Skip to main content

An Introduction to Traceability for Processed Foods

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
  • 4226 Accesses

Abstract

Traceability systems that are modelled after fresh produce are inadequate for processed foods. It is a common mistake since regulations and current scientific and trade literature on traceability generally do not specify sector-specific methods of implementing traceability. Most processed foods require more complex operations than fresh produce, and implementing traceability along with other quality initiatives will necessarily be more complex. Most processors recognize the increased complexity caused by the use of multiple ingredients for a single product and the manufacture of several products from different combinations of ingredients. As such, most processors believe they have adequate traceability systems in place. However, keeping track of the inputs and outputs are only parts of an effective traceability system. Processors tend to assume that internal traceability is well-known and controlled since yield, costs and certain quality parameters are well-known and controlled. However, traceability systems sometimes require unique information from processors since in-process mixing blurs the straight line that usually exists between inputs and outputs for fresh produce. Three different types of in-process blending can occur: blending that is “purposeful,” (ex. the manufacture of olive oil), blending that is “continuous,” (ex. a continuous evaporator) and blending that is “idiosyncratic” (ex. that which occurs in an aseptic surge tank). This third type of blending defies analysis for traceability. Each step in a process must be examined to determine if blending takes place, what type of blending it is, and how to accommodate the traceability system to it.

Much of this information was developed by the author at the Egyptian Traceability Centre (ETRACE), 106 Gamet El Dewal El Arabia Street, 5th Floor, Mohandessin, Giza EGYPT; www.etrace-eg.org ETRACE was supported by UNIDO.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32002R0178:EN:HTML

  2. 2.

    Canadian Food Traceability Data Standard, version 2.0 (2006); Note: GS1 Canada is the industry custodian of the Can-Trace standard.

    http://www.can-trace.org/portals/0/docs/CFTDS%20version%202.0%20FINAL.pdf

  3. 3.

    Since traceability systems should operate in “real time,” they should be able to reveal the history of any given component in a process at any point in time. Depending on the extent of the traceability system, it can not only reveal which lots of product were manufactured from which lots of raw materials, but it can also reveal the source and causes of out-of-specification product.

  4. 4.

    The exceptions are products manufactured for industrial uses by intermediate processors, such as tomato paste in bulk.

  5. 5.

    For a discussion on how to handle dealers, see “Dealers and Other Middle-Men,” below.

  6. 6.

    We will see later that traceability systems for most processed foods are necessarily less precise than those for fresh produce. Traceability procedures are not changed by this limitation. The implications of the uncertainty are felt mostly during a recall where lots known to contain problems are removed from the trade. Uncertainty forces the processor to recall products not known, but suspected, to have problems.

  7. 7.

    Common major hazards include aflatoxin, pesticide residues, heavy metals or pathogens. Other possible hazards and concerns that could be linked to the traceability system include allergens and GMO inputs.

  8. 8.

    This not only means in the accounting sense, but also accounting for which materials ended up in what production codes.

  9. 9.

    About the only time when these examples would not mix lot codes is if the lot codes represented very long times.

  10. 10.

    It should be mentioned that certain transformations (such as finished product storage) that may be important for fresh produce are not as important to processed foods. The reason lies in the difference in shelf life between the two product categories. Storing fresh produce for a week will likely have a major effect on its shelf life in the trade as well as its quality on release. This effect could be described as a “transformation”. If most processed foods were stored under the same conditions for a week, the change in the product would not be measurable. No “transformation” would take place.

  11. 11.

    Since most aseptic lines operate continuously, the remaining level of contaminated product in this example will never be zero until the line is shut down and cleaned. In the case of idiosyncratic blending, the level of the contaminant over time can not be calculated, only inferred qualitatively.

  12. 12.

    This information is needed in the production code only in the event that multiple production sites exist for the same product for the same company. Otherwise the product’s label, with the identity and address of the company, will take care of this item. It follows then that the production code can include information that is presented on the label.

  13. 13.

    http://www.ift.org/cms/?pid=1002160

Suggestions for Further Reading

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas A. Butterworth .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Glossary of Terms

Breadth

The amount of information that a traceability system demands,

CIP

Cleaning in-place

Common carrier

The entity, usually a third party, responsible for delivery of finished product

Depth

How far back or forward a traceability system traces or tracks (such as one up/one down)

HACCP

Hazard analysis and critical control point

Ingredient

Any substance, including water, intentionally incorporated into the food during its manufacture, preparation, or treatment

Internal traceability

The ability to track what happens to raw materials, ingredients, primary packages, and finished products inside the processor’s operation

ISO

International Organization for Standardization

Label

A written statement appearing on each container of processed food. Typically, a label contains, at a minimum, the product name, form & style, its net contents and the identity of the manufacturer. The information contained on a label does not change on a regular basis.

Lot

A collection of materials (ingredients, raw materials, or primary packaging materials) produced in the same time period under conditions as nearly uniform as possible, designated by a common code for identification

Lot identifier

A code which uniquely identifies a lot. Terms such as batch number, batch code, and lot number may all be synonymous with lot identifier. A production code and information from the label may also be considered to be a lot identifier.

One up/one down

A description of one level of depth of a traceability system. In a one up/one down system, each participant in the food supply chain is responsible for maintaining records about the products they receive, their use (i.e. the link between inputs and outputs) and to whom they were shipped, or sold.

Precision

The degree of assurance that a traceability system can pinpoint the movements of a particular ingredient to a single lot of finished product, or conversely, can pinpoint all the lot(s) of raw materials, ingredients, or primary packaging materials that make up a finished product

Primary producer

A farmer or grower

Processor

A member of the supply chain that typically receives inputs from primary producers, suppliers of ingredients and packaging materials and/or common carriers and transforms these inputs into some other form. This other form is typically packaged in a way that would preclude the addition of more inputs or processing without opening it. A supply chain may have more than one processor.

Production code

The identification printed on each container of processed food at the time of its manufacture. The production code uniquely identifies when the product was packaged (the year, day, and time period). It also uniquely identifies, by examination of the factory’s records, which factory manufactured the productFootnote 12 and what production codes of raw agricultural commodities, ingredients, and packaging materials went into the product. The production code should be changed with sufficient frequency to enable ready identification of lots during their sale and distribution. Production codes should not extend over a period of more than one personnel shift.

Record keeping step

Also known as a critical tracking event,Footnote 13 a point in a process where records are taken and new batch codes assigned for the purpose of traceability. Data taken could include input lot numbers, times, and other data to link the inputs to the outputs.

Ultimate processor

The last processor in a value chain to add ingredients or otherwise process a product

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this paper

Cite this paper

Butterworth, T.A. (2011). An Introduction to Traceability for Processed Foods. In: Hefnawy, M. (eds) Advances in Food Protection. NATO Science for Peace and Security Series A: Chemistry and Biology. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1100-6_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics