Session 2: International conference "Tracking the future"

International Conference TRACKING THE FUTURE
10 – 11 November 2010
Centro Congressi Fondazione Cariplo
Via Gian Domenico Romagnosi, 8, Milan (Italy)

***

NOVEMBER 10th, 2010 (afternoon)

Session 2 – Approaches to traceability and supply chain integrity
Objective of this session is to learn about experiences in other sectors and situations
concerning selected pending issues in the field of supply chain traceability and integrity.

Programme

14:30 Introduction
Moderator: Rolf Larsen, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences

From traceability to supply chain integrity
David Martinez and Jose Miguel Pinazo, Asociaciòn de Investigaciòn de la Industria
Agroalimentaria

14:50 Pending issues in traceability architectures and organisation
Chairman: Tomasz Dowgielewicz, Institute of Logistics and Warehousing

Petter Olsen, Senior scientist, Nofima Marked
Mark Zeller, GS1 Germany

15:40 Pending issues in ICT approaches to food chain integrity
Chairman: Vito Morreale, Engineering Ingegneria Informatica

Alberto Costanzo, Director of Automation & Control Department, Industries and
Services Business Unit, Engineering.it
Open discussion on the topic

17:00 Pending issues in tracing food safety and quality
Chairman: Jorge Molina, Asociaciòn de Investigaciòn de la Industria Agroalimentaria

Marco De Vito, Tecnoalimenti S.C.p.A.
Guy Weiss, SICPA Product Security SA

17:50 Proposal of a Conference Declaration on “Actions for Future Food Chain Integrity” -
Raffaello Prugger, Tecnoalimenti

18.00 Discussion and Closure

A) Summaries
The Session 2 was focused on the main pending issues concerning supply chain traceability and integrity.
Jose Miguel Pinazo from ainia Technological Centre
focused the first speech on the current trend, from
traceability to food chain integrity. To consider the
entire food chain as a single issue instead of using
traceability systems in isolate companies would
improve food safety and quality. Concerning
consumers´ information, food chain integrity aims at
working in both directions. On the one hand it will
provide consumers with reliable and accurate
information about the whole food chain. On the other
hand, these systems will permit to collect consumers´
requirements that will push food companies within the
supply chain to align their strategy so as to give the
right answer to the demands (personalized products).

Standards are a key issue when traceability is done
• Peter Olsen, Nofima´s researcher
One of the big challenges in traceability is the
organization. After analyzing a large number of
projects, researchers realized that in the food chain it
has not been used the same batch number one step
backwards and one forwards. To ensure reliable food
traceability it is necessary a unique batch number.
Standards are essential to guarantee a transfer of
information. Currently, Nofima is working in the
definition of a new traceability standard for fish
products which is focused on unique identification. It
could be extended to many different products.

• Mark Zeller, GS1 representative in Germany
GS1 is offering a novel recall service, B2B. Nowadays,
in view of a recall, reactions start after 18 days, to
recall all the products requires 42 days and only the
43% of all the recalled products are traced. B2B
service to faster react to a recall, unique identification
is a key issue for faster recall reaction and immediate
contact to all involved actors.
A question related to the integration with other services
came up. The speaker concludes that it is possible to
create different interfaces for other services
Concerning companies´ requirements, the system
requires critical information to run properly
An attendee pointed out that companies already have
recall systems and would like to know the benefit that
B2B system offer. The speaker answered, unique easy
system for the whole chain then all the stakeholders
will be benefited
ICT issues in food traceability
Engineering Group presented the complexity related
to logistics traceability. Some food examples showed
how ad-hoc ICT solutions might be applied to
guarantee reliable information transfer along logistics
activities. RFID and special labels resistant to extreme
situations, such as high temperatures, were shown.
Some questions were asked to the audience and
answered at the end of the presentations.
Is Internet a key tool to move from traceability to
food chain integrity?
Web oriented services will allow internal and
external traceability information transfer in a cheap
way. These systems will provide consumers with
trustful information.
Common interchange language?
There are many details that must be considered in
standards not only the language. Unique
identification is stressed.
Will external service providers be considered as a
stakeholder to storage traceability information?
At the moment external storage of traceability
information is not considered. In a horizon of 3-4
years it could be feasible.
Internet of things?
University of Parma pointed out that devices are
required to control certain parameters to ensure
mainly food quality and safety.
Atos Origin indicated they are working on these
issues.
Software as a Service Model (SaaS)

Pending issues in tracing food safety and quality

• Marco De Vito, Tecnoalimenti S.C.p.A.
The experience which was reported represents an
example of how quality and safety has been included
into the food chain. It deals with the food chain
problem of physical transport of resources along the
different phases of the distribution process.
The agri-food chain presents strong criticalities due
to the number of operators who take part in the
different operative phases creating a gap in the
preservation parameters of the transported goods.
Through technologies such as passive refrigeration
and modified atmosphere integrated in the transport
unit, and through a new dimensional concept of the
same unit, it was possible to control the biological
processes of the quality decay. The shelf-life
improvement and the consequent more efficient
integrated system for moving the resources guarantee
the preservation of the high quality of the perishable
products on the remote markets.
The technological solutions studied are referred to the
hardware components for the transport and to the
hardware architecture and management software and
control of processes along the entire food chain.
The reduction of the critical variables along the
supply chain, together with the application of
monitoring technologies and control of transportation
parameters, are able to promote a new standard in the
sector of logistic dedicated to the agri-food chain.

