Implementing Interoperability in the Seafood Industry: Learning from Experiences in Other Sectors.

Interoperability of communication and information technologies within and between businesses operating along supply chains is being pursued and implemented in numerous industries worldwide to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of operations. The desire for greater interoperability is also driven by the need to reduce business risk through more informed management decisions. Interoperability is achieved by the development of a technology architecture that guides the design and implementation of communication systems existing within individual businesses and between businesses comprising the supply chain. Technology architectures are developed through a purposeful dialogue about why the architecture is required, the benefits and opportunities that the architecture offers the industry, and how the architecture will translate into practical results. An assessment of how the finance, travel, and health industries and a sector of the food industry-fresh produce-have implemented interoperability was conducted to identify lessons learned that can aid the development of interoperability in the seafood industry. The findings include identification of the need for strong, effective governance during the establishment and operation of an interoperability initiative to ensure the existence of common protocols and standards. The resulting insights were distilled into a series of principles for enabling syntactic and semantic interoperability in any industry, which we summarize in this article. Categorized as "structural," "operational," and "integrative," the principles describe requirements and solutions that are pivotal to enabling businesses to create and capture value from full chain interoperability. The principles are also fundamental to allowing governments and advocacy groups to use traceability for public good.

Project to Develop an Interoperable Seafood Traceability Technology Architecture: Issues Brief.

The Interoperable Seafood Traceability Technology Architecture Issues Brief reflects the growing need to establish a global, secure, interoperable support system for seafood traceability. Establishing effective traceability systems relies on the development of a cohesive and consistent approach to the delivery of information technology capabilities and functions. The ability of business to utilize traceability for commercial gain is heavily influenced by the supply chain in which they operate. The Issues Brief describes factors associated with enterprise-level traceability systems that will impact the design of technology architecture suited to enabling whole chain interoperable traceability. The Brief details why a technology architecture is required, what it means for industry in terms of benefits and opportunities, and how the architecture will translate into practical results. The current situation of many heterogeneous proprietary systems prevents global interoperable traceability from occurring. Utilizing primary research and lessons learned from other industries, the Brief details how the present situation can be addressed. This will enable computerized information systems to communicate syntactically by sharing standardized packages of data. The subsequent stage, semantic interoperability, is achieved by establishing a common language (ontology). The report concludes with a series of recommendations that industry can act upon to design a technology architecture suited to enabling effective global interoperable traceability.

Pilot projects for improving product tracing along the food supply system.

In September 2011, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) asked the Institute of Food Technologists (IFT) to execute product tracing pilot projects as described in Section 204 of the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA). IFT collaborated with representatives from more than 100 organizations-including the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, state departments of agriculture and public health, industry, and consumer groups, as well as not-for-profit organizations-to implement the pilots. The objectives of the pilot projects were 1) to identify and gather information on methods to improve product tracing of foods in the supply chain and 2) to explore and evaluate methods to rapidly and effectively identify the recipient of food to prevent or mitigate a foodborne illness outbreak and to address credible threats of serious adverse health consequences or death to humans or animals as a result of such food being adulterated or misbranded. IFT conducted evaluations to determine the impact of currently available technologies, types of data and formats, and the data acquisition process, as well as the use of technology on the ability to follow product movement through the supply chain. Results from the pilots found inconsistencies in the terminology, numbering systems, formatting, legibility, and occasionally the language that sometimes required IFT to contact the submitting firm to gain clarity, thus increasing the time required to capture data before any meaningful analysis could begin. However, the pilot participants appeared to have many of the tools and processes in place which are required to allow the capture and communication of critical track and trace information (such as, key data elements) at critical points of product transfer and transformation (such as, critical tracking events). IFT determined that costs associated with implementing a product tracing system can vary widely as determined by numerous factors: the size of the firm/facility, the method of product tracing already in use (manual or electronic), and the range of each firm's capabilities to implement or improve its product tracing system, to name a few. IFT found that there are several areas (such as uniformity and standardization, improved recordkeeping, enhanced planning and preparedness, better coordination and communication, and the use of technology) in which industry improvements and enhancements to FDA's processes would enable tracebacks and traceforwards to occur more rapidly. IFT developed 10 recommendations for FDA to consider for improving the state of system-wide food product tracing. The recommendations outlined in the report will enable FDA to conduct more rapid and effective investigations during foodborne illness outbreaks and other product tracing investigations, thus significantly enhancing protection of public health.

