Tag Archives: Traceability

Interview – Founder of SensoMind, Rufus Blas

We love the new technologies here at MyFoodTrust, of course in relation to improving the current lack of transparency. Last week we talked to Daniel from Bext360, and their use of blockchain and AI. Today we focus on AI again, which we find super interesting as a tool for food transparency, so it was a no brainer to do a interview with Rufus from SensoMind.

Read here, how SensoMind have applied AI to create a system to detect anomalies in food products and what role AI will play in creating transparency in food supply chains in the future.

Can you start with telling us a little about yourself and SensoMind?Hi, my name is Rufus. I’ve been involved in AI ever since I studied at MIT in 2004 at their Artificial Intelligence Lab. I hold both a PhD and an MBA and have a passion for innovation management and entrepreneurship. Previously I worked a lot with perception for self-driving vehicles in agriculture. I founded Sensomind with my partner in 2016 in order to democratize AI and get it out to the masses.  We’ve built our own set of tools around top AI products such as Googles Tensorflow which we thought at the time were too much targetting data scientists and not enough the engineers that are out in the field today. Our core competencies lie in analysis of complex sensor data. This is available in abundance in manufacturing so is one reason why we have gotten into this industry.

Rufus Blas
Sounds interesting, but can Sensomind’s AI technology be applied on food?
We’ve been working extensively with food manufacturing customers where our technology can be used for quality monitoring and sorting of food products. Most of our solutions are based on optical sensors (Such as cameras and multi-spectral imaging). Vision technology has been around in the food industry for 10-20 years but it’s been very difficult to apply it to food products with organic shapes and high variety. Examples include monitoring breads, meat, and fruits & vegetables. With AI you can teach the system just be showing it examples which opens up for completely new applications. An example can be automating the cutting of meat.  The price of a final product has a large influence on the cutting being done correctly and it can be very difficult using traditional computer vision to recognize exactly where to cut.
And in relation to that, can Sensomind’s technology help tackle the problem of, e.g. food contamination or unapproved enhancements/additives in food?
So we have a system to detect anomalies which can for example detect contaminants. In the food industry we have used this to detect contaminants such as bone fragments, metal, plastic, and other objects which shouldn’t be there. Unlike a human operator, our system never tires. Unapproved additives is difficult to detect using traditional color cameras so here we work with spectrometers or multi-spectral cameras. Using traditional computer vision an engineer would normally sit and try to make a model for different additives based on a pre-conceived notion of what to look for. AI allows a more statistic and data-driven approach which reduces the chance of unapproved additives making it through the production undetected.
In your opinion, what role does new technologies, e.g. AI, play in creating transparency in food supply chains?
Supply chains are notoriously difficult to model because of large amounts of often poor quality or missing data. AI is really good at crunching numbers and extracting meaningful informations from poor quality and multi-source data (including images, text, numbers, etc). AI can help piece together the information about specific products which would be impossible to model by hand.
If someone was interested in learning more about the work you do, where can the find more? 
The obvious thing would be to contact me. Check out our website (sensomind.com). We have a number of international projects going so location is often not a big issue.
A big thank you to Rufus, and great to hear of the use of AI in the food supply chain. Here at MyFoodTrust, we are always looking for how new technologies can enhance transparency and traceability.
So if you know of any startups, please let me know!
Have a great day.
© MyFoodTrust 2018

Farm animal welfare & transparency. So call me blockchain? Maybe

This article is written by Dan McGlynn:

Sustainability & animal welfare – the power of transparency, technology & collaboration – so call me blockchain, maybe?

Farm Animal Welfare – it’s now seen as a strategic opportunity by many global companies.

The benchmark…

I was fortunate enough to attend the launch of the 6th BBFAW report evaluating the performance of 110 large food institutions. The headline was ‘good progress but still a long way to go’.

Thank you to Nicky Amos for inviting me, one of the best events I have ever attended.

The venue was the London Stock Exchange – strange setting you may possibly think? Not so, it became very evident when David Harris, Head of sustainable investment at FTSE Russell opened the event by talking about how investors are closely linking sustainability and animal welfare metrics with share performance and valuation.

All business should take note – as the consumer becomes more aware and demands greater transparency on the goods that they are buying, companies that are transparent with their performance in dealing with ethical, sustainability and animal welfare issues will outperform those that are not.

Steve McIvor – chief executive of World Animal Protection made some great comments : ‘Consumers are showing that they increasingly care about the welfare of animals when they are deciding where to eat’.

The Foodservice industry still has ‘a lot more work to do’ providing transparency of animal welfare in their supply chains according to the new report. Despite making some progress (JD Wetherspoons rose 3 places) in the Business Benchmark on Farm Animal Welfare, pub & restaurant chains lag behind retailers and manufacturers and still need to make improvements.

No hospitality company achieved the ‘tier one’ status in the ranking but McDonald’s & our very own Greggs placed towards the top of tier two after making farm animal welfare a part of their business strategies.

The likes of KFC, Pizza Hut and Starbucks managed tier five, defined as showing limited evidence of implementation, while Subway and Burger King both ranked in tier four, and were defined as making progress. Waitrose, Marks & Spencer and The Co-operative Group all achieved tier one ranking.

The stats are staggering. Globally, 50 billion chickens are slaughtered every year (that’s 7500 every 10 seconds) – a large proportion of those live in unacceptable conditions. A lot of work is being done with the emerging markets of countries such as China, Brazil and Thailand.

 

Did you know that the largest dairy industry in the world is in India? China produces 700 million pigs per year – the UK produces 10 million. Big numbers, lots of animals.

The report scores companies on 4 areas:

·      Management policy & commitment

·      Governance & management

·      Leadership & innovation

·      Performance reporting & impact – increasingly becoming more important

Similar to the Modern Slavery act 2015, it’s not good enough just to have a policy in place. The company needs to have the commitments as part of their culture and strategy and more importantly, measure and report on their performance.

Only 11% of companies report on animal welfare outcomes – that’s 12 out of 110 global businesses. The answer is data and technology.

Can blockchain fill this void? Possibly. There are more and more commentators on this subject, very few are experts and it’s unproven in food. Watch this space and I aim to provide more insight on this subject soon.

There is existing technology that maps supply chains and is able to harvest sustainability & animal welfare KPIs from any part of that chain – look at my linked in profile and you will find out who they are!

Transparency will be king – do not underestimate the power of transparency. Technology will be the vehicle for this much need transparency.

If any of the above has resonated and you would like to discuss this subject further, lets connect and get in touch. I am heading up a project to drive collaboration in the foodservice industry focusing on compliance, ethical and animal welfare performance. All fingers point towards integrity.

Don’t get me started on integrity (doing the right thing even when nobody is looking). That subject is for another day.

I also love feedback – good, bad and ugly, it’s how we all grow so please let me know your thoughts.

Have a great day

Dan McGlynn

Authenticate IS

Original posted here:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/farm-animal-welfare-transparency-so-call-me-maybe-dan-mcglynn/

Towards a Transparency Culture in the Food Chain

This article is written by John G. Keogh.

Conventional wisdom suggests that transparency is an irrefutable practice in public and private sector governance (1). In fact, transparency is viewed as foundational for the efficient functioning of markets and provides a bedrock layer for trust to function as a ‘social lubricant’ by reducing information asymmetry (2). Although there is a complex bidirectional relationship between transparency and trust, increased transparency increases trust, according to a growing number of empirical findings and industry research.

“Trust is in Crisis” Edelman, 2017 Trust Barometer

The recurring exposures of deceptive practices, ethical lapses as well as opportunistic and immoral behaviour by individuals, governments, media, NGO’s and businesses has catapulted transparency into global prominence especially in the food industry.

No doubt you would concur that we have ideological and biased reporting, allegations of ‘paid-for’ scientific publications, deceptive practices, fake news and then there is the viral nature of social media to spread the falsehoods.

With all this going on in the background, sceptical consumers continue to raise their concerns about major social issues related to sustainability of natural resources and habitat destruction of endangered species. A key question raised often is whether the 3rd party certifiers are independent and unbiased, whether their results are peer-reviewed and can be trusted. And more importantly, can they be trusted when they rely on the firms they audit for revenue?

Research by Graham Bullock (2015) on 245 eco-labels and sustainability schemes in the USA found only 2 firms met criteria of being independent, had qualified staff (PhD level experts) and their results were peer-reviewed. He further noted that 56% of Americans do not trust companies’ green claims. Bullock’s insightful research was based on the findings from Starobin and Weinthal (2010) who found competency issues with 3rd party certifiers for Kosher labels.

Furthermore, consumers have legitimate concerns spanning from fair trade to the immoral acts of human slavery and forced child labour in our food chains. On top of concerns for animal welfare and a growing fear of antibiotic resistance, consumers are suffering from a lack of consensus among the public health agencies, NGO’s and the food business operators on the long-term health and safety of common foods. Again, whom can they trust?

do you remember the 2015 ‘processed meat causes cancer’ from the WHO? It seemed well grounded in scientific evidence but after significant push-back from industry, there was consumer confusion followed by a partial retraction by WHO a few days later. Who can the consumer trust to provide transparent, and trusted information? Unbiased reporting and evidence-based recommendations? Was the retraction the result of an industry lobby to protect revenues or grounded in sound science?

When transparency is lacking, so is trust!

In my view, the problem today is a lack of a transparency culture throughout the food ecosystem. But my question is; who is hiding what and why are they doing it? Following on from that, it is no wonder (at least to me) that Edelman argues that trust is in crisis. The challenges we are now faced with is ‘whom’ do we trust, and ‘what information’ can we trust? And my question is, therefore ‘can a transparency culture help’? I think it can.

