“Consumers are aware of traceability issues,” says food safety expert

Food source information that is easy to understand and quick responses from the authorities are key issues

According to the senior staff attorney of the Food Safety Program Center for Science in the Public Interest, David W. Plunkett, traceability is important to consumers. The food safety expert is convinced that customers want authorities to be able to trace unsafe food quickly to its source, and he observes that by doing this, traceability systems increase public welfare, even if consumers are unaware they exist. 

Recent research in the United States has shown that consumers value information about the source of products they buy. For instance, they support the Country of Origin Labeling (COOL); although this is not strictly a traceability system, its acceptance by consumers identifies an important characteristic of a trace system: “Consumers need to be able to interpret the information that appears on trace labels (not just codes or electronic tags),” Plunkett comments. 

Traceability also relies on proactive communication such as customer loyalty systems to alert consumers, and it should be supported by relevant information, such as the retail consignee, posting alerts in the store, etc.

Cost of implementing traceability
 
“The cost of implementing traceability systems is often cited as a reason to forego mandatory traceability systems,” Plunkett explains. On the one hand, suppliers do not normally think that shirking safety is a responsible means of gaining a competitive advantage. 
 
On the other hand, according to a study, consumers would pay 3% to 5% more for information about the source of their food and for additional safety.  According to Plunkett, the decline in the proportion of per capita income devoted to food is another reason to be confident that price will not prove to be a prohibitive factor when seeking to improve traceability systems.

Overall, factors that will affect the costs of implementing traceability are the creation of new infrastructure, standardisation, the replacement of legacy systems, labour and records. On the other hand, its benefits will include lower recall costs and the improvement of both consumer confidence and supply chain management.

“I believe there is a tendency to ignore the pervasiveness of traceability in the system already, implying that this cost may already be built into product pricing,” the expert states.  Many manufacturers and retailers already require traceability in their supply chains and they are doing it by means of contracts that demand quality assurances or through other government programs that have trace-like features.”

On the whole, David W. Plunkett concludes that consumers need better traceability to help protect public health, build confidence in the safety of the food supply, and provide choices that improve their social welfare.

S&G Brassicas Today - February 2010