Food product tracing technology capabilities and interoperability.

Despite the best efforts of food safety and food defense professionals, contaminated food continues to enter the food supply. It is imperative that contaminated food be removed from the supply chain as quickly as possible to protect public health and stabilize markets. To solve this problem, scores of technology companies purport to have the most effective, economical product tracing system. This study sought to compare and contrast the effectiveness of these systems at analyzing product tracing information to identify the contaminated ingredient and likely source, as well as distribution of the product. It also determined if these systems can work together to better secure the food supply (their interoperability). Institute of Food Technologists (IFT) hypothesized that when technology providers are given a full set of supply-chain data, even for a multi-ingredient product, their systems will generally be able to trace a contaminated product forward and backward through the supply chain. However, when provided with only a portion of supply-chain data, even for a product with a straightforward supply chain, it was expected that interoperability of the systems will be lacking and that there will be difficulty collaborating to identify sources and/or recipients of potentially contaminated product. IFT provided supply-chain data for one complex product to 9 product tracing technology providers, and then compared and contrasted their effectiveness at analyzing product tracing information to identify the contaminated ingredient and likely source, as well as distribution of the product. A vertically integrated foodservice restaurant agreed to work with IFT to secure data from its supply chain for both a multi-ingredient and a simpler product. Potential multi-ingredient products considered included canned tuna, supreme pizza, and beef tacos. IFT ensured that all supply-chain data collected did not include any proprietary information or information that would otherwise identify the supply-chain partner who provided the information prior to sharing this information with product tracing technology providers. The 9 traceability solution providers who agreed to participate in this project have their systems deployed in a wide range of sectors within the food industry including, but not limited to, livestock, dairy, produce, fruits, seafood, meat, and pork; as well as in pharmaceutical, automotive, retail, and other industries. Some have also been implemented across the globe including Canada, China, USA, Norway, and the EU, among others. This broad commercial use ensures that the findings of this work are applicable to a broad spectrum of the food system. Six of the 9 participants successfully completed the data entry phase of this test. To verify successful data entry for these 6, a demo or screenshots of the data set from each system's user interface was requested. Only 4 of the 6 were able to provide us with this evidence for verification. Of the 6 that completed data entry and moved on to the scenarios phase of the test, 5 were able to provide us with the responses to the scenarios. Time metrics were useful for evaluating the scalability and usability of each technology. Scalability was derived from the time it took to enter the nonstandardized data set into the system (ranges from 7 to 11 d). Usability was derived from the time it took to query the scenarios and provide the results (from a few hours to a week). The time was measured in days it took for the participants to respond after we supplied them all the information they would need to successfully execute each test/scenario. Two of the technology solution providers successfully implemented and participated in a proof-of-concept interoperable framework during Year 2 of this study. While not required, they also demonstrated this interoperability capability on the FSMA-mandated food product tracing pilots for the U.S. FDA. This has significant real-world impact since the demonstration of interoperability enables U.S. FDA to obtain evidence on the importance and impact of data-sharing moving forward. Another real-world accomplishment is the modification or upgrade of commercial technology solutions to enhance or implement interoperability. As these systems get deployed by clients in the food industry, interoperability will no longer be an afterthought but will be built into their traceability systems. In turn, industry and regulators will better understand the capabilities of the currently available technologies, and the technology provider community will identify ways in which their systems may be further developed to increase interoperability and utility.

Making traceability work across the entire food supply chain.

The Institute of Food Technologists held Traceability Research Summits on July 14, August 22, and November 1, 2011, to address how to meet the growing requirement for agriculture and food traceability. Each meeting had a group of about 50 individuals who came from food companies, trade associations, local, state, and federal governments, 3rd-party traceability solution providers, not-for-profit corporations, consultants, and consumer groups. They discussed and deliberated the objectives of traceability and the means to develop product tracing in the food system. A total of 70 people participated in the 3 summits. These individuals were invited to participate in a small workgroup responsible for considering the details related to product tracing and presenting draft concepts to the larger group on November 1, 2011, in Chicago. During this meeting, the larger assembly further refined the concepts and came to an agreement on the basic principles and overall design of the desired approach to traceability.

Proceedings of the November 2011 Traceability Research Summit: this report is the third in a series on Traceability Summits sponsored by IFT beginning in July 2011.