• Guy Weiss, SICPA Product Security SA
SICPA is a leading provider of security inks and
security systems, protecting banknotes, documents of
value and consumable goods.
SICPA provides integral services and technology
packages:
• To deter and combat product counterfeiting,
adulteration and diversion
• To increase supply chain visibility, agility and
security
• To protect and inform consumers
Consumers want assurances about the products they
buy (quality, integrity, safety, conformity, origin and
compliance). Nowadays traceability is mainly driven
by risk.
How to define safe and secure supply chain
components: Identification, authentication, track,
trace.

B) Presentations
Index
Speaker Presentation

Introduction

Jose Miguel Pinazo, Asociaciòn de Investigaciòn de la Industria Agroalimentaria (AINIA) Pg. 6

Pending issues in traceability architectures and organisation

Petter Olsen, Senior scientist, Nofima Marked Pg. 12

Mark Zeller, GS1 Germany Pg. 25

Pending issues in ICT approaches to food chain integrity

Engineering group: Open discussion on the topic
Pg. 37

Pending issues in tracing food safety and quality

Marco De Vito, Tecnoalimenti S.C.p.A.
Pg. 42
Guy Weiss, SICPA Product Security SA
Pg. 48

From traceability
to food chain integrity

From traceability to food chain integrity ainia

Jose Miguel Pinazo Sanchez
ICT Department
ainia technological center Valencia Spain

From traceability

Integrity issues in food chain

A number of critical food supply chain risk and security and integrity issues
exist today

The food chain is highly vulnerable
• Un-intentional risk / Intentional threats
• The impact of an incident (intentional or unintentional) can be significant

Present methods for managing risk in the supply chain are poor
• Majority of risk plans are manual
• Visible integrated standards and monitoring mechanisms do not exist across the food
chain
• Risk monitoring data is rarely integrated into the plan
• Trading partner relationships rely on “faith”

Compliance to law/standards
• Adherence to several and diverse countries’ and retailers’ regulations (BRC, IFS, ISO…)
• Lack of understanding of how this works (GS1,…)

Significant inefficiencies exist in the food supply chain
• Increasing levels of complexity (Increasing demands from final consumers)
• Global interdependencies are becoming more widespread
• There is a lack of interoperability (EDI has not been adopted by SMES, ICT skills
gives cause for concerns, e-business adoption depends on size and costs)

Increasing prevalent view that something must be done
• Who, what, why, when, where? More research is needed

From traceability

Food chain integrity: Main drivers

1. The emergence of the “Omni Consumer”: googled
consumer.
Consumers have more control than ever re what, where and when to
buy. Empowerment of active consumers: prosumers.

2. Credence driven product innovation: “premium food”
Product innovation has led to explosive growth in the sales of products
with “credence attributes” (e.g., green, organic, fair, healthy, etc). As
credence attributes are not readily verifiable by consumers, trust of
the manufacturer and retailer plays an enormous role in the
purchasing decisions of consumers.

3. Managing increasingly complex supply chains
Globalization has “flattened” the world and allowed companies to
outsource and globally source. As a result, it is increasingly difficult to
establish transparency across the complex global supply chain.
Companies are now faced with the enormous challenge of effectively
managing critical data and information so as to establish visibility and
enhance decision making.

From traceability

Food quality and safety: a joint effort

Food safety is related to the presence of and levels of food-borne hazards in food
at the point of consumption (intake by the consumer). As food safety hazards may be
introduced at any stage of the food chain, adequate control throughout the food chain
is essential. Thus,

Food safety and quality at the PoS is a joint responsibility that is
principally assured through the combined efforts of all the parties
participating in the food chain.

Technology plays today a fundamental role
in ensuring food safety and quality in companies
and will play an even increased role in the future
if extended to the entire food chain.

An interesting application of interoperability is in
traceability software, which requires a strong
interoperability among the various players
in the supply chain.

means interaction (Source ISO 22000)

From traceability

Food chain integrity: Our vision
Food chain integrity

1. Leverage traceability to empower and protect the brand by means of
making new claims (premium products). Traceability improves a
company’s ability to deliver creditable information, and allow a digital
print for food products at the PoS with a multi-valued logical
information (sustainability, nutritional value, health-benefit, eco-
packaging, …), which contributes to overall brand trust.

2. Integrate the physical and informational supply chain – companies that
can capture, store, analyze, and communicate information about
product sourcing, processing and movement across their supply chain
will have a strategic advantage in the marketplace.

3. Proactively engage the stakeholders and consumer– reaching beyond
direct supply chain participants to engage a broad set of stakeholders
will move companies away from the traditional defensive posture
toward a whole value chain perspective that is opportunistic and
expansive.


From traceability


Traceability systems have served as that source of trusted information allowing
companies to connect with concerned consumers, and realize other benefits

Food chain integrity allows companies to support the creation of integrated solutions
throughout the supply chain to improve visibility and efficiency of the logistics,
empower the brand to make new claims, certify product authentication, ensure
consumer safety, facilitate product recall and withdrawal and comply with
regulatory requirements pertaining to food safety and quality.

From traceability

las asistencias tecnológicas (ATE) son servicios orientados a un resultado a
corto plazo, en los que ponemos nuestros conocimientos y experiencias al
servicio de la empresa
Food chain integrity becomes so a property of the food chain. This
property could be defined as follows:

”is the capacity of an entire food chain to perform its expected function
without deliberate or unintended failure with both a push (displaying
their commitment to omni-consumer) and a pull approach (consumer
oriented innovation)”.

