Spårbarhet en väg mot transparens - Fallstudier i livsmedelskedjan
(2004)- Abstract
- This traceability report is based on information found in the literature, resent seminars and conferences about the subject and on two case studies made in the meat industry, and in the dairy-product industry. Several interviews were made along the value-chain to determine the traceability situation in the food industry in Sweden today.
State of the art of traceability
A traceability system is traditionally regarded as an active system for occasional use. The system itself can not generate money; the profit will come when the system is used. Therefore, changing the system into an active system working continuously as part of the quality system will generate profit continuously through, for example, improved quality and... (More) - This traceability report is based on information found in the literature, resent seminars and conferences about the subject and on two case studies made in the meat industry, and in the dairy-product industry. Several interviews were made along the value-chain to determine the traceability situation in the food industry in Sweden today.
State of the art of traceability
A traceability system is traditionally regarded as an active system for occasional use. The system itself can not generate money; the profit will come when the system is used. Therefore, changing the system into an active system working continuously as part of the quality system will generate profit continuously through, for example, improved quality and production logistics. Introducing a new traceability system is not only a choice of risk, but also of opportunities.
The EU-regulation (the Regulation EC (178/2002) of the EU parliament and Council, 28 January 2002) is rather vague, and most companies al least in Sweden will be able to follow it without too much of an effort. The way they fulfil it will vary, though. The legitimate claim will only be registration and knowledge of what comes in from where, linked to where it is sent. In the interpretation today in Sweden, no demands are set for the size of the traceability resource unites or on the time needed to find the information. What most of the companies are missing today, however, are the documentation of their traceability, the batch sizes between definite cleaning and recirculation stops etc., as well as means and systems to present their traceability information to the authorities.
Introducing the systems
The traceability system should not be considered as yet another certificate to achieve, but as a possibility to gain production and product quality improvements.
In order to introduce an effective traceability system, it is important to define why it is established. What is the system supposed to be used for, what are the goal and the driving force? To know this it is necessary to know the visions of the company for the future. Not until then, we believe, strategic decisions about the choice and performance of the traceability system can be taken.
The food industry claims to be financially restricted, despite this there is a lack of economical analysis of improved traceability in their business. Cost analysis, coupled to risk assessment, for the traceability resource units, TRU, for different critical control points are missing.
There is no list of priority for what to do first where to improve, or gain a certain level of, traceability. The work put down to gain information and to separate small TRUs in one part of the chain could be totally lost in another part.
The system
Many registrations of traceability data are still made manually on paper by pen. To achieve the most from a traceability system it has to be fast, reliable, retrievable and searchable, in other words computerized.
Often several different systems are being used simultaneously along the chain, systems to create unique identification as we!! as different software systems for business administration, registration of laboratory results or process control etc. More often than not, these systems are not able to communicate with each other. Active acknowledgement is not extensively used today. Unless something is reported, the product is assumed to be OK, which is creating a risk.
The companies are working more with trace then with track and trace. Their primary issue I rather to find what went wrong and why for a specific product then to specify how the products have been distributed if something should be wrong.
Production
Today unit operations, in which the product is filed and emptied simultaneously, are commonly used. From the point of minimising the traceability resource unit however, these unit operations are to be condemned.
The traceability systems are often constructed for the mainstream activities, and by-stream products like minor ingredients, packaging and rejected products used for something else, a forgotten.
Research areas
The most important questions that were found in this investigation regard the optimal, economically defendable, resolution of the TRU (traceability resource unit) at different points, and how they are to be handled. How are the TRUs found and defined, how can the) vary along the chain, how are they connected to each other and how will their choice effect the development of the company.
Another important question related to the economic aspects of traceability is how to find the consumer values of the product and the future goal of the company, and how to consider the values from the beginning when creating the traceability system.
