Traceability becomes food safety technology trend in EU
In the dispute over genetically
modified foods between the United States and the European Union, one sticking
point is Europe's requirement that all GM foods be labeled and traced
back to their origin. While the U.S. views traceability as a novel and,
in some cases, bad concept, the European Union sees it as an essential
element of food production and a way to assure consumers of food safety.
A
good example is Tracemeal S.A., a company based in Geneva, Switzerland,
that supplies soymeal to salmon breeders in northern Europe. Tracemeal
buys soymeal from a Brazilian soy processor who contracts with farmers
to grow certified non-genetically modified soybeans. After processing,
the soymeal, which is identity preserved at every stage, is shipped to
a port in Denmark, which is dedicated to receiving only non-GM soy. The
soymeal then goes to fish feed producers where it is made into feed and
given to salmon. Finally, the salmon are shipped to Japan where they
are cooked and served fresh, just 72 hours after shipment from Europe.
The entire chain-from the salmon dinner in Japan back to the soybean seed
in Brazil-can be traced.
The extent of the traceability
system even surprises Tracemeal's president, Bernt Antonsen. "This is
extremely long and deep traceability," he say. "I never would have imagined
it would have gone this far."
Traceability laws
While concern over GM foods
is a factor, the demand for traceability extends beyond GMOs. Pat Cox,
President of the European Parliament, calls traceability "one of the central
pillars of the new food safety policy in the EU."
Europe's main traceability
efforts and regulations have focused on animal feed, which has been the
source of several food scares, such as the Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
(BSE), "Mad Cow" crisis. "Feed is a big issue," says Lia Jennissen, project
manager of animal feed at SGS, a non-GMO certification company based in
the Netherlands. "It's the beginning of the food chain, and if anything
goes wrong there, it has an enormous impact on recalls from retail stores."
The
European Parliament has passed a series of regulations establishing
traceability. In 2000, legislation was passed requiring traceability and
labeling of beef products. In February 2002 Parliament passed regulation
Number 178/2002, which established the European Food Safety Authority
and principles of food law.
The regulation states "The traceability of food, feed, food-producing
animals…shall be established at all stages of production, processing,
and distribution."The regulation will become law in 2005. This past November,
the European Union's Agriculture Council and Environment Council agreed
to establish stringent regulations to label and trace GM food and feed. "The
need for traceability has crystallized into real and active regulation," says
Richard Werran, a representative with Cert ID, a non-GMO certification
firm based in the United Kingdom. "It's here to stay and will be the way
business is done in Europe."
Traceability provides greater
assurance to consumers by requiring transparency in food and feed production. "Consumers
want to know how and where food is produced, and traceability is a key
enabler in that respect," says Ronan Loftus, business development director,
IdentiGen, a DNA analysis laboratory based in Ireland. As an example,
a French court recently ruled that restaurants serving beef must clearly
show on menus the origin of the cattle used to make the beef.
Tracing GMOs
As a result of food scares
and the need to allay consumer fears, Europe's regulators have extended
traceability to GM food and feed. Some food and agricultural groups in
the United States say that Europe has established traceability rules as
a barrier to trade, a claim that angers Europeans. "It has nothing to
do with trade barriers; it's complete and utter rubbish," says Werran.
European consumers want GM
food labeled and traced and major food retailers, such as Tesco and ASDA,
based in the United Kingdom, and Carrefour, based in France, are responding.
These companies have eliminated GM ingredients from their house brand
foods and are requiring meat suppliers to raise animals on non-GM feed. "More and more animal feed companies are producing
non-GMO because the retailers are asking for that," says Jennissen.
Since
the BSE crisis, animal feed producers have used soymeal as a protein
source, which has increased opportunities for companies such as Tracemeal
that have traceability systems to address GMO concerns. Tracemeal supplies
fully traced, certified non-GM soymeal from Brazil to nine fish feed
producers in northern Europe.
Antonsen says feed producers
will pay a 5 to 10 percent premium over commodity prices for fully traced,
identity preserved non-GM soymeal. In turn, feed producers that breed
salmon can earn a 20 to 25 percent premium in Japan for salmon labeled
as identity preserved and non-GMO. Antonsen says Europe's traceability
rules will have a big impact in Europe and globally. "Every commodity will have to be traced," he says. "There
will be a lot of logistics to get everyone up to speed, and it will be
a rough ride."
According to Katrin Schröder, IP management at GeneScan
Analytics GmbH, the traceability regulations are shifting the labeling
criteria from detecting GMOs in the product to application of GMOs in
the process. "The European food industry is looking for avenues how to
comply so they won't have to label their products," she says. As an example,
the regulations require that all food and feed ingredients produced from
GMOs be labeled even if GMOs cannot be detected in the final product.
In addition, products exported to Europe without a label will be assumed
to be non-GMO and be subject to PCR tests by authorities. Products that
test positive for GMOs will prompt an investigation and may result in
refused shipments. Providing PCR test reports as proof that a product
is non-GM won't be sufficient. "Authorities will want to look at traceability
documentation," says Werran. "Exporters have to assume the worst possible
case and have traceability in place."
Companies such as SGS, IdentiGEN,
Cert ID, and GeneScan offer non-GMO certification services to verify companies'
IP systems and help them comply with the new rules. Schröder says
demand is increasing for such services, which focus more on suppliers
in production countries such as Brazil and China. "The trend for European
companies is to make their suppliers responsible to establish control
programs," says Schröder.
U.S. perspective
In the United States, traceability
is a fairly new concept and not as readily embraced, according to Dennis
Strayer, president of Dennis Strayer & Associates, an IP consulting firm. "A
segment of the food industry is against traceability," says Strayer. "They
don't think we have the technology to do it, and that it would be too
costly."
On the other hand, Phil Neff,
business development manager at IdentityPreserved.com says U.S. food manufacturers
are using traceability to emphasize a product's value-added nature. "Being able to offer traceability
allows marketers to make claims and differentiate brands," he says. In
addition, traceability systems can limit food recalls, which saves companies
money. According to Neff, a key difference in the U.S. is that traceability
is being dictated by the needs of the market and not by government regulators
as in the EU.
As the dispute over traceability and other GMO issues escalates
to a possible trade war, the U.S. would like Europe to back off on its
traceability requirements, but it is not likely to happen. As Antonsen
says, "We're at the point of no return on that."
(February 2003)