Food chains with such integrity features will be consumer oriented,
transparent, sustainable, competitive and certifiable.

They will assure safety to the European citizen, will satisfy consumer
expectations and will document product quality on the markets with a
readily and easy verification by consumers/3rd parties.

From traceability


TRACEBACK has introduced a new approach, based on traceability
extended to food safety and quality, for connecting food chain players
and for ensuring food chain integrity

Player B

INFORMATION
HIGH WAY *
Player A

Player C
TRACEBACK approach

But, there is a long path to walk

Time has arrived to merge all e-business infrastructures (traceability, food
safety certifications, e-procurement, e-refurnishing, logistics, CRM,
PLM…) into a single supply chain e-platform capable of providing a tool
to govern the entire supply chain as a single “cooperative entity”
reducing transaction costs and redundancies while boosting quality,
safety, efficiency and competitiveness

From traceability

Food chain integrity ecosystem

ERP, TIS, QMS, MES, SCM
systems of supply
chain players
Common data
standards
The Food Chain Backbone
provides the unifying
framework
Food Chain Integrity Backbone Distributed IT
infrastructure
for data capture, store,
access, aggregate and
transmission Executive
across the food chain
support
The data warehouse builds a
complete end-to-end profile
& audit trail of all
transactions along the
supply chain: product
movements, attribute
changes and processing
activities

green safe healthy free of fair personalized …. PUSH + PULL

Stakeholders 3rd parties non food based benefits consumer-oriented innovation
ubiquitous services (physical&logical coupling)

From traceability

Food chain integrity ecosystem
Identity preservation
Recall/Withdrawal

Certification tool and

Origin authenticity
Remote auditing on

Shelf life syncronism
Crisis Management

Mass balance

Free of XYZ
brand

protocols
Shared QA
providers

…

Tracing, Tracking
Traceability core services External, Internal,
Quality data...

From traceability


We envision an inter-organisational system (IOS) system that provides
food companies with the ability seamlessly interoperate with
other agile enterprises, and be able to adapt to actual or imminent
changes, instead of making some product or providing some service in
the most efficient way, then displaying their commitment to
consumer safety

Food Chain Integrity goes beyond current approaches in 3 important
ways:

1. While food quality/product safety is critically important, FCI adopts a
more strategic view of transparency and leverages the availability of
information to empower products and brands to more credibly
market functionality and responsibility claims.

2. It requires a more integrated approach to transparency that
addresses the dynamics of today’s complex physical and
informational chains.

3. Internet-based IOSs are more SME-centric (Hughes, Golden & Powell
2003) since they overcome the need for the installation of proprietary
technology and their associated set-up costs.

From traceability

Thanks a lot for your attention!

Jose Miguel Pinazo Sanchez
Information and Communication Technologies Department
jmpinazo@ainia.es

ISO/DIS 12875 and 12877 seafood standards
Template for further food standardization work

Senior scientist Petter Olsen
Nofima

”Tracking the Future” International Conference
Milan, November 10th 2010
Petter Olsen 10/11/10 - ©Nofima Market - May be copied if source is acknowledged

Nofima is the newly formed fusion of almost all
Norwegian food research institutes (incorporating
Akvaforsk, Matforsk, Norconserv and Fiskeriforskning)
and covers all food sectors and links in the value chain.

Nofima Market is situated in
Tromsoe and carries out R&D work
related to economics, marketing,
logistics, rationalisation and
traceability of food products.


Batch traceability has built-in limitations
Same production run Production
Same date/time
Same raw materials

Same number on all?

Batch 112 Batch 112
Batch 112 Batch 112
Batch 112 Batch 112
Batch 112 Batch 112 Batch 112
Shipping Batch 112 Batch 112
Batch 112 Batch 112
Petter Olsen 10/11/10 -- © Nofima Market - May be copied if source is acknowledged
Petter Olsen 10/11/10 ©Nofima

Systematic information loss
Batch 112
Batch 112
Batch 112

Need unique
TU 11202
Identification! TU 11206
TU 11209

TU 11205
TU 11208
TU 11212

Petter Olsen 10/11/10 -- © Nofima Market - May be copied if source is acknowledged
Petter Olsen 10/11/10 ©Nofima

Internal and chain traceability
These are the units that we need to trace!

Trade units 15510
Raw material Trade units 21551

Trade units 16515 batch 151 Production Trade units 22199
batch 211
LU
Trade units 16518
Raw material
batch 156 Pro
Trade units 22651

Trade units 18771

Trade units 18851
Ingredient
duct LU
Trade units 23174

Trade units 25009

Trade units 19001
batch 838
ion Production
batch 212 Trade units 27654

Trade units 19432 Ingredient Trade units 28866
batch 915
Trade units 19768 Trade units 29702

Received Internal Sent
Petter Olsen 10/11/10 - © Nofima Market - May be copied if source is acknowledged

Why chain traceability standards?
• Reduce workload for food business operators (FBOs);
avoid large sets of conflicting documentation
requirements.
• Increase transparency and re-use of data; data
delivered by different FBOs will have standard meaning
and measurement
• Enable benchmarking between same type FBOs
• Enable common understanding and automatic
translation of product and process parameters
• Establish ”unique identification on lowest level” and
”documentation of transformations” principle to enable
tracking and tracing without systematic information
loss; this to establish virtual infrastructure to enable all
the previously mentioned drivers (food safety,
legislation, labour/cost reduction, etc.)