Fifty thought leaders in the area of food traceability met for a 3rd time to discuss methodologies and finalize the principles that define their vision for traceability. Participants in the summit included representatives from industry, trade associations, government, academia, consumer groups, and more. One main focus of this summit included a discussion on the current regulations and voluntary initiatives in place regarding traceability. Overall, it was recognized that the recommendations from this summit group would be more specific and stringent in comparison to these current regulations and initiatives. The participants sought to be leaders in the traceability arena, with their recommendations leading the industry to optimal traceability systems and methods. Participants agreed on many principles for their vision of traceability, emphasizing the importance of access to traceability data. They discussed having industry be asked for "basic" tracing data prior to the need for a large-scale investigation, having standards for sharing data, and having the data in electronic form. Participants foresaw the importance of capturing data electronically in the future, although they recognized that many firms do not currently do this. The group also saw a need for a transition period to implement changes, and to provide implementation training and resource aid to small businesses. Summit participants discussed specific definitions and examples for key data elements and critical tracking events that could be used by industry to capture tracing data at specific points within the supply chain. Overall, participants refined the goals of the summit group and started to identify specific ways to achieve those goals.

Proceedings of the July 2011 Traceability Research Summit.

At a discussion-based forum of 50 leaders in the area of food product tracing, participants recognized the need for the development of a common vision for a simple, low cost and implementable traceability approach. A key theme that emerged during the day's discussions revolved around not reinventing the wheel: there are many efforts underway, including numerous pilots, and these efforts should be collaborative. The group sought more information on current initiatives and felt that learning from the experiences of others could help form a realistic vision for the future. Although any forthcoming actions from the US FDA are unknown, industry fully expects that improvements in product tracing will be necessary, and expects that industry itself (through the "demand" side) will enact requirements that may surpass regulatory mandates. A chief concern is uniform adoption, which will require outreach to and support from the global community as well as small firms that may lack the resources and education to keep up. Ultimately, an approach that is global, economical, scalable, and inclusive of firms of all sizes who handles all types of food products, will have the greatest likelihood of success. While the ability to rapidly link products across the supply chain serves as an ideal goal, there are still substantial concerns to be addressed, particularly regarding confidentiality of data, and who will have access to what information under what circumstances, which was woven into virtually every discussion topic. Who will spearhead the development of the visions is a question, but there was general agreement that a joint partnership which includes all stakeholders is a necessity.

Proceedings of the August 2011 Traceability Research Summit.

IFT's Traceability Improvement Initiative aims to advance work in the area of food product tracing through several means including hosted events where thought leaders exchange knowledge and ideas. In August 2011, the Initiative, in collaboration with GS1 US, convened a group of 50 product tracing stakeholders, as a follow-on to a successful event the month prior. Representatives conducting pilots or implementation studies in produce, seafood, dairy, and other industries discussed the objectives, challenges and learnings. Some of the learnings from on-going initiatives included the sense that better information management provides a return of investment; data often exist but may not necessarily be appropriately linked through the supply chain; and enhanced product tracing enables better accountability and quality control. Challenges identified in enabling traceability throughout the supply chain were the distribution complexity; the need for training, communication, and collaboration; improving the reliability, quality and security of data captured, stored and shared as well as the importance of standards in data and interoperability of technology. Several approaches to overcoming these challenges were discussed. The first approach incrementally improves upon the current "one up/one down" system by requiring electronic records and tracking internal as well as external critical tracking events. The benefits of this approach are its similarity to existing regulatory requirements and low cost of implementation; resulting in a higher probability of adoption. The major disadvantage to this process is the longer response time required during a trace (back or forward). The second approach is similar to a "pedigree" approach where historical information about the food travels with it through the value chain. A major advantage of this approach is the quickest response time during a trace. Some of the disadvantages of this approach are potential for misuse of data, the volume of data required to be maintained at value chain end points, and data privacy concerns. The third approach requires individual nodes within the value chain to maintain electronic records for its own data and make them available for querying during a traceback for outbreak investigation. The major advantage of this approach is the protection of confidential information and the potential for quicker access during a trace. However, the primary disadvantage of this approach is the need for greater computational power and a more complex mechanism to linking the value chain through the data. As next steps, a subgroup will work on clarifying the approach to meeting the goals of traceability, better defining critical tracking events, and articulating the strategy and return on investment from a regulatory and industry perspective. This will result in improved alignment of on-going traceability pilots and initiatives as well as a more actionable guidance document for public review.