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines transparency as the “quality or state of being transparent”. And ‘transparent’ is defined as “having the property of transmitting light….” and “free from pretense or deceit”, “easily detected or seen through”, “readily understood,” “characterized by visibility or accessibility of information especially concerning business practices”

What is a Transparency culture?

Much like a food safety culture which is brilliantly outlined in several books by Frank Yiannas, VP of Food Safety at Wal-Mart, in my view, a transparency culture is essentially about human behaviour. Regardless of laws, regulations, standards and organizational SOP’s, a transparency centric culture means doing the right thing when nobody is looking. And when they are looking, to accept responsibility and accountability.

A transparency culture should extend throughout the organizational ecosystem and is critically important to the boundary spanning employees who engage in direct communication and business transactions with stakeholders. A transparency culture is also about honest, forthright, clear and understandable communications, not hiding details in the fine print or providing scientific or technical language that consumers cannot normally decipher.

An example of a Transparency Culture fail

A transparency culture in the food chain is not only about the food itself but also related to business practices which impact consumers negatively. In the past week, Canada’s premier retailer, Loblaw received immunity from prosecution as the whistleblower on more than a decade of industry practices of collusion and price-fixing for bread. This ethical and immoral lapse was not just one person but a whole supply chain colluding to cheat consumers and break Canadian anti-trust laws. Will a Blockchain fix this? Nope.

This illegal practice will be costly for Loblaw and others, and not just financially. It will take time for consumer trust to bounce back. Loblaw is booking a CDN$ 150 million charge this quarter to appease angry consumers with a 25-dollar ‘mea-culpa’ voucher. Unethical behaviour doesn’t pay and will get exposed eventually.

 ‘‘Transparency is the deliberate attempt to make available all legally releasable information—whether positive or negative in nature—in a manner that is accurate, timely, balanced, and unequivocal, for the purpose of enhancing the reasoning ability of publics and holding organizations accountable for their actions, policies, and practices” Rawlings (2009)

How do we fix this?

The entire food ecosystem needs a rethink on transparency as an enabler of consumer trust. From farm to retail we should consider how to put into practice a program, or programs to ensure ‘transparency as a culture’ is embedded in all aspects of the food chain.

A lofty goal right? Why am I proposing this? well, no government or enforcement agency can control or govern all aspects of our complex society. Therefore, voluntary measures such as those embedded into a corporate social responsibility (CSR) program becomes an alternative, non-state mechanism to address these societal issues and concerns broadly (5). And specifically, issues such as food safety, food security, food fraud and price fixing – the latter being one of those issues where consumers, regulators and insiders alike probably shake their heads in dismay thinking that was a thing of the past.

Embarking on a CSR journey focused on implementing a transparency culture is one way for an organization to publically state, ‘we are taking responsibility’ and ‘we are accountable’ for addressing these big-hairy societal issues and also the specific issues of food safety, fraud and deceptive practices. By the way, transparency is viewed in the discourse as fundamental to the implementation of successful CSR, which, if not managed ethically, becomes just another tool for an organization to peddle untruths such as greenwashing (fake sustainability claims).

Finally, in a transparency culture, whistleblowing at all levels should be encouraged to continually improve processes by shining a light in the opaque areas of the food chain where unethical, immoral, deceitful and illegal behaviours are most rampant. This is no doubt a marathon, and the food industry is likely still at the start line without a race plan.

Thanks for reading.

Cheers.

About the Author:

John G. Keogh is a sought-after speaker, advisor and researcher. Operating at the intersection of the Public + Private sectors globally, he provides confidential advisory, research & interventions across policy, operations, strategy and technology.

John holds a PG Dip. and an MBA in General Mgmt. He has an MSc (distinction) in Business and Management Research into Supply Chain Transparency and Consumer Trust. He is currently a part-time, associate researcher at Henley Business School, undertaking doctoral (DBA) research into food chain transparency and consumer trust. John plans to publish an ebook “Food Chain Transparency – what executives need to know” in 2018.

Sources:

(1) Welch et al., (2006), (2) Berg (2004). (3) Rawlins, (2008), (4) Penders et al., (2017), (5) Dubbink et al., (2008), plus in-text references.

 

Original posted here:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/towards-transparency-culture-food-chain-john-g-keogh/

Interview – Founder of bext360, Daniel Jones

I have looked so much forward to this interview.  Ever since I first read about bext360, and their use of blockchain, I have impatiently been waiting to see their work in action. So, if you are a coffee addict, and want to be sure that the coffee you drink everyday, in fact is the quality of what it is suppose to be, bext360 will have you covered. Lets get started!

Can you start with telling us a little about yourself and Bext360?I’m (Daniel Jones) a US and Africa based entrepreneur with over 17 years of experience living and working in emerging and frontier markets including China, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), and India. I have professional roots in technology, applied mathematics, electronic commerce, and emerging economies. In 1991, I was with the Defense Intelligence Agency, where I was a key architect and topology designer of the Joint Worldwide Intelligence Communications Systems (JWICS), the first and now largest TCP/IP system to transfer voice, video, and data across Top Secret networks.