Standards on what level?
• Physical connection – use of internet,
phone, fax, dedicated line, …

• Message type – UN/EDIFACT, XML, UBL,
GS1 XML, EPCIS, …

• Parameter naming
New ISO
• Parameter content standards


Enable Electronic Data Interchange
Standardization essential
to enable chain
communication by
electronic means

• Standardize practice
• Standardize EDI / XML
• Standardize meaning
of words (ontology)


Background - TraceFish standards
• CEN Workshop Agreement - CWA 14659 (2003)
Traceability of fishery products — Specification
of the information to be recorded in farmed fish
distribution chains
• CEN Workshop Agreement - CWA 14660 (2003)
Traceability of fishery products — Specification
of the information to be recorded in captured fish
distribution chains
• Developed in EU-project ”TraceFish” 2000-2003
• Involvement and feedback from more than 100
stakeholders
• Translated into JA, NO, SP, VI
• Became CWA for 3 years, renewed as CWA for
another 3 years (2007-2010)


ISO seafood traceability standards
• ISO/DIS 12875 “Traceability of finfish products —
Specification on the information to be recorded in
captured finfish distribution chains”
• ISO/DIS 12877 “Traceability of finfish products —
Specification on the information to be recorded in
farmed finfish distribution chains”
• 3 year development track, Nov. 2008 – Nov 2011
• 1st meeting, Madrid Nov. 2008, standards established
• 2nd meeting, Nanaimo Oct. 2009, standards refined
• 3rd meeting, Thailand Nov. 2010, final version
• Formal hearing, voting and acceptance by Nov. 2011


ISO/DIS 12875 applies to:
• fishing vessels
• vessel landing businesses / auction
markets
• processors
• transporters and storers
• traders and wholesalers
• retailers and caterers


ISO/DIS 12877 applies to:
• fish feed production
• breeders
• hatcheries
• fish farms
• live fish transporters
• processors
• transporters and storers
• traders and wholesalers
• retailers

Conclusions from process so far
• Standards like the ones proposed are needed
• Should be based on unique identification on
lowest level, i.e. the smallest unit that will not
be split up, for example a package, a box etc.
• Standards will enable electronic recording and
communication, but not require it
• The standards should not have GS1 codes or
any other proprietary codes as a prerequisite
• The scope is only finfish, not molluscs, prawn,
crawfish, etc.
• Parameters are categorized into ‘shall’,
‘should’ and ‘may’; the last only informative

Unique identification principle
The fundamental principle of chain
traceability is that trade units (TU) shall
be identified by unique codes (UI). This
code may be globally unique in itself
(for instance the GS1 SGTIN or EPC
numbers) or it could be unique in that
particular scope only, which means that
there should be no other TUs in that
part of the chain that may have the
same number.

The ”Shall” category
This category contains recordings related
to identifiers and transformations that is
necessary in order to trace the history,
application or location of an entity. This
means the unique identity of trade and
logistic units, as well as the dependencies
between the identifiers of inputs and
outputs in a process.
Data elements relating to product properties are not in this
category, even if these properties are essential for other
purposes like product documentation or food safety.

The ”Should” category
This category contains parameters that
describe and provide supporting
information on the units being traced.
Common parameters required by law,
commercial requirements or good
manufacturing practices are recorded, but
only where an established international
format or data list for the value exists.

This includes parameters like "species", "ID of food
business", "production date", etc. Part of certification.

The ”May” category
This category contains parameters that
describe and provide supporting information
on the units being traced. It contains
parameters that are not part of the "should“
category, that may still be useful or relevant to
record. It also contains parameters that are
deemed important, but where no established
international format or data list exists.

The "may" category is informative only, and it
is included to enable use and uptake of the
standard. Not part of certification.

Chain traceability standard:
The “Shall”
category

“Should” and “May”
categories

ISO TC234/WG1 active participants
• Belgium • Mauritius
• Canada • New Zealand
• Denmark • Norway
• Finland • Pakistan
• France • South Africa
• Iceland • Spain
• India • Thailand
• Italy • UK
• Korea • USA
• Malaysia • Vietnam

ISO TC234 vote on 1st draft
• Belgium, YES • Mauritius
• Canada, NO • New Zealand
• Denmark, NO • Norway, YES
• Finland, YES • Pakistan
• France, NO • South Africa, YES
• Iceland, YES • Spain, YES
• India, YES • Thailand, YES
• Italy • UK
• Korea • USA
• Malaysia • Vietnam

ISO TC234 vote on 2nd draft
• Belgium • Mauritius, - / YES
• Canada, YES • New Zealand

12 - 1½
• Denmark, - / YES • Norway, YES
• Finland, YES • Pakistan, YES / -
• France, YES / - • South Africa, YES
• Iceland, NO • Spain
• India, NO / YES • Thailand, YES
• Italy, YES • UK
• Korea, YES • USA
• Malaysia, YES • Vietnam, YES

If the drafts become ISO standards
• Note that ISO standards are not legal
requirements (unless a country decides this)
• ISO standards are voluntary industry
standards
• Buyers of fish products may give preference to
suppliers who implement the standards
• Certification may happen on these standards
• Buyers of fish products may require their
suppliers to be certified according to these
standards

