Proceedings of the August 2011 Traceability Research Summit

Tejas Bhatt,Greg Buckley,Jennifer C McEntire

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-3841.2011.02617.x

Abstract:IFT's Traceability Improvement Initiative aims to advance work in the area of food product tracing through several means including hosted events where thought leaders exchange knowledge and ideas. In August 2011, the Initiative, in collaboration with GS1 US, convened a group of 50 product tracing stakeholders, as a follow-on to a successful event the month prior. Representatives conducting pilots or implementation studies in produce, seafood, dairy, and other industries discussed the objectives, challenges and learnings. Some of the learnings from on-going initiatives included the sense that better information management provides a return of investment; data often exist but may not necessarily be appropriately linked through the supply chain; and enhanced product tracing enables better accountability and quality control. Challenges identified in enabling traceability throughout the supply chain were the distribution complexity; the need for training, communication, and collaboration; improving the reliability, quality and security of data captured, stored and shared as well as the importance of standards in data and interoperability of technology. Several approaches to overcoming these challenges were discussed. The first approach incrementally improves upon the current "one up/one down" system by requiring electronic records and tracking internal as well as external critical tracking events. The benefits of this approach are its similarity to existing regulatory requirements and low cost of implementation; resulting in a higher probability of adoption. The major disadvantage to this process is the longer response time required during a trace (back or forward). The second approach is similar to a "pedigree" approach where historical information about the food travels with it through the value chain. A major advantage of this approach is the quickest response time during a trace. Some of the disadvantages of this approach are potential for misuse of data, the volume of data required to be maintained at value chain end points, and data privacy concerns. The third approach requires individual nodes within the value chain to maintain electronic records for its own data and make them available for querying during a traceback for outbreak investigation. The major advantage of this approach is the protection of confidential information and the potential for quicker access during a trace. However, the primary disadvantage of this approach is the need for greater computational power and a more complex mechanism to linking the value chain through the data. As next steps, a subgroup will work on clarifying the approach to meeting the goals of traceability, better defining critical tracking events, and articulating the strategy and return on investment from a regulatory and industry perspective. This will result in improved alignment of on-going traceability pilots and initiatives as well as a more actionable guidance document for public review.