Because of its carcinogenic potential and low exposure limits, acrylamide is considered a potential health hazard (JECFA, 2005). For this reason, in many countries, food authorities have asked food producers to take steps to limit the formation of acrylamide in their products (Amrein, Andres, Escher, Amado, 2007). In 2002, the German concept of minimisation of acrylamide was introduced by the Federal Office for Consumer Protection and Food Safety (BVL). The concept was based on a voluntary agreement between the BVL, the Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection (BMELV), federal authorities and industry stakeholders. The aim of the concept of minimisation is to gradually reduce the acrylamide content of foodstuffs by avoiding training. This requires the development of reduction methods that reduce the acrylamide content of foods without altering the properties of food (Gobel-Kliemant, 2007). The recipient may only charge GST for all goods or services provided under a voluntary agreement if the payer is not entitled to a full GST credit. If the payer is normally entitled to a full GST credit, the recipient cannot charge GST. Many English-speaking Commonwealth of Nations countries that have structured their training in a neoliberal market, such as New Zealand, Scotland, Australia, South Africa, England and Ireland, have adopted national certification frameworks. They can also be taken into account in Kintzer`s typology, with people created in New Zealand and South Africa being prescriptive and more favourable to Scotland, Ireland and Australia (Young, 2005: 12) and almost voluntarily for certain sectors.
Some argue that a certification framework is part of the neoliberal agenda, because it brings education together and thus contributes “to the creation of education markets by providing a common qualifying currency. This common currency, like the money of an economy, is seen as promoting increased competition between diploma providers, since all institutions recognize and reward learning in the same way” (Strathdee, 2003: 157). However, even in countries that have strongly marketed their higher education, such as New Zealand, Australia and, to a lesser extent, England, national certification frameworks are encouraged to minimize barriers to vertical and horizontal transfer and to “maximize access, flexibility and portability between different areas of education and work and different places of learning” (Young , 2003: 224). However, it is relatively unclear that national certification frameworks are meeting these goals (Young, 2005: 1). Perhaps the main influences on the paths and articulation in higher education are vast economic, technological and social changes. Increased national wealth allows governments to expand higher education and establish institutions in small population centres, greatly expanding access. The increase in personal and family wealth gives people and their children the resources and above all the desire to pursue a higher education. Improved and reduced transportation and communication costs make it much easier for students to study in institutions far from home.
These are some of the reasons for the significant expansion of transnational higher education over the past two decades, which has been at the origin of the partnership agreements mentioned above, as well as the many paths and articulation agreements developed between the institutions of different countries.