Thank you for
your attention
Petter Olsen
petter.olsen@nofima.no


GS1 Recall Service - Introduction to a
Standardized Service

Agenda

1. General information
2. What is the GS1 recall service – a short introduction
3. Approach by GS1 Germany - Feedback of retailers and
suppliers
4. Opportunities

Mark Zeller | GS1 Germany GmbH | 10.11.2010 | 2

Recalls in November 2010

Recall of 67,500 chest
Recall of 67,500 chest
freezers with risky capacitors
freezers with risky capacitors
that could overheat
that could overheat Fire danger in third party
Fire danger in third party
iPhone power adapters
iPhone power adapters

retailer recalls sausages with
retailer recalls sausages with
salmonella
salmonella

Cheese manufacturer
Cheese manufacturer
recalls cheese that might
recalls cheese that might
contain glass pieces
contain glass pieces


Recalls in Europe in 2009

Total number of recalls in 2009:

4.724

3.117 food recalls
1.607 non-food recalls

Source: AFC Management Consulting


Recall vs. Withdrawal
Recall (public):
Product has already reached the consumer
Consequences:
Information of public authorities (suppl.)
Information of the receivers (suppl. )
Information of the customers (i.e. press releases)
Removal of the products off the shelves
Destruction of the products or return to the suppliers
Withdrawal (not public):
Return of products that have not even reached the
consumer
Consequences:
Information of the receivers (suppl. )
Physical removal of the products
Return to supplier

B2B: same communication channels and pieces of
information for recalls und withdrawals


Time to Act on A Recall

18 days to sense & act on a recall

only 43% of recalled
products with health &
safety concerns are traced

42 days to complete the recall


Main Issues with Today’s Processes

Suboptimal notification processes

Inaccurate announcements

Failure to validate product removals

Use of proprietary systems

Lack of automation


What is the GS1 Recall Service?

A web-based, B2B-communication service which enables
trade partners to exchange standardized recall
information quickly, excactly and safe.


What is the GS1 recall service?

Exchange of standardized
recall information
Supplier 1 Retailer 1

Supplier 2
Retailer 2

Retailer3

Supplier n Retailer 4

Retailer n
Retailers can still
use their existing
systems


What is the GS1 recall service?

Change of the role
Retailer 1

Distributor 1 Retailer n

Supplier 1

Retailer1
Distributor n

Retailer 2

Retailer 3



Initiator Approver Receiver
(QA manager) (QA director)
Recall details Ok

Target groups
Ok

Attachments Ok

Request by mail for approval

Recall is online!

Features of the GS1 Recall Service

Standardizes the recall process between suppliers,
distributors and retailers

Uses GS1 standards (i.e. GDTI)

Improvement of efficiency

Only authorized persons are able to initiate recalls

Recalls can be forwarded to selected target groups

Attachments can be added

Live status of current recalls



Access restricted to authorized subscribers with
valid User ID and Password

Comprehensive verification process by GS1 before
registration is approved

Self-registration allows subscribers to select
authorized internal access

Subscribers assign roles and permissions to
internal users

Service requires two separate and authorized
users to issue a recall



Unique Identification of..
Business partners via Global Location Number (GLN)

Affected products via Global Trade Item number (GTIN) and e.g. batch

Each recall via Global Document Type Identification (GDTI)

The system records:
When a recall notification is sent

When a recall notification is opened

Who opened a given recall notification

When a recall was modified or updated

All issued recalls are permanently stored electronically



Already introduced in Canada and the
United States

Pilots in Australia and New Zealand (start
approx. in 2011)

GS1 US: More than 500 participants

Validating processes in several European
and Asian countries

GS1 Germany plans to start with a
requirements workshop in Q1 2011.


The Two-Stage Process

getting a better overview of the service and the national market
information of the requirements
getting more familiar with the service itself
preparation of the business case
minimization of the investment risk

Experiences with Retailers and Suppliers

Retailers:
Hot topic
Interest in improvement of internal and/or
external recall processes
Different requirements from different retailers
International interoperability (multinational
retailers)
Request for the use of GS1 standards
chicken-and-egg principle
SME should participate as well in the service
Confidence in the role of GS1 in that service
Privacy reasons
Standardization reasons


Experiences with Retailers and Suppliers

Suppliers
Hot topic and interest in introduction
Preference for one solution with all
retailers
Special interest from multi-national
companies
Request for the use of GS1 standards
Request for connection to data pools for
improved usability


GS1 Recall Service – Keys of Success

Solid base of retailers and suppliers
Well-balanced price structure
No barriers for SME to join
Financial base to maintain and develop the service
GS1 recall service needs to fit the main requirements of the users
Current internal systems can still be used
Opportunity of interfaces to existing (internal) systems
Continuous development of the service


GS1 Recall Service – Business Opportunities

Extension of the service to additional
branches and industries
Added value by connecting data pools to
the service
Added value by web 2.0 services and
mobileCom services
Offer of recall consultancy services
Development of additional services
Offer of recall training courses


Conceptual Opportunities

Distributor

internal handling of internal handling of
the recall process the recall process
(supplier) (retailer)