After that, I spent the last five years living in Kinshasa, DRC, where I evaluated supply chains and structured/funded companies as CEO and founder of Pioneer Management. In the DRC, I founded RAMIKA, the first US-owned company to successfully export conflict-free minerals from the DRC to the US in compliance with supply chain and traceability requirements under the Dodd-Frank Act. In addition, I structured the first private port facility constructed in the DRC.

I launched bext360 in April 2017. bext360 is company that develops technologies to streamline critical supply chains in emerging economies. Although our technology can be used across industries for different commodities, we are focused on the coffee industry first. Our bext-to-brew” platform aims to revolutionize the coffee supply chain with IoT, blockchain, machine vision and artificial intelligence (more on this below), while bringing consumers and farming communities together to improve product quality, community livelihoods and the consumer coffee experience. A guiding principle of bext360 is to build community by enabling buyers and other organizations with direct paths to improve the quality of both the product and the communities that provide the coffee.

Great, but how did you first get involved with coffee supply chains?I got involved with coffee supply chain after working for years in the Democratic Republic of Congo exporting conflict-free minerals, where security necessitated by large cash transactions represented a significant expense. I saw that most were entirely inefficient and lacked so much transparency. At around the same time, I started learning about blockchain technology and I became fascinated with the idea that it could potentially transform the supply chain for many industries. I landed on coffee because it is one of the most valued commodities in the world and its supply chain is completely antiquated.

Why is there a need for better traceability and transparency of coffee supply chains?

Although coffee is the second-largest traded commodity in the world (a $150 billion market worldwide), its supply chain remains antiquated and opaque. While global demand for coffee continues to grow, farming communities in developing countries must accept low prices and delayed payments for their harvested goods (women are responsible for 70 percent of growing and harvesting). However, millennials and coffee connoisseurs are now demanding transparency for sourcing and origin – indicating a shift in consumer preference and their willingness to pay for supply chain transparency.

And in relation to that, how do Bext360 technology tackle the problem?

bext360 is helping to eliminate many of the inefficiencies of the coffee supply chain while simultaneously providing transparency at each step of the process. Using machine vision, AI and IoT along with blockchain technology, we evaluate and sort coffee cherries and parchment (a phase of coffee been processing) based on quality. Farmers are then able to use a mobile app to view payments based on coffee quality, and may offer or reject the proposed payment. They are effectively increasing compensation for higher quality cherries. Powered by Stellar’s blockchain, the application immediately pays the farmer for her product upon acceptance of the offer. The application may also connect to the farmer’s other accounts for transactions such as loan repayments, local taxes and other financial commitments. Each evaluation and transaction relating to the coffee – including farmer identification, quality, purchasers and payouts – is recorded on the blockchain providing visibility to end consumers.

The certification process in supply chains is extremely costly. Currently, inspectors must physically examine each product at every point of the supply chain to verify that the product is what it purports to be. For coffee, every batch requires certification papers to move along the supply chain from one port to the next. bext360 is moving this data to the blockchain, providing transparency and immutability, which eliminates today’s costly and sometimes unreliable paper trail.

Using blockchain technology, the bext360 platform also creates crypto tokens based on the analyzed quality of the coffee to more accurately reflect the value of this commodity. As the commodity progresses through the supply chain, new tokens are automatically created to represent the increased value of the product until it becomes the roasted coffee we know and love.

For example, when a coffee cherry enters the supply chain, a token is created to represent its quality at the first level. As it continues through the supply chain and is processed to become “green coffee”, a new token will be created at this supply chain node and exchanged with the older token to represent the commodity in its new form. This tokenization technology can be used to represent other products, such as cocoa, nuts, spices, seafood products and pharmaceuticals.

The ability to create tokens representative of commodity value is groundbreaking in many ways. All stakeholders across the supply chain can own tokens, which hold real value for financial institutions. Banks, suppliers, business owners and the machines themselves can own, pay and collect from each other seamlessly. Commodity financing, plays a significant role in the portfolios of certain financial institutions. Rabobank has welcomed the use of tokens to reduce risk, while fundamentally changing how companies interface with the bank itself. Tokenization technology drastically reduces the transaction cost of global commodities and may also be applied to inventory valuation and the development of smart contracts.

Additionally, by providing the data recorded on the blockchain to banks and microfinancing institutions, it makes financials easier to audit and assess lending risk and therefore, reduces the risk to make individual loans. On the bext360 platform record includes: how much each farmer has sold, the quality of her cherries, and how many coffee cherry trees she owns. Based on this information and her unique history, the bank may borrow against the value reflected on her blockchain record. It is an innovative solution to address ongoing limitations for the under-banked – something other startups like Tala are trying to address with alternative credit scores.

