Honey Quality and International Regulatory Standards: Reviewof the International Honey Commission
Bogdanov S., Lüllmann C., Martin P., von der Ohe W., Russmann H., Vorwohl G., Persano Oddo
L., Sabatini A.G., Marcazzan G.L., Piro R., Flamini C., Morlot M., Lheretier J., Borneck R.,
Marioleas P., Tsigouri A., Kerkvliet J., Ortiz A., Ivanov T., D'Arcy B., Mossel B., Vit P.
International honey standards are specified in a European Honey Directive and in the Codex
Alimentarius Standard for Honey, both of which are presently under revision. In this paper thepresent knowledge on the different quality criteria is reviewed and propositions for a new honeystandard are made.
Honey quality criteria are specified in a European Directive8 and in the Codex Alimentarius
standard5, both presently under revision6,8. The authors of this review are members of theInternational Honey Commission (IHC), which was formed in 1990 to revise the methods andstandards for honey. The commission compiled the methods of analysis currently used in routine
honey control and carried out ring trials in collaboration with the honey commission of the Swiss
Food Manual (SFM). The methods were first published in the SFM15 and then in a slightly modified
form elsewhere3. The work of the commission, presented in the present review, was chaired by
Stefan Bogdanov, with Cord Lüllmann as vice-chairman and Peter Martin as secretary. Presently,
the IHC deals with compositional criteria for unifloral honeys under the chairmanship of Werner vonder Ohe. The commission meets regularly once in a year. Representatives of other countries arewelcome for the future work of the commission.
As new, better and faster analytical methods are available nowadays, introduction of new
standards, using these new methods is necessary. In a recent publication we reviewed extensively
the specific sugar content and the electrical conductivity of honey, as well as and the methods,
used for the determination of honey quality3 . In this paper we focus our discussions on thestandard drafts of the Codex Alimentarius and of the EU.

DRAFTS FOR CODEX ALIMENTARIUS AND EU HONEY STANDARDS
In general, the Codex Alimentarius Standard is valid for honey trade in the whole world, while otherregional norms, as the European Honey Regulation, can also be established, if there are regional
quality requirements, differing from the Codex Alimentarius.
The proposed draft for a honey standard in the EU is very similar to the Codex standard, but it
contains fewer specific details. The main similarities and differences can be outlined as follows:
1. The moisture content is the only composition criteria, which as a part of the Honey Standard
has to be fulfilled in world honey trade. Honey having a high water content is more likely toferment. A maximum value of 21 g/100g is suggested in the draft for a new standard. The
exception for clover honey is not justified by measurements during recent years. Accordingly,
the maximum water content for clover honey should also be 21 g/ 100 g. In practice, values ashigh as 21 g/100 g are very seldom attained. In routine honey control carried out by the IHA
during the years 1989-97 on ca. 30,000 honey samples 91-95 % of all honeys had a watercontent of less than 20 g/100g11 Also in Switzerland a standard of 20 g/100 g was successfully
used in the past 20 years, until the last revision of the Swiss Food Ordinance, where theEuropean Union maximum value of 21 g/100 g had to be accepted. Many national beekeeping
organisations (e.g. Germany, Belgium, Austria, Italy, Switzerland, Spain) have moisture
content maximum values of 17.5 to 18.5 g/100 g for special classes of quality honey.
2. With the exception of the moisture content, which is valid as a compositional criteria in bothdrafts, according to the European draft the general quality criteria, summarised in table one,