Possible Roles: Possible Roles:

initiator: pre- initiator: retailer‘s
suppliers
Supplier Retailer head office

receiver: QA distributor:
(domestic) sales Line

Receiver: (domestic)
store
GS1 recall service
framework

Framework can be used for customized, internal recall processes

Interface to the GS1 recall service

Opportunities of Introducing the GS1 Recall
Service in Europe

Suppliers: Increasing
efficiency for multi-
Recall

national companies by
Recall
Recall
using one (similar)
Recall
Recall service as a B2B-
Recall
Recall
communication platform

Recall
Retailers: Solution for
multi-national retailers by
Recall Recall

Recall
Recall
Recall
introducing a core
Recall
Recall recall system
Recall

Introducing
Recall

Recall
interoperability of the
domestic systems


Contact Details
Mark Zeller
Sales + Implementation
GS1 Germany GmbH

T: +49 221 94714-348
zeller@gs1-germany.de

GS1 Recall Service

ICT issues in food traceability

Milan, 10th November 2010 Vito Morreale
Head of Intelligent Systems Unit
Research & Development Department
ENGINEERING Group
vito.morreale@eng.it

Agenda

• Introduction
• ICT challenges and open issues in food
chain traceability: experiences and
lessons learned

• Questions on ICT issues in food
traceability

The rules

• 5 questions
• 5 answers/comments/opinions per
question
• 1 minute per answer

Q1
• Internet and the Web offer many
opportunities, services, and information
that traceability processes and
operations could benefit from and exploit
o Is this the key to move from traceability
to food chain integrity?
o What’s the meaning of Web-oriented (not
only Web-based) traceability?

Q2
• Common interchange language:
– It is not mandatory: interoperability can be
achieved with other tools

o is it the best tool to achieve interoperability
among players and their systems?

o Is a standard needed?

Q3
• External service providers:
– Services: from traceability-specific (reception, dispatch, alert,
tracing, …) to very general (information storage, security, mail,
maps, messaging, …)
– External = specialized players not belonging to the product
supply chain
– Result: service value network
o Could Google services be useful for traceability?
o Could reliable and certified data storage be more appropriate
to manage traceability information?
o Could business intelligence benefit traceability?
o Are we (developers) ready for such a model?
o Do food companies perceive the real value of such a model?

Q4

• Internet of Things:
– not only, as today, computers, printers,
actuators, mobile phones, but any object
around us, anywhere, at any time, creating
an “universally addressable continuum”

o What is the impact on traceability
processes? Or we just need some devices
to integrate?

Q5

• Software-as-a-Service (SaaS): software
on demand, deployed over the internet,
"pay-as-you-go" model.
o Which is the role of SaaS, cloud computing
and services in future traceability systems?

o What is the effect on business models of
traceability system developers as well as
food companies?

Thanks for your attention
!!!
Vito Morreale
Head of Intelligent Systems Unit
Research & Development Department
ENGINEERING Group
vito.morreale@eng.it
?

Un innovativo MarketPlace per le produzioni
agroalimentari fresche di qualità

Il Posizionamento strategico del Progetto

B-to-B B-to-C

Materie prime e Produzione Trasformazione Distribuzione
mezzi tecnici Agricola Alimentare alimentare

Agricoltura FoodnetXchange Distribuzione

CRM
e-Procurement Supply Chain Category
Software Management Management

Enti e società partecipanti

•UNIVERSITA’
•IMPRESE DELLA LOGISTICA
•IMPRESE DELLA DISTRIBUZIONE
•IMPRESE DELLA PRODUZIONE
•IMPRESE DI SERVIZI TECNOLOGICI
•PIATTAFORMA INFORMATICA
•APPARATI DI TRASPORTO
•SISTEMI DI CONDIZIONAMENTO

I Fattori strategici del FoodNetXcange

• FRAZIONAMENTO • Allargamento del sistema distributivo ad
imprese con volumi di produzione medio-bassi
(minore volume-maggiore frequenza)

• Adattamento delle condizioni di trasporto in
• QUALITA’ E FLESSIBILITA’ funzione dei volumi e delle diverse
caratteristiche dei prodotti

• Continuità di condizionamento dal magazzino
• SICUREZZA del produttore fino al punto vendita, diminuendo
il ruolo di soluzioni di packaging e stoccaggio
condizionato

• SERVIZIO LOGISTICO “ALL • Sviluppo di una piattaforma di tecnologie e
servizi dedicati alle imprese agroalimentari
INCLUSIVE” indipendentemente dalle dimensioni

• INTEGRAZIONE CON I PROCESSI • Gestione di riordini, integrazione con il processo
produttivo, logistico
AZIENDALI
• Mantenimento delle caratteristiche quali-
• VELOCITA’ DI TRASPORTO quantitative dei prodotti deperibili per mercati
remoti

Obiettivi specifici del progetto

1. Analisi delle filiere e mappa dei processi intra ed inter-
inter-
organizzativi
2. Modelli e sistemi per la rintracciabilità
rintracciabilità
3. Marketplace Digitale
4. Meccanismi e sistemi intelligenti per l’automazione dei
l’
processi di riordino, di identificazione e di distribuzione
dei prodotti agroalimentari lungo la filiera
5. Modelli logistici per il trasporto intermodale delle
produzioni deperibili
6. Sistemi di contenimento innovativo
7. Sistemi innovativi di condizionamento
8. Miglioramento delle caratteristiche e della shelf-life di
shelf-
prodotto