Blockchain technology can also bring consumers and farming communities together. Using the bext360 platform, eventually, consumers may tip coffee farmers directly for coffee purchased at their neighborhood coffee shop. Payments to the farmer could be made instantaneously and tracked through the blockchain’s immutable ledger to assure consumers that tips were allocated appropriately.

If someone was interested in learning more about the work you do, where can the find more?

They can visit our website, or also read about us on Fast Company and Fortune. There is also a short documentary video about our company and technology that was created by Freethink Media for their Coded Series that was sponsored by Facebook.

I believe that this combination, blockchain and on-site quality control, will help ensure transparency from start to finish, and as Dan says, bring consumers and farmers closer together.

® 2018 MyFoodTrust

By

Kristoffer Just

Interview – Tom Mueller – Author of Extra Virginity: The Sublime and Scandalous World of Olive Oil

Extra Virgin Olive Oil (EVOO). It might not be a food product that you buy everyday, but when you buy it, it is quite expensive so you want to “the real deal”. But, far from every EVOO product on the shelf at the supermarket is actually a EVOO. Meaning, that some are of lesser quality (low-grade oils), not from the country of labelling (olives from greece, but the label says Italy) and so forth.

I used EVOO as an example in my thesis on how a new technology, blockchain, could reestablish trust, transparency and traceability in the supply chain of EVOO. And that is highly needed, especially if you (if your Danish), saw Kontant on DR last night, where they investigated Danish distributors and a Italian producer. So in relation to that, I have interviewed Tom Mueller, who has extensive knowledge about EVOO and the fraud that happens before the products are on the shelfs. So without further ado:

Can you start with telling us a little bit about yourself?

I’m Tom Mueller. I am a free-lance writer of non-fiction and fiction. I was educated at Oxford (DPhil, Rhodes Scholar), Harvard (BA, summa cum laude), and Alief Hastings High School in rural east Texas, home of the Fighting Bears. I’ve lived or worked in 48 countries.

My first book, Extra Virginity, is a New York Times best-selling account of olive oil culture, history, and crime. My articles have appeared in the New YorkerNational Geographic MagazineNew York Times Magazine and Atlantic Monthly.

What work have you done in relation to EVOO?

Truth about EVOO was born out of my love of great olive oil, and my concern about low-grade oils being passed off as “extra virgin” in the industry today, worldwide.  As a freelance writer who for the last two decades has spent much time in and around the Mediterranean, while contributing to publications including the New Yorker, Atlantic Monthly, National Geographic, and New York Times Magazine, I felt I knew olive oil well.  But it took an assignment for the New Yorker in 2007, “Slippery Business,” to make me understand the remarkable complexity of the olive oil trade, and the immense value of olive oil itself.  Since then I’ve gone steadily deeper into oil; in 2012 I published Extra Virginity, a book that explores this great foodstuff from many angles – cultural, culinary, chemical, criminal – and introduces the artisan producers and age-old landscapes of fine olive oil.

Why does fraud happen along EVOO’s supply chain?

The fraudulent behavior comes from everywhere – from misrepresenting amounts of olives brought to the mill, to various games that are played in the milling process, to blending of higher-grade extra virgin olive oil with low-grade olive oil or with other cheaper vegetable oils, to mislabeling . . .  The list is endless, as is the ingenuity of the fraudsters.

Why is it important for, us as a consumer, to have knowledge about this fraudulent behavior?

First, to ensure you are eating a healthy, tasty and genuine product, whose origin you know. Second, to make sure that honest producers get a fair price for their product – or find a market at all (they are often excluded by low-priced, fraudulent oils). Third, that you aren’t supporting fraudsters when you buy a bottle of oil.

From your knowledge, what can be done to increase traceability and transparency of EVOO products?

It is crucial to do on-site inspections and tests of mills, refineries and storage facilities, especially in ports.  So many checks are on paperwork only, not chemical testing of oils. The chemical and sensory parameters of the extra virgin grade also have to be improved (tightened) – they are currently very loose. Labels should specify the exact geographic location where olives were grown and milled, and the exact name of the producers – too often the “brand” is simply a multinational that buys and blends other peoples’ oils.

Further on that note, do you think tech can help with increasing traceability and transparency of EVOO products? And how?

Steady scientific advances in infra-red, DNA and other testing of olive oil have appeared. These need to be incorporated, rapidly, into current legislation.

What are your tips and tricks to spot that the EVOO you buy, is in fact what it is?

That is very hard to state, because there are many factors that comes into play. But I have outlined some points below, and if you want more thorough tips and tricks go to my website here.

  • Olives are stone fruits, like cherries and plums.  So real EVOO is fresh-squeezed fruit juice – seasonal, perishable, and never better than the first few weeks it was made.
  • Bitterness and pungency are usually indicators of an oil’s healthfulness. Sweetness and butteriness are often not.
  • There are 700+ different kinds of olives, which make thousands of different kinds of oil. Asking “what’s the best olive oil?” is like asking “what’s the best wine?”  The answer is, “depends on what you’re eating it with.”
  • Know the when, who, where of your oil: When it was made (harvest date), who made it (specific producer name), and exactly where on the planet they made it.