Swiss Bee Research Centre (1999)1

have to be fulfilled by all retail honeys, while according to the Codex, they can voluntarily beagreed upon.
3. Contrary to the EU draft, in the Codex draft there are specific paragraphs, dealing withcontamination, hygiene and sugar adulteration, all of these being important quality factors
nowadays. The microbiological honey quality is of special importance. In different countries
cases of sudden infant death, due probably to honey consumption have been made public. The
sudden infant death can theoretically be caused by the bacteria spores of Clostridium
Botulinum, which can be found in honey. Due to these cases honeys in the UK and USA mustcarry the label ”not for the consumption by infants under 6 months old”. Also, the issue ofhoney adulteration is becoming increasingly important for honey control. Indeed, the problem ofpossible adulterated Chinese honey preoccupies presently the food control authorities in
Europe and USA.
4. Only the EU proposal contains a definition of ”industrial” or ”bakery”-honey: ”Honey, which isconvenient for human consumption, but which can have unspecific taste or odour, befermented, was overheated or which has a lower diastase activity or higherhydroxymethylfurfural content than prescribed in the norm”. Such a paragraph lacks in the
Codex. A paragraph for a separate quality of industrial honey is necessary, as honey forindustrial use is often sterilized because of hygienic reasons.
5. Another important issue is the pollen content. Both the European and the Codex draft state,that no essential honey components can be removed from honey, but they do not say whether
honey pollen is an essential honey component. While from nutritional point of view it is of noimportance, as honey pollen content is less than 0.01 % of the total, it is important for thedetermination of the botanical and the geographical origin of honey. Also, honey is used insome cases for pollen desensitisation, due to its low pollen content. The argument of the honeyindustry is, that a fine filtration is often necessary for the removal of small foreign particles,
impeding honey quality. The best solution would be to include a paragraph, stating, that honeyshould not be filtered with filters with a mesh-size, smaller than 0.2 mm. This practice will keep
the pollen in the honey, but will remove most of the honey impurities. Different European
beekeeping federations prescribe the use of such filters for their honey regulations.

Specific quality criteria
Table 1 summarises the composition criteria of the EU and the Codex drafts. According to Codex
Alimentarius these quality standards are not compulsory for governments and can be voluntarily
agreed upon, while according to the EU draft they have to be fulfilled by all commercial retailhoneys. Evidently, there are only minor differences in both drafts and they both do not contain suchimportant quality criteria as the specific sugar content and electrical conductivity.

Apparent sugar content
In most blossom honeys apparent reducing sugars” represent the great majority of honey sugars,
but in honeydew honeys, the situation is often very different. Indeed, many honeydew honeys havehigh amounts of non-reducing oligosaccharides such as melezitose, maltotriose and raffinose.
Because of these findings, the standard for apparent sugars has been modified in the Codex draft,compared with the previous standard: a minimum of 45 g/100 g has been proposed, compared tothe old standard with a minimum of 60 g/100 g. The European draft keeps the old norm of 60
g/100g. ”Apparent sucrose” is measured indirectly as the difference between total and reducing
sugars and can often be different from true sucrose. Here both drafts are similar, the Codex draft
including more honey types than the European one.
The measurement of reducing sugars detects only the difference between blossom and honeydew
honeys, but this difference can be determined much easier by other methods, e.g. by electricalconductivity determination. There are many arguments for replacing the measurement of the
reducing sugars with that of specific sugars (see next section).

Swiss Bee Research Centre (1999)

2

Water insoluble solids content
The measurement of insoluble matter is an important means to detect honey impurities that are
higher than the permitted maxima. It was set in the times, when a significant portion of world
honey was harvested by pressing the combs. However, nowadays almost all commercial honey isharvested by centrifugation. It seems to us that the permitted maximum in the Codex andEuropean standards of 0.1 g/100 g is too high. Mostly lower values, in the range of 0.005 to 0.05 g/
100 g are found. Wax, which is not determined by the Codex method, is a major source of waterinsoluble contamination. For this purpose other filtration technique can be used, e.g. with paper
filter, but such a method has not been officially proposed yet.

Mineral content (ash)The ash content is a quality criterion for honey botanical origin, the blossom honeys having a lower
ash content than honeydew honeys17. At present, this measurement is generally replaced by themeasurement of electrical conductivity. The ash content could be kept as a quality factor during atransition period, until conductivity is accepted as a world-wide standard.

Acidity
Acidity is an important quality criterion. Honey fermentation causes an increase of acidity andbecause of this a maximum acidity value has proven useful, although there is a considerable
natural variation. The old standard fixed a maximum of 40 milliequivalents/kg, which has been
increased to 50 milliequivalents/kg in the Codex draft, as there are some honeys, which have ahigher natural acidity10 .