Il sistema complessivo
PIATTAFORMA
INFORMATICA

PIATTAFORMA RFID

MODULI E PIANALE

SCAFFALE
MARKETPLACE TELEMATICO

SISTEMA DI DISTRIBUZIONE TRADIZIONALE
(Le bande rosse rappresentano i punti di cricità per il prodotto nel sistema distributivo)

MAGAZZINO TRASPORTO PIATTAFORMA DISTRIBUZIONE
PUNTO VENDITA
CARICAMENTO CARICAMENTO CARICAMENTO Ricomposizioni di carico SCARICO HANDLING IN PIATTAFORMA SCARICO

Grafico di decadimento dei parametri di qualità del prodotto

Time

SISTEMA DI DISTRIBUZIONE INNOVATIVO TRASPORTO
MAGAZZINO HUB LOGISTICO TRASPORTO
Stoccaggio in unità
PIATTAFORMA DISTRIBUZIONE PUNTO VENDITA
Stabilizzazione condizionata

[T°, P, atm] [T°, P, atm]
[T°, P, atm]

[T°, P, atm]

[T°, P, atm]
ALTA QUALITA’

[T°, P, atm]
[T°, P, atm]
[T°, P, atm]

[T°, P, atm]

[T°, P, atm]

Grafico di decadimento dei parametri di qualità del prodotto

Time

I RISULTATI SUI PRODOTTI
ottenuti attraverso il sistema innovativo (modulo in atmosfera modificata+temperatura controllata)

incremento incremento
es. da 5 a 14 giorni Shelf Life Self Life

ZUCCHINE GRIGLIATE 180% MELANZANE FRESCHE 600%
MELANZANE GRIGLIATE 180% ZUCCHINE FRESCHE 133%
CARCIOFI BOLLITI 180% CARCIOFI FRESCHI 600%
CARCIOFI GRIGLIATI 180% POMIDORO FRESCHI 133%
PEPERONI GRIGLIATI 250% UVA DA TAVOLA 105%
POMODORI PIZZA 700%
SEMIDISIDRATATI 244% TORTA 133%
PASTA FRESCA 520% ORATA 133%
PASTA STABILIZZATA 460% SPIGOLA 300%
PASTA ALL'UOVO 675% SALAME TIPO FIOCCO 20%
PANE 1233% MORTADELLA 20%
FOCACCIA CON PROSCIUTTO COTTO 20%
POMODORO 700%

Il modello logistico distributivo

HUB
HUB HUB

HUB

HUB

HUB

HUB

HUB

HUB

HUB

HUB

HUB

I RISULTATI TECNOLOGICI

1) LA PIATTAFORMA INFORMATICA
E-Business suite
Sistema informativo distribuito
Sistema informativo di supporto alla rintracciabilità
Sistema di pianificazione del trasporto intermodale
2) IL SISTEMA DI RINTRACCIABILITA’ RFID
Meccanismi e strumenti di comunicazione wireless
3) LO SCAFFALE INTELLIGENTE
4) I MODULI DI TRASPORTO
Sistema di refrigerazione controllata
Apparato di condizionamento dell’atmosfera
5) IL PIANALE INTERMODALE

Problematiche di ricerca aperte

• Consolidamento tecnologico
• Standardizzazione internazionale
• Integrità di filiera
• Ridisegno della catena del valore
• Modelli logistici tailorizzati per il comparto alimentare
=
Complessità di integrazione negli scenari operativi

SICPA PRODUCT AND BRAND PROTECTION
MULTI-LEVEL APPROACH FOR MANAGING SECURITY
AND PRODUCT QUALITY IN SUPPLY CHAINS

Presented by Guy Weiss – Supply Chain Solutions Leader
TRACEBACK – Milan – 10 November 2010

SICPA – DECADES OF SECURITY EXPERTISE

• Global company founded in 1927
• Leading provider of security inks and
security systems, protecting banknotes,
documents of value and consumable
goods.

• Based in Lausanne, Switzerland

• Offices and manufacturing sites in 22
countries

• Close to 2500 employees of over 45
nationalities

© 2010, SICPA Product Security SA, Switzerland
2

FROM PRODUCERS TO CONSUMERS: BUILDING A CHAIN OF TRUSTTM

• Provider of integral service and technology packages:
• To deter and combat product counterfeiting,
adulteration and diversion
• To increase supply chain visibility, agility and security
• To protect and inform consumers

• Main sectors of activity:
• Food & Beverage
• Health & Personal Care
• Consumer Products

3

FOOD SUPPLY CHAIN – PRESENT SITUATION

• Consumers want assurances about the products they buy
(quality, integrity, safety, conformity, origin and compliance).

• Food-borne illnesses and poisoning involving contamination,
adulteration, and counterfeits have called for strengthened
regulations and manufacturing practices.

• Traceability is mainly driven by risk.
Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) and traceability
are both leveraged to identify and control risks.

4

FOOD SUPPLY CHAIN – PRESENT SITUATION

• At present, “external” traceability (i.e. among different stakeholders
of the supply chain) does not exist

• “Internal” traceability programs rely mostly on lot codes, hence, on
proprietary company codes

• Lot may have different meanings among stakeholders

• There is a lack of standardized methods for capturing and sharing
data

• Many companies have a one step forward, one step backward
traceability in place, but have not extended it beyond.