A big thank you to Tom, for his insights on this widely loved product across the globe, and why we need to keep pushing for better traceability and transparency of food products, in general.

If you want to read or know about my work on creating better traceability and transparency with tech, read this post, where I state the current supply chain process of EVOO, and how blockchain can shift the supply chain towards more transparency of the food we eat, and how farmers, producers, retailers etc, can get better traceability.

Have a great day!

© 2018 Kristoffer Just Petersen

Fish is good for you(?) – Lack of transparency of mercury levels

Eat fish at least 2 times a week! That is what the Danish Ministry of Environment and Food say, that fish is the main course several times a week. It is important to eat different fish species of both fatty and lean fish. In total, you should eat 350 grams of fish per week, of which about 200 grams should preferably be fatty fish.

But it comes with a catch. Mercury! As illustrated below, mercury is a natural part of the food chain, but coal-fired power plants are the No. 1 culprit when it comes to adding mercury to our environment, that ends up in the fish that you eat.

Fish that are contaminated with mercury, can lead to very serious diseases. Fish in Danish waters have such high levels of mercury that researchers in all of the samples in 2015. In some cases, the level of mercury was up to 13 times higher than the limit value, according to a report published by DCE (Danish Centre For Environment And Energy). However, it is worth noting that the content in 98 percent of the cases does not exceed the limit value of the food for humans. But pregnant women and children is to avoid fish due to mercury contamination. As the consumption of mercury in the quantities can impair immune response and cause neurological damage leading to loss of coordination, vision, hearing and can produce mental retardation, especially in the young.

If we travel across the globe to Japan, dolphin and whale meat is a common source of food. Here tests conducted by BlueVoice.org on residents of the village of Taiji, Japan revealed that people who eat dolphin meat exhibit extremely high levels of mercury and other heavy metals. The Japanese Health Ministry advised level of mercury in humans is 0.4ppm. The highest level in their tests revealed a mercury level of 18.9 ppm in a man who eats dolphin to this day.

One tragic side effect of the ban on commercial whaling is that Japanese fishermen have increased their slaughter of dolphins many fold. A product labelled and sold as whale meat is often found to be dolphin meat if subject to molecular genetic analysis.

There is som tragic irony that the arguement that we not kill dolphins and whales for food cunsumption includes the fact that we have contaminated the seas to such an extent that these creatures are dangerous to eat.

BUT, there is hope. Safe Catch! Safe Catch inspects the fish to ensure it meets conventional standards: It has to fall within the normal size for the particular type of tuna, and display no visible deformities or strange odors that indicate disease. Then, Safe Catch partnered with the Monterey Bay Aquarium Seafood Watch Program–a global authority on sustainable and ethical seafood standards–to ensure the catch methods and labor practices of the fishing companies they source from fall in line with those standards.  Furthermore, Safe Catch only sources from fisheries that have been certified by the U.S. Department of Commerce.

To carry out the mercury test, Safe Catch takes a small flesh biopsy (around the size of a grain of rice), using a syringe-like tool. The sample is then injected into the technology interface. On the screen, the Safe Catch team enters data about the origin and size of the fish; the analysis of the mercury level takes under a minute. Those fish that don’t pass the test are returned to the fishermen and likely sold to other tuna companies.

References

https://www.fastcompany.com/40497117/this-mercury-safe-tuna-company-is-on-a-mission-to-clean-up-the-oceans

https://www.foedevarestyrelsen.dk/Selvbetjening/Guides/Sider/Saadan-begraenser-du-kviksoelv-fra-isaer-fisk.aspx

http://www.bluevoice.org/news_dolphinmeat.php

The current food supply chain is broken. Here is 5 reasons

Supply chains. We know surprisingly very little about most of the products we eat every day. Before even reaching the end consumer, products travel through an often-vast process flow of retailers, distributors, transporters, storage facilities, and suppliers. Here is five reasons the current system aren’t working:

1. Complexity – In the beginning, two centuries ago, the supply chain was a revolutionary idea. The idea was improve visibility and control of products through interorganizational exchange, as they moved from A to Z. But this old concept and the inherent technology can no longer support today’s production and supply cycles of products, which have become extremely fragmented, complicated process and geographically scattered across the globe. The effect is, that supply chains now is a blurred process that is extremely hard to manage for retail businesses, to effectively track and trace their products, and thereby paving the path for, e.g. fraudulent behaviour. The emphasis on providing cheap food has led to complex supply chains which are ripe for fraudulent activity, according to Prof. Chris Elliot.

2. Demand – We, as consumers, are very demanding when it comes to food. We want fresh bananas, juicy tomatoes, tasty mango all year long, no matter the season, we want it. And your local supermarket knows, and are trying to deliver out-of-season food all year long. It takes a lot of resources to ship non-local goods around the world, which from a sustainability stance, is very damaging.