Diastase Activity
Honey diastase activity is a quality factor, influenced by honey storage and heating and thus an
indicator of honey freshness and overheating. Although there is a large natural variation ofdiastase, the present standard of a minimum DN value of 8 has proven to be useful. In long-term
routine honey control at the IHA more than 92 % of the raw honey samples (n = ca. 20,000) andmore than 88 % of the retail honey samples (n = ca. 1000) had a DN greater than 811. Wheninterpreting diastase results one should take into consideration that certain unifloral honeys have anaturally low diastatic activity. Although the minimal requirements for diastase activity in the Codex
and the EU drafts are the same, in practice there is an important difference between the two: while
the Codex norm refers to honey after processing and blending, the EU norm is valid for the whole
retail honey. In reality this means that the EU norm is more severe than the Codex norm, as
diastase activity is expected to diminish upon storage.

Hydroxymethylfurfural content
This major honey quality factor is an indicator of honey freshness and overheating. In fresh honeys
there is practically no hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF), but it increases upon storage, depending on
the pH of honey and on the storage temperature. Some European bee federations (Germany,
Belgium, Italy, Austria, Spain) market a part of their honey as ”quality honey”, having a maximumof 15 mg/kg. In international trade, a maximum value of 40 mg/kg has proven satisfactory. In longterm routine honey control at the IHA during the last 10 years, more than 90 % of the raw honeysamples (n = 30,000) and more than 85 % of the retail honey samples (n = 2000) had less than 30
mg HMF/kg11. The Codex proposal is a maximum of 60 mg/kg. The proposal for a higher maximum
value is based on the experience that HMF increases on honey storage in warm climate countries.
The latest EU standard proposal demands a maximum of 40 mg/kg, as under European conditions
this standard has proven to be valid. Here too, as in the case with diastase, there is an importantdifference between the two norms: while the Codex norm refers to honey after processing andblending, the EU norm is valid for the whole retail honey. In reality this means that the EU norm ismuch more severe than the Codex norm, as HMF is expected to increase upon storage.

Swiss Bee Research Centre (1999)

3

PROPOSAL FOR A NEW INTERNATIONAL STANDARD
Electrical conductivity
Conductivity is a good criterion of the botanical origin of honey and today it is determined in routine
honey control instead of the ash content. This measurement depends on the ash and acid content
of honey; the higher their content , the higher the resulting conductivity17. There is a linear
relationship between the ash content and the electrical conductivity14 :C = 0.14 + 1.74 A
where C is the electrical conductivity in milli Siemens cm-1 and A the ash content in g/100 g.
Extensive conductivity data on thousands of commercial honeys has been recently published3.
Based on this data we propose that blossom honeys, mixtures of blossom and honeydew honeys
should have less than 0.8 mS/cm and honeydew and chestnut honeys should have more than 0.8
mS/cm (see table 1). Exceptions are Arbutus, Banksia, Erica, Leptospermum, Melaleuca,
Eucalyptus and Tilia honeys as well as their blends, having an extremely high variation in theirconductivity.
The conductivity measurement is easy and fast and needs only inexpensive instrumentation. It isvery widely used for discrimination between honeydew and blossom honeys and also for thecharacterisation of unifloral honeys. Thus an introduction of an international conductivity standard
is recommended as urgent.

