
  • to involve a broad range of stakeholders (industry, veterinarians, animal welfare organisations and government),
  • to create a transparent and nationally recognised benchmark,
  • to embed independent third-party auditing rather than self-declaration.

After extensive consultation, AS5812:2011 – Manufacturing and Marketing of Pet Food was published in March 2011.

The Standard established requirements across the pet food supply chain, including:

  • ingredient sourcing and hazard identification,
  • processing, heat treatment and hygiene,
  • labelling and consumer information,
  • traceability and recall systems.

Although voluntary, AS5812 represented a step-change in the strength of industry self-regulation, particularly through independent certification and formalised recall provisions.

4. Policy Rationale and Economic Assessment

The SCoPI Working Group concluded that, with the exception of specific issues such as thiamine deficiency in pet meat, formal regulation was unlikely to have prevented most historical pet food incidents. However, the Group found that:

  • the scale and severity of incidents could have been reduced through better preventive controls,
  • earlier detection and response mechanisms were needed,
  • industry self-regulation required a stronger and more credible foundation.

To test this conclusion, the Working Group commissioned an independent economic assessment by ABARES. That assessment found that strengthened self-regulation anchored by AS5812 was the most cost-effective policy option, provided there was strong uptake and compliance. Key strengths identified included the role of brand reputation, independent auditing, and built-in recall mechanisms.

On this basis, governments supported AS5812 as the appropriate cornerstone of Australia’s pet food safety framework, alongside the development of the veterinary-led Pet Food Adverse Event System of Tracking (PetFAST).

5. Revision and Update to the Australian Standard (2017)

The SCoPI Pet Food Controls Working Group identified the uptake and compliance with the newly introduced Australian Standard AS5812:2011 as a critical determinant of the effectiveness of Australia’s pet food safety framework, noting that the Standard operates within a voluntary, industry‑led self‑regulatory model.

While the Working Group concluded that strengthened self‑regulation, supported by AS5812 and the PetFAST adverse event reporting system, was the most appropriate and cost‑effective policy response at the time, it emphasised that this approach was conditional on strong and sustained industry uptake. Accordingly, the Working Group recommended that the operation of the scheme—including levels of adoption, compliance and its contribution to reducing the scale and impact of pet food safety incidents—be independently reviewed after three to five years, to assess whether self‑regulation was delivering the intended level of consumer protection and animal welfare outcomes, or whether further regulatory intervention might be warranted.

In 2016, the ministerial group that coordinated the SCOPI review no longer existed. However, the industry association decided to review internally the effectiveness of the standard and the uptake amongst members. A member survey was conducted and the outcomes used in the standard revision.

The Standard was re-opened for review with the FT-033 group.

Key outcomes of the AS5812:2017 update included:

  • expansion of scope to explicitly cover pet treats and pet meat (higher-risk product categories),
  • stronger alignment with international best-practice nutrition standards (AAFCO and FEDIAF),
  • enhanced labelling and disclosure requirements,
  • clearer expectations around testing and feeding trials,
  • refined requirements relating to preservatives, additives and processing treatments such as irradiation.

6. Renewed Scrutiny and the 2018 Senate Inquiry

Despite these improvements, serious pet food safety incidents continued to occur, most notably the megaoesophagus (MO) outbreak in dogs, identified in late 2017 and associated with a dry dog food product. More than 100 dogs were affected, many with irreversible or fatal outcomes.

Public concern led to the establishment of the 2018 Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee Inquiry into Regulatory Approaches to Ensure the Safety of Pet Food.

The Senate Inquiry reaffirmed several underlying policy realities:

  • pet food remains outside Australia’s formal food regulatory system,
  • consumer law is not designed to protect animals,
  • accountability relies heavily on industry systems,
  • information asymmetry remains a key risk between producers and consumers,

Importantly, the Inquiry recognised AS5812 as the central existing safeguard, but identified the need to:

  • strengthen its effectiveness,
  • expand its scope and clarity,
  • improve transparency, testing and labelling provisions,
  • ensure it better supports confidence, compliance and rapid incident response.

7. Strengthening and Updating AS5812 (2017–2023)

In response to emerging risks and the policy direction set by both ABARES and the Senate Inquiry, AS5812 was reviewed and updated.

Following the Senate Inquiry, the Australian Government supported further review and strengthening of AS5812 through the Standards Australia process, with a renewed focus on:

1. ingredient transparency,

2. nutrition adequacy and testing prior to sale,

3. clearer communication of processing treatments,

4. reinforcing recall and traceability expectations,

5. adverse event recording and reporting,

6. improving accessibility of the Standard to enhance uptake and accountability.

In addition, to support the fluid global trading environments, the new version of the standard sort to

  • support stronger alignment with international best-practice nutrition standards (AAFCO and FEDIAF),
  • Harmonise where possible to global best practice
  • Focus on outcomes rather than prescription
  • Create clearer, more coherent instruction for manufacturers and auditors
  • Create a solid foundation for future regulation

These changes reflect a deliberate policy choice: to build on AS5812 rather than replace it, recognising that it remains the most practical mechanism available within Australia’s constitutional and regulatory constraints to manage the safety and efficacy of pet food.

8. Current Role of AS5812

Today, AS5812 operates as:

  • the nationally recognised benchmark for pet food manufacturing and marketing in Australia,
  • the technical foundation for industry self-regulation and any future regulation,
  • a critical reference point for veterinarians, regulators and consumers,
  • an essential enabler of export market confidence.

Its development over time demonstrates a progressive strengthening of safeguards, shaped by real-world incidents, independent economic assessment, and parliamentary scrutiny.

9. Conclusion

AS5812 was created in response to demonstrated risks, regulatory gaps and public concern, and has evolved through successive reviews to address emerging evidence and expectations. The most recent updates, influenced directly by the 2018 Senate Inquiry, reaffirm AS5812 as the cornerstone of Australia’s pet food safety framework—one that continues to be refined to improve animal welfare outcomes, consumer confidence and industry accountability.

10. References :

  1. Report of the Standing Council on Primary Industries (SCoPI) Pet Food Controls Working Group ‘Managing the Safety of Domestically Produced Pet Meat, and Imported and Domestically Produced Pet Food’ 2009
  2. Australian Government DAFF ABARES ‘Pet food safety in Australia: economic assessment of policy options’ Research Report 12.8 July 2012
  3. The Australian Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee ‘Regulatory approaches to ensure the safety of pet food’ Oct 2018