3. Traceability – With more companies outsourcing for raw materials and distribution, having end-to-end visibility in a supply chain is an absolute necessity in order to ensure public safety, as well as brand protection. The information and data is an integral part of the product quality, so this information needs to provide an accurate picture of where your products are at any given time in your supply chain. A food traceability system is only effective if it can track and trace every component of every product, which the current system can’t.

4. Certifications – On the face of it, certifications on everything from fish to timber can be seen as progress, with a promise of better standards and the pursuit of sustainability. But what purpose are the certification labels actually serving? Can we assume that they are beneficial to producers? Do consumers understand what’s behind a certification label, as there seems to arise new certifications all the time? Today, the industry is more aware that certification alone isn’t addressing problems of low productivity, poor infrastructure and child labour, which continue to destabilise the supply chain. An example is Fairtrade, which is not that fair at all.

5. Transparency – With the requirement of only knowing one step back, and one step forth, actors in food supply chains have very little transparency of where their products come from. This, and other factors, leads to scandals like horse meat in cow meat, harmful pesticides in bananas, Chinese terrified of eating processed food and fraud with extra virgin olive oil.

References:

https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2016/mar/10/fairtrade-labels-certification-rainforest-alliance

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20120511005906/en/trace-Lack-traceability-product-integrity-%E2%80%93-profits

Blockchain as a food supply chain

How to improve trust in supply chains – by blockchain

Introduction 
The main purpose of this blog post is to state how Blockchain Technology influence the role of trust and how it might solve the challenges in tracking and tracing products throughout its supply chain, by identification of opportunities with blockchain as a platform of traceability, information and documentation sharing regarding Extra Virgin Olive Oil (EVOO). The case partner was COOP Trading. This blog post is an executive summary of a master thesis on the matter.

We know surprisingly very little about most of the products we eat every day. Before even reaching the end consumer, products travel through an often-vast process flow of retailers, distributors, transporters, storage facilities, and suppliers, yet in almost every case these journeys remain unseen. This can lead to fraud of adulteration and tampering with the products we consume everyday. Which the The Danish Veterinary and Food Administration action team found, by adulterated EVOOs at Dagrofa and Dansk Supermarked. Out of the 35 tested bottles, only 6 could be classified as EVOO.

Challenges
The identified challenges from the gathered data, were the difficulty to qualify trust as it’s very ambiguous of what it entails, but is key to have an effective supply chain. Regarding the actual process of EVOO, the law requirement of only knowing “one step back, one step forth” of where the product came from, the lack of interoperability of systems along the supply chain, formats rangning from paper slips, oral communication to large ERP systems. The low traceability and documentation sharing hinders an effective supply chain, especially when fraudulent behaviour seems a great concern.

Results
One of the outcomes where what kinds of trust might be influenced by blockchain. Contract trust, predictability and dependability was chosen from 21 different kinds (Seppänen 2005). After a workshop with COOP Trading employee’s, they deemed contract trust as a central aspect of trust in a supplier out of the 21. It was found that blockchain and smart contracts inherent qualities that might qualify the technology to accomplish a form of digital trust, by managing one of the approaches to measure trust, contract trust.
The outcome for COOP Trading was conceptual UML blockchain design, illustrating the possibilities of enhanced traceability, information, documentation sharing along the supply chain of EVOO. The challenges depicted was information quality, legal implications and digital trust.

  • With information quality, is the issue with garbage in, garbage out as data transferred to the blockchain needs to be truthful and of high quality for the blockchain platform to work. This might be solved by RFID tags to get quality data.
  • Legal implications is the current legislation challenging greater traceability and information sharing, due to contractual bindings between buyer/supplier (FPA), and on blockchain application legislation as it is highly unregulated.
  • With digital trust would be a form of calculative trust, that one can place trust in a technology to handle what is to be expected of it, and thereby handle aspects of trust.

The takeaway
Blockchain have great opportunities to influence the role of trust, by developing a form of digital trust, and be a platform for greater traceability, product information and documentation sharing among supply chain participants. With any new technological improvements it should sprout internally, teaching management of the possibilities, internal meetings and identify other areas where the technology can be applied in the future. Take time to do a simple test, gain knowledge and grow from there.

If this has your interest, raised some questions or just got you curious for more, please contact me. I have a 12 page summary that gives a lot more detail, and of course the 109 page long full thesis on the matter, if you´re really into it.

Looking forward to hear from you.

Kristoffer Just

Below is the illustrations made, first the current supply chain of EVOO and then with blockchain as a platform.

Current


Blockchain supply chain

© 2018 Kristoffer Just Petersen

Interview – “Mr. RFID”, Henrik Granau (Part 1)

As the second interview post I wanted to, hopefully, expand your knowledge about what tech can help with better traceability and transparency of food products. One of these tech’s is RFID. RFID is not new to scene of tech developments, but maybe looking to be a “revival”, due to its capabilities for easy tracking and tracing of products. So if you want to learn about RFID, from Mr. RFID himself, you have to read this.

