News

In our Food Safety Insights column in Food Safety Magazine’s Dec/Jan issue, we detailed what processors told us about their project plans for 2020. We received responses from more than 200 processors from around the world across all types of food products.

We are back this month in Food Safety Magazine’s Feb/Mar issue more details about what processor are focused on.

What do processors consider to be their most important initiatives for 2020?

Leafy Greens?  Environmental Monitoring?  Supply Chain?  Employee Training?  Food Fraud?

Find out in Food Safety Magazine here    Food Safety Priorities, Part II

There have been many changes to food processing since the signing of FSMA in 2011. Looking forward to a new year and a new decade, we wanted to see how processors are managing their new responsibilities  and what they see as their priorities for the next few years.

So, to find out, and as part of our Food Safety Insights program with Food Safety Magazine, we surveyed and/or interviewed more than 200 food processors from around the world. In order to avoid guiding the responses, we asked open-ended questions where one could offer any answer in any category of food safety or operations related to food processing. The first question, for example, was, “What would you say are your top priorities for food safety for 2020?”

It was also clear from the responses that issues related to microbiology, environmental monitoring, and pathogen control will continue to occupy an area of primary focus for many processors as roughly one in five mentioned some aspect of microbiology and control as a key area for investment in 2020. Some mentioned specific targets, such as Listeria and, specifically control of L. monocytogenes. Several processors in the meat and protein category also mentioned looking to improve their Salmonella and Campylobacter control programs, most likely in anticipation of impending regulatory and enforcement initiatives.

Training will also be a key area of focus (confirming what we have seen in previous studies) with about one in six citing training as a top priority. Many respondents indicated an intent to develop and incorporate new and improved training methods into their training programs. Some mentioned making better use of technology, including using more self-guided training programs that people can more easily access or use for refresher training as needed.

The full article can be found in the December/January issue for Food Safety Magazine – Food Safety Priorities – Part I

Note: In the data shown in Figure 3 from the article, “Regulatory Compliance” was cited second most after Microbiology.  Regulatory Compliance encompasses many issues and activities, including most of the other activities cited in the Figure.  From our interviews, however it was clear that Microbiology and Training were the two top distinct areas of focus.   

Presented in 2019 at the 14th Annual PDA Global Conference on Pharmaceutical Microbiology, Bethesda MD

PDA Bethesda 2019

Strategic Consulting, Inc. was pleased to have had a poster presentation at the 14^th Annual PDA Conference on Pharmaceutical Microbiology.  The poster presented the results of our work in studying and measuring the volume and market value of worldwide microbiological testing in the pharmaceutical sector.

Strategic Consulting, Inc. collected primary data on the number and types of tests conducted worldwide, using interviews and electronic surveys with key knowledgeable individuals at more than 300 pharmaceutical facilities in North America, Europe, Latin America and Asia (incl. India and China).  The market at the end of 2018 was validated as consisting of a worldwide test volume of 415 million tests and a market value for test materials of $1.64 billion.

It is important to recognize that Strategic Consulting defines the worldwide pharma sector as including approximately 5,400 plants with 25 or more employees. Our research project focused only on these facilities and did not attempt to collect data from smaller facilities.  These facilities were found to conduct an average of approx. 77,000 tests per year, with a very wide range in test volumes with smaller facilities that may collect “thousands” of tests per year to the largest pharma plants that collect more than 1 million tests per year.

Due to the crucial nature of this testing, and the steady growth of the pharmaceutical manufacturing sector, the growth of this market has continued steadily since we first started tracking this market in 1993.  The worldwide Pharma Sector has shown steady growth in test volume from 105 million tests in 1993, 206 million tests in 2003, 348 million tests in 2014 to our estimated volume of 415 million tests in 2018.  This growth is expected to continue at a slightly faster growth rate and reach 526 million tests in 2023.

The market value of Industrial Microbiology testing in the Pharma Sector has gained steadily from US$ 365 million in 1993, US$ 995 million in 2008, and now reaching over US$1.640 billion in 2018.  With a slightly decreasing rate of market value growth expected, due to developing competition that will add to pricing pressure, the Pharma Sector is projected to reach an estimated US $2.1 billion in market value by 2023.

What are Processors doing to combat Food Fraud?

Economically Motivated Adulteration (EMA) – otherwise known as Food Fraud – can be committed in many ways, including mislabeling, product substitutions, or product adulteration. There are no shortages of reports of this type of fraud with stories of sugar being added to honey, lower quality vegetable oil being misrepresented as extra virgin olive oil or horse meat being sold as beef being common in the popular press.

It may be tempting to think that because our food supply chain is so large and complex that some of these incidents occur simply through errors. If this were the case, we would often find a more expensive ingredient substituted for a lower quality one – and yet this is rarely found to happen.

In our article in the Oct/Nov issue of Food Safety Magazine, we asked processors what they were doing to combat food fraud.

As you can see in the full article, there were varying levels of concern about food fraud throughout different processor types and processors in the US and Canada seemed to be less concerned (or perhaps had better control) than those suppliers and processors outside of the US/Canada.

The processor vertical that reported a different response was Spices and Ingredients where we saw a much higher level of concern than in other food areas. It has been known that this market has had a history with EMA with many cases of substitutions and alterations. And “spices” are not a food type but a broad category with a far larger and more global supply chain than what most other processors deal with. This complexity provides many more “touch points” that are very difficult to track providing ample opportunities for someone tamper with a product.

When we asked about the testing that processors are doing, most reported that they are not testing or doing limited testing with the most common control being to deal only with known and trusted suppliers and make sure that they have Certificates of Analysis (CoA) from each of those suppliers.

Consistent to what we heard from Spices and Ingredient processors about risk, these processors are doing far more testing than other verticals and using more varied types of analytical tests.

Food fraud is not new, and it is not going to be eliminated any time soon. As supply chains get longer, more global and more complex there will be ever more opportunities for food fraud to occur and food companies will have to remain vigilant.

Find out more in the full article – Economically Motivated Adulteration: What Are Processors Doing to Combat Food Fraud? http://bit.ly/34raGxm