5

FOOD SUPPLY CHAIN – REGULATORY ASPECTS

• Tendency
Each facility handling a product should record its specific
transactional portion of the information

• HACCP and traceability are closely connected. While HACCP is
usually seen as an internal matter, traceability should ideally span the
whole flow of the supply chain

• Regulation EC/178/2002: (came into force in 2005) operators shall
be able to identify any stakeholder from whom they have purchased
and where their products have been supplied. Food should be
adequately labeled.

6

FOOD SUPPLY CHAIN – REGULATORY ASPECTS

In North America
• FDA Bioterrorism Act: food companies are requested to be
registered and must keep records of the produces they receive/sell
(one step up and one step back).

• Produce Traceability Initiative: Coding (GTIN, Serial Shipping
Container Code - SSCC) of every case throughout the entire supply
chain by the year 2012.

• Food Safety Enhancement Act, HR2749,(USA 2009) requires food
facilities to have safety plans in place in order to mitigate hazards.
Once enforced, all actors will have to maintain pedigree of the
products.

7

FOOD SUPPLY CHAIN
DRIVERS FOR SAFE AND SECURE SUPPLY CHAIN

1. Risk management
• Market access and regulatory compliance
Unhampered access to market where traceability is
mandatory
• Liability
Reduce the probability and consequences of
contamination (HACCP, recall process). Ability to
prove that a given product is or is not the source of
public health problem
• Brand protection
Mitigate financial losses and negative impacts on brand
image arising from counterfeiting, adulteration,
diversion, lower product quality and fraudulent use of a
brand name.

8

FOOD SUPPLY CHAIN
DRIVERS FOR SAFE AND SECURE SUPPLY CHAIN

2. Product differentiation
• Ability to prove authenticity
• Protected designations of origin (IGP, DOP)
• Consumer interaction, confidence and loyalty

3. Operational efficiency – Productivity gains
• Reduce expensive overstocks, enhance speed of operations
• e.g. Waste: 30 percent of perishables never reach consumers
due to a variety of supply chain issues

9

PHARMACEUTICAL SUPPLY CHAIN
A COMPARISON

• California ePedigree
From 2015, life science companies need to trace drug and product
information such as historical locations, time spent at each location,
record of ownership, transaction history, packaging configurations, and
environmental storage conditions in the supply chain…

• FDA imposes “What to do”
Industry defines “How to do”

• European projects are amongst others, driven by Government
reimbursement controls and thus far address mostly an identification
concern (i.e. EFPIA).
However, Track and Trace projects, with EPCIS inspiration are
beginning to take shape (i.e. EDQM).

10

SAFE AND SECURE SUPPLY CHAIN
REFERENCE MODEL

SAFE and SECURE
SUPPLY CHAIN
Reference model
Product visibility Movement visibility

AUTHENTICATION PEDIGREE

Is the product genuine Is the chain of
and custody intact?
Is it the right product ?

PRODUCT IDENTITY PHYSICAL FEATURES TRACK TRACE

Is the code associated Has the item been Where is the product ? Where was the product ?
with tampered with ? Where is it heading ? (locations and owners)
the unit of sale valid ? Is it authentic ?

11

SICPA’S MULTI-LEVEL OFFERING
FOR SAFE AND SECURE SUPPLY CHAIN

AUTHENTICATION
Possibility to create a secured identifier for virtually any application

• Item level secured identification using standardized or proprietary
systems
(Over 50 billion items are coded annually by SICPA around the world)

• Multi-layer proprietary authentication features used on packaging,
labels or directly on product (overt, semi-covert, covert and forensic)

• Anti-tampering

• Product composition analysis

• Automated in-line vision inspection and portable equipment

• Label and packaging design

12

SICPA’S MULTI-LEVEL OFFERING
FOR SAFE AND SECURE SUPPLY CHAIN

PEDIGREE
• High volume database and data management system design and
implementation
(billions of items are tracked and traced every day using SICPA’s
technology).

• Interoperability with existing systems (ERP, WMS,…)

• State of the art security for data transfer and integrity

• Parent/child affiliation

13

VALUE PROPOSITION OF SICPA‘S MULTI-LEVEL
SUPPLY CHAIN OFFERING

BUSINESS AND LEGAL VALUE
• Regulatory compliance
• Risk management – For liability protection, each business needs to
demonstrate that it has taken steps to maximise the safety of its
products
• Identification of diversion patterns
• Proof of ownership of goods and products
• Mitigation of liability risks associated with counterfeiting, diversion and
adulteration

14

VALUE PROPOSITION OF SICPA‘S MULTI-LEVEL
SUPPLY CHAIN OFFERING

SUPPLY CHAIN VALUE
• Greater supply chain visibility and product traceability (out of stocks,
product obsolescence, shrinkage, reconciliation / deduction, minimize
shipping and receiving discrepancies …)
• Increased supply chain security
• Improved production / distribution monitoring and control

MARKETING VALUE
• Control of brand image
• Increased consumer and stakeholder confidence
• Improved consumer reach and market accessibility

15

FROM PRODUCERS TO CONSUMERS: BUILDING A CHAIN OF TRUSTTM

For further information on SICPA’s Supply Chain and Traceability
Solutions and Services, please contact us at:

pbpd@sicpa.com

16

Session 2: International conference "Tracking the future"

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Session 2: International conference "Tracking the future"

Similar to Session 2: International conference "Tracking the future" (20)

More from Tecnoalimenti S.C.p.A.

More from Tecnoalimenti S.C.p.A. (20)

Session 2: International conference "Tracking the future"