I had the pleasure of meeting Henrik at the RFID in Denmark conference at IT University in Copenhagen this summer. I had touched upon RFID during the writing of my master thesis, and wanted to learn more about it’s potential in retail, and to know about where we are in terms of adoption by companies. To get those learnings, you have to read part 2. But for now, lets talk about RFID, here goes!

Can you start with telling us a little about yourself?

Well, I am what you would call an experienced executive, having conducted most of my career in international IT Companies, where I have developed my strategic outlook and knowledge for the successful Marketing, Selling and Implementation of high level and complex business solutions.

I was originally an IT Expert working with development of large complex IT Systems. As an example, I was Project Manager for the development of the world first distributed real time trading system for Financial Instruments (for Copenhagen Stock-Exchange 1986-1988).  Since 1990 it has been General Management at C-level.

What are RFID technology and why is it important?

RFID is an abbreviation for Radio Frequency Identification – using radio waves to identify objects or people. This could be done on very long distances (Satelites, GPS etc.) and on very short distances (Access to buildings, wireless payments etc.). Some Frequency bands are in the regulation allocated to RFID use and a lot of people only perceive these as “RFID”, but in my definition it is everything using radio waves to identify – including WiFi, Bluetooth etc.

When RFID back in 2004-2005 was hyped as the next big thing – the replacement of barcodes – it was however very much focused on what we call “passive RFID”, where the term ‘passive’ means no power source on the RFID Tag itself (no battery). A passive RFID Tag is a very simple microchip with an antenna and only when it is in the proximity of an RFID Reader the chip is powered up (by the radio waves from the Reader) and it can do very limited operations, such as telling it’s unique Identifier.

Different RFID Tags

Passive RFID Tags are now standardized and the prices has decreased to a level where it really make good sense to attach RFID Tags to single items. Because of the lack of battery, the lifetime of an RFID Tag can be considered like ‘forever’.

The technology is used across Industries and in a lot of different application areas. You can track a product throughout it’s entire lifetime establishing complete transparency in your business operation. Examples are Library books, Fashion clothes, containers, airplane parts etc. etc.

We have thousands of successful implementations – the technology is working and the cost is justified through achieved business benefits – but a lot of organizations have never learned about the technology in relation to their operation.

Great, but how did you first get involved with RFID?

I was introduced to RFID when I accepted the challenge to be heading a Danish start-up company, RFIDsec in 2005 – a company with a mission to set new standards for security and privacy in RFID. We developed our own security features at the chip level as well as at the solution level with end-to-end control. Unfortunately we had to close RFIDsec in 2010, but all our features are now a part of the new international standards which were finalized in 2015.

During my 5 years as CEO for RFIDsec (2005-2010), I established my international network within the RFID world – because I had to get involved in all formal as well as informal standardization activities around security and privacy issues with RFID technology.

I was a co-founder of the RACE Network (Racing Awareness and Competitiveness in Europe) who was advising the EU Commission in RFID matters 2008-2011. The RACE Network was later renamed to ‘RFID in Europe’.

What are your current work in relation to RFID?

In 2010 I founded the thematic network “RFID i Danmark” where I am still putting a lot of time and effort into nursing the initiative. Every year we are organizing the largest RFID Event in the Nordic countries – the 7´th of its kind was held in Copenhagen at the IT University on June 14’th 2017.

In the network I am known as “Mr. RFID” and since 2014 I have also taken on the challenge to build up a strong organization in the Nordic countries for AIM Global. I am also Vice Chairman of the Board at AIM Europe.

In addition to the networking activities, I work as an independent Management Consultant where most of my activities are in the area of tracking, tracing and locating.

I help companies select the most appropriate technologies and standards to their usage and keep myself updated on the technological development through a good relationship with the manufacturers and resellers of RFID products.

I am the guy who knows what is going on internationally and nationally within the area of RFID.

What is the most challenging for a general RFID adoption at the moment?

Well, in general Supply Chain Management, in Fashion clothes and apparel, in Libraries, in ticketing, access cards etc. I believe that we on an international level actually has reached ‘general RFID adoption’. If you look at the hype created back in 2004-2005, where RFID was predicted to be a general replacement of barcodes, though I will still state that this will never happen with the current silicon based RFID technology. It just doesn’t make sense to put RFID tags on each item of bubble gum, milk etc. – the total cost of attaching an RFID Label is still 30-40 times the cost of using a traditional barcode.

Across Industries I would however still claim that lack of knowledge is the most important reason for not implementing RFID.

Want to read about the opportunities that Henrik sees with RFID in supply chains? RFID’s possibility to create better traceability in food products? And Henrik’s thoughts on a RFID/Blockchain combination to greater traceability in food products?

Then stay tuned for part 2 next week!

© 2017 Kristoffer Just Petersen