Specific sugar content
Based on the extensive data, that we published recently3 , a general standard for a minimum
content of the sum of fructose and glucose of 60 g/100 g for all blossom honeys and 45 g/100 g for
all honeydew honeys can be proposed (table 2). This standard could be fulfilled in more than 99 %of the analysed honeys3 For sucrose, the situation is more complex. Here the general standard of
5 g/100 g could be fulfilled in more than 99 % of the analysed honeys, with the exception of someunifloral honeys like Banskia, Citrus, Hedysarum, Medicago, Robinia and Rosemarinus honeys
with up to 10 g/100 g and Lavandula honeys with up to 15 g/100 g sucrose3 . The sum of the
fructose and glucose content is very close to the sum of all reducing sugars, as fructose andglucose represent mostly more than 90 % of all reducing sugars. Indeed, the proposed minimum
standard for the sum of glucose and fructose of 45 and 60 g/100 g for honeydew and blossom
honeys is almost identical to the proposed standards for apparent reducing sugars of 45 and 65
g/100 g respectively. On the other hand, the proposed standard for true sucrose is very similar tothe one for apparent sucrose. Exceptions are differences for honeydew honeys, where the”apparent sucrose standard” is 15 g/100 g, while the specific sucrose standard is only 5 g/100 g
and also some Australian and New Zealand honeys, which figure in the standard for reducing
sugars (table 1), but not in the proposed standard for specific sugars (table 2) as no specific sugardata are available for these honeys.
The introduction of a standard for specific sugar contents will have other positive consequences forroutine honey control. Thus, the fructose/glucose ratio and the sucrose concentrations are good
criteria for differentiating between different unifloral honeys. Also, the content of different higher
sugars as melezitose, maltotriose is a good indicator of the honeydew content of honey. The
specific sugar spectrum yields also information on honey authenticity and sugar adulteration.

ADDITIONAL QUALITY FACTORS OUTSIDE THE STANDARDSThere are some useful quality criteria, used for the determination of honey quality outside theinternational honey regulations.

Swiss Bee Research Centre (1999)

4

Invertase activity
Invertase activity is particularly sensitive to heat and storage damage and is used as a freshness
indicator. It was proposed that fresh and unheated honeys should have an invertase number (IN)more than 10; for honeys with low enzymatic activity a IN of more than 4 is recommended7 .
Although, like honey diastase, the activity of invertase has a great natural variation12 its use has
been proven in honey quality control. A freshness invertase standard is also used in the honeystandards of the beekeepers associations of Germany, Belgium and Spain.

Proline content
The honey proline content is a criterion of honey ripeness and in some cases, also of sugar
adulteration16. A minimum value for genuine honey of 180 mg/kg is accepted in honey control
laboratories. However, it should be taken into account that there is considerable proline variation,
depending on the honey type4.

Specific rotation
The overall value for the optical rotation is a resultant of the values of the different honey sugars.
The measurement of specific rotation is currently used in Greece; Italy and UK to distinguishbetween blossom and honeydew honeys. In Italy it was found that blossom honeys1,13 havenegative values of optical rotation, while honeydew honeys have a positive one13. Theoretically,
these differences are due to the higher content of glucose and lower content of fructose in blossom
honeys. Whether this method is capable of differentiating these honey types also in othergeographic regions, remains to be examined in future studies.

CONCLUSIONSThe present review summarises the present state of knowledge on the quality factors, whichshould be used in the international honey regulations for the determination of honey quality. As
these quality factors are valid all over the world, it is not possible that they satisfy the quality
standards of all countries. For the majority of European consumers, honey is regarded as avaluable natural food, which should be fresh and unheated. This notion results in an European
standard draft, which has more severe requirements for freshness indicators as HMF and diastase
than the ones proposed in the Codex draft. Also, some European beekeeper’s associations specify
more severe quality criteria for the honey sold under their label than the ones valid for generalretail honey. For instance, maximum values of 17.5 -18.5 % for humidity and 15 mg/kg for HMF
content and a minimum value of 10 invertase number units are specified.
Apart from the composition criteria, discussed in this review, specialised honey laboratories use
also a number of other quality criteria to determine the botanical and geographical origin of honey,
especially the characterisation of unifloral honeys. In its further work the IHC is going to compile
and harmonise the methods and criteria, used for this purpose. Indeed, up to now chemical quality
criteria for unifloral honeys are valid only in separate countries, but they are not officiallyrecognised in the international honey trade.
AfterHoney quality and international regulatory standards: review by the international honeycommission. Bee World 80 (2) 61-69: (1999).