Some other interesting aspects to consider were:
• Risk assessment
• Chain traceability effects on the logistics
• Distribution of the TRUs
• Communication between different systems
• Identification systems
• Distribution of processing times
• Product quality
• The interplay between big organisations, the public opinion and new legislation (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/1154774
- author
- Alklint, Charlotte LU and Göransson, Anders LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2004
- type
- Book/Report
- publication status
- unpublished
- subject
- publisher
- [Publisher information missing]
- language
- Swedish
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- d82c2226-5b77-460d-8ef4-02cccdbc3433 (old id 1154774)
- date added to LUP
- 2016-04-04 13:57:38
- date last changed
- 2018-11-21 21:17:26
@techreport{d82c2226-5b77-460d-8ef4-02cccdbc3433,
abstract = {{This traceability report is based on information found in the literature, resent seminars and conferences about the subject and on two case studies made in the meat industry, and in the dairy-product industry. Several interviews were made along the value-chain to determine the traceability situation in the food industry in Sweden today. <br/><br>
State of the art of traceability <br/><br>
A traceability system is traditionally regarded as an active system for occasional use. The system itself can not generate money; the profit will come when the system is used. Therefore, changing the system into an active system working continuously as part of the quality system will generate profit continuously through, for example, improved quality and production logistics. Introducing a new traceability system is not only a choice of risk, but also of opportunities. <br/><br>
The EU-regulation (the Regulation EC (178/2002) of the EU parliament and Council, 28 January 2002) is rather vague, and most companies al least in Sweden will be able to follow it without too much of an effort. The way they fulfil it will vary, though. The legitimate claim will only be registration and knowledge of what comes in from where, linked to where it is sent. In the interpretation today in Sweden, no demands are set for the size of the traceability resource unites or on the time needed to find the information. What most of the companies are missing today, however, are the documentation of their traceability, the batch sizes between definite cleaning and recirculation stops etc., as well as means and systems to present their traceability information to the authorities. <br/><br>
Introducing the systems <br/><br>
The traceability system should not be considered as yet another certificate to achieve, but as a possibility to gain production and product quality improvements. <br/><br>
In order to introduce an effective traceability system, it is important to define why it is established. What is the system supposed to be used for, what are the goal and the driving force? To know this it is necessary to know the visions of the company for the future. Not until then, we believe, strategic decisions about the choice and performance of the traceability system can be taken. <br/><br>
The food industry claims to be financially restricted, despite this there is a lack of economical analysis of improved traceability in their business. Cost analysis, coupled to risk assessment, for the traceability resource units, TRU, for different critical control points are missing. <br/><br>
There is no list of priority for what to do first where to improve, or gain a certain level of, traceability. The work put down to gain information and to separate small TRUs in one part of the chain could be totally lost in another part. <br/><br>
The system <br/><br>
Many registrations of traceability data are still made manually on paper by pen. To achieve the most from a traceability system it has to be fast, reliable, retrievable and searchable, in other words computerized. <br/><br>
Often several different systems are being used simultaneously along the chain, systems to create unique identification as we!! as different software systems for business administration, registration of laboratory results or process control etc. More often than not, these systems are not able to communicate with each other. Active acknowledgement is not extensively used today. Unless something is reported, the product is assumed to be OK, which is creating a risk. <br/><br>
The companies are working more with trace then with track and trace. Their primary issue I rather to find what went wrong and why for a specific product then to specify how the products have been distributed if something should be wrong. <br/><br>
Production <br/><br>
Today unit operations, in which the product is filed and emptied simultaneously, are commonly used. From the point of minimising the traceability resource unit however, these unit operations are to be condemned. <br/><br>
The traceability systems are often constructed for the mainstream activities, and by-stream products like minor ingredients, packaging and rejected products used for something else, a forgotten. <br/><br>
Research areas <br/><br>
The most important questions that were found in this investigation regard the optimal, economically defendable, resolution of the TRU (traceability resource unit) at different points, and how they are to be handled. How are the TRUs found and defined, how can the) vary along the chain, how are they connected to each other and how will their choice effect the development of the company. <br/><br>
Another important question related to the economic aspects of traceability is how to find the consumer values of the product and the future goal of the company, and how to consider the values from the beginning when creating the traceability system. <br/><br>
Some other interesting aspects to consider were: <br/><br>
• Risk assessment <br/><br>
• Chain traceability effects on the logistics <br/><br>
• Distribution of the TRUs <br/><br>
• Communication between different systems <br/><br>
• Identification systems <br/><br>
• Distribution of processing times <br/><br>
• Product quality <br/><br>
• The interplay between big organisations, the public opinion and new legislation}},
author = {{Alklint, Charlotte and Göransson, Anders}},
institution = {{[Publisher information missing]}},
language = {{swe}},
title = {{Spårbarhet en väg mot transparens - Fallstudier i livsmedelskedjan}},
year = {{2004}},
}