A panel of four experts tackled the vexed question: ‘Can we win the fight against food fraud?’ The session, which took place at the Fi Europe’s Innovation Hub, was moderated by Rob Kooijmans, CEO of the Food Strategy Institute.

“The opportunities for fraud are there, massively, and much more than even a few years ago,” Kooijmans said.

This was in the context of what Bertrand Emond, ambassador and cultural excellence lead at Campden BRI, had characterised as “the fundamentals” of risk management, such as “knowing who your suppliers are”.

“But war, first in Ukraine and then in the Middle East, has disrupted a lot of well-established supply chains,” he explained. “People have moved from ‘Just-in-Time’ to ‘Just-in-Case’, and they haven’t had time to establish the necessary trust, yet. But then, they’ve been desperate.”

In many cases, businesses have had to rely on spot buying, he added, rather than established relationships.

A changing world and ‘perfect storm’ of disruption

Sophie Lawrence, programme manager at the Food Industry Intelligence Network (FIIN), pointed out that climate change and its effects were adding to what Emond called “this perfect storm” of disruption.

“These are starting to change traditional growing seasons and shift global production patterns,” she said. “So, this is wher you might see premium products with tight supply in one area being substituted by lower-cost products with abundant supply in another.”

She also made it clear that, while larger food brand-owners could implement measures such as unannounced audits, food vulnerability assessments, and robust testing, the small-to-medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) that make up 99% of the European food industry often lacked the resources to do this.

“Smaller companies that might not have such comprehensive control measures in place are possibly a more attractive target for someone to try to place illicit goods,” Lawrence told the audience. “So, if you’re trying to strengthen overall supply chain resilience, allowing these companies to prove and protect their provenance is key.”

Selvarani Elahi, UK deputy government chemist and executive director of the Food Authenticity Network (FAN), spelt out these needs in more detail. “If you want to be Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) certified, which is the requirement for many companies now if they want to sell into retailers, you need a food fraud prevention plan,” she said.

FAN has signposted the most commonly-used tools and guides for compiling such a plan, she added, including some which are free to use. At least one of these allows a manufacturer not only to map the supply chain and identify the risks, but to build that into a strategy and demonstrate due diligence in this area.

‘Food Fraud Triangle’

According to Elahi, John Spink of Michigan State University in the US has concluded that the occurrence of food fraud depended on a ‘triangle’ of three factors: the macroeconomic realities providing the opportunity; system weaknesses in the company making it possible; and an individual crossing the line between what is within the law and what is outside it.

“You have a lot of control over how happy your own staff are, as well as your suppliers,” she explained. “The theory is that you should concentrate on the factors that you can control and identify the risks in your own supply chain.” That way, those risks can be dramatically reduced.

Free-to-use online company assessment tools such as Glassdoor.com could play an important role, the speakers said.

In terms of tests and analysis, Elahi highlighted a different type of challenge. “Unlike in food safety, wher you have legal limits and thresholds, in order to judge whether a food is authentic or not, you need to have access to a good reference data set.”

In many cases, such data is either proprietary or non-existent.

“FAN recently launched our Open Data Initiative, inviting companies which own databases to signpost them on our network,” she said.