Swiss Bee Research Centre (1999)5

References
1. BATTAGLINI, M; BOSI, G (1973) Caratterizzazione chimico-fisica dei mieli monoflora sullabase dello spettro glucidico e del potere rotatorio specifico. - Scienza e tecnologia degli
Alimenti 3 (4): 217-221.
2. BOGDANOV S, MARTIN P AND LÜLLMANN C (1997) Harmonised methods of the European
honey commission. Apidologie (APIDGB5, extra issue) 1-59.
3. BOGDANOV, S AND 20 OTHERS (1999) Honey Quality and International Regulatory
Standards: Review of the Work of the International Honey Commission. Mitteilungen aus dem
Gebiete der Lebensmitteluntersuchung und Hygiene 90 (1): 108-125.
4. BOSI, G; BATTAGLINI, M (1978). Gas chromatographic analysis of free and protein aminoacids in some unifloral honeys. Journal of Apicultural Research 17 (3): 152-166.
5. CODEX ALIMENTARIUS (1994) Codex Standard for Honey, Codex Stan 12-1981, Rev.1(1987), Volume 11, FAO, Rome.
6. CODEX ALIMENTARIUS draft revised for honey at step 6 of the Codex Procedure. CX 5/10.2,
CL 1998/12-S 1998, FAO, Rome, Italy.
7. DUISBERG, H; HADORN, H (1966) Welche Anforderungen sind an Handelshonige zu stellen?
Mitteilungen aus dem Gebiete der Lebensmitteluntersuchung und Hygiene 57 : 386-407.
8. EEC (1974) Council Directive of 22 July 1974 on the harmonization of the laws of the Member
States relating to honey, 74/409/EEC, Official Journal of the European Communities, No L
221/14, Bruxelles, Belgium.
9. EU, Document 96/0114 (1996) Proposal for a directive of the European council relating tohoney Bruxelles, Belgium.
10. HORN, H; LÜLLMANN, C (1992) Das grosse Honigbuch, Ehrenwirth, München.
11. LÜLLMANN, C (1989-1997) Annual Reports of the Institute for Honey Analysis, Bremen,
Germany.
12. PERSANO ODDO, L; PIAZZA, M; PULCINI, P (1999) The invertase activity of honey,
Apidologie 30 (1) : 57-66.
13. PERSANO ODDO, L; PIAZZA, M G; SABATINI, A G; ACCORTI, M (1995) Characterization of
unifloral honeys. Apidologie 26, 453-465.
14. PIAZZA M G; ACCORTI M; PERSANO ODDO, L (1991) Electrical conductivity, ash, colour
and specific rotatory power in Italian unifloral honeys. Apicoltura 7: 51-63.
15. SWISS FOOD MANUAL (1995) Schweizerisches Lebensmittelbuch Kapitel 23 A: Honig. Eidg.
Drucksachen und Materialzentralle, Bern, Switzerland.
16. VON DER OHE W; DUSTMANN, J H; VON DER OHE, K (1991) Prolin als Kriterium der Reifedes Honigs. Deutsche Lebensmittel Rundschau 87 (12): 383-386.
17. VORWOHL, G (1964) Die Beziehung zwischen der elektrischen Leitfähigkeit der Honige undihrer trachtmässigen Herkunft. Annales de l’Abeille 7 (4): 301-309.

Swiss Bee Research Centre (1999)

6

Table 1. Sugar content and electrical conductivity: proposal for a new honey standard

Suggested New Quality Criteria

Proposed
Value

Sugar Content
Sum of fructose and glucose
blossom honeys≥ 60 g / 100 ghoneydew honey or blends of honeydew honey and blossom honey≥ 45 g / 100 g

Sucrosehoneys not listed below≤ 5 g/ 100 g

Banksia, Citrus, Hedysarum, Medicago, Robinia. Rosemarinus≤ 10 g/ 100 g

Lavandula≤ 15 g/ 100 g

Electrical Conductivity
Blossom honeys excepted the honeys listed below and blends withthem; blends of honeydew and blossom honey≤ 0.8 mS/cm

Honeydew and chestnut honey, excepted the honeys listed below andblends with those≥ 0.8 mS/cm

Exceptions: Arbutus, Banksia, Erica, Eucalyptus, Eucryphia,
Leptospermum, Melaleuca, Tilia.

Swiss Bee Research Centre (1999)

7