Meat traceability - It is not the same as tracing eggs in a carton! Solution Providers required [Part 1]
Theme Articles: Part 1(Innovation Challenge and Background), Part 2 (development plan), Part 3 (draft funding application), and Part 4 (recent traceability market study).
There are numerous levels and components required for an effective red meat supply chain traceability system.
A full paddock to plate concept is not always required of a traceability system for that traceability system to be fit for the intended purpose of a specific traceability question/value add. This is one reason why different supply chains and auditors are already successfully leveraging different approaches to red meat traceability currently on offer.
In light of that, this call-out is specifically focused on the further and ongoing development of cost-effective and indisputable ability for a solution(s) to link a retail cut back to a primal once in the hands of a consumer, or at the point of purchase (with an assumption that the primal can be traced back to an Australian processing establishment and ideally a carcase). The latter can be provided by existing solution providers and can be leveraged by new entrants (providers) to this development area.
Many providers in the red meat traceability area have solutions that come close and may provide great existing platforms for themselves, or others, to build upon. AMPC would like to support these existing providers to extend their offerings. AMPC is also interested in hearing from new providers interested in closing this last piece of the puzzle that may then be sold as a value add to existing traceability providers or sold independently under their own traceability offering solution.
Retail meat cuts are not eggs in a carton - The majority, if not all, of the traceability solutions presented to AMPC recently make an assumption that the Australian sourced retail cut, purchased by an international consumer, leaves Australia in its shelf presented - purchase pack form. This is not the case in the majority of examples of Australian cuts being purchased internationally. A 'steak to primal' traceability component needs to accommodate this when designing a solution.
AMPC Innovation challenge
Typically, primals (e.g. 5+ kg in weight) leave Australian meat establishments and exported in vacuum bags. Once in an international location a third party further slices and repacks the primal into retail-ready portions (as depicted below). It is at this point that some traceability systems do not provide a level of reliable or cost-effective continuous plate to paddock traceability, that AMPC would like to see more solutions providers develop solutions for.
Image source: https://www.seriouseats.com/2015/05/knife-skills-how-to-cut-a-whole-strip-into-steaks-beef.html
'Steak to Primal' Traceability possible solutions - AMPC is interested in hearing about both cost-effective software and hardware solutions. Software solutions may be a value add to existing software trusted ledger systems whereby a 'primal ledger code is agreed within the ledger system to be cut into 10 retail-ready ledger codes'. Hardware solutions could include printing the primal ledger QR code on the fat layer or meat component of the primal before it is put inside the vacuum bag in Australia. These are just two of many possible different approaches willing to be considered by AMPC.
AMPC would like providers to also consider how consumers at international retail could interact with the proposed traceability system, at the point of purchase. Also, consider how international restaurants and their patrons could leverage this last piece of the traceability puzzle when they are thinking of possible solutions.
If you are a solution provider or developer and would like to be financially supported by the Australian Meat Processor Corporation (AMPC) to demonstrate and evolve your offering in 'steak to primal' traceability and demonstrate it in meat processing environments please reach out to myself on LinkedIn or one of my AMPC colleagues, Stuart Shaw and Matt O'Bryan (or Ian Jenson @ MLA).
About AMPC
AMPC is an industry body that facilitates industry and researchers/providers in undertaking/adopting innovation and R&D for the Australian red meat processing sector. We do this by having access to an industry levy (aka an industry tax) and matching Aust. Fed. Govt. R&D funds (50% from the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment - The Hon. David Littleproud MP & Andrew Metcalfe AO). We invest in others undertaking R&D. Note we do not undertake any of the R&D ourselves.
- Think of AMPC as innovation investment managers (without taking equity).
Possible providers (others welcome):
Oritain (Grant Cochrane), BeefLedger (Warwick Powell), AgLive (Paul Ryan), KPMG (Ben van Delden), PricewaterhouseCoopers (Tom Seymour), IBM Food Trust (Anita Gardeva), Hitachi (Derrick Thompson), BeefChain (Tyler Lindholm), DMRI (Niels Madsen), AgResearch (Cameron Craigie), Lumachain (Jamila Gordon), FoodsConnected (Tom Redden)), escaVox (Luke Wood), Bosch (Peter Rindt), SoftBank (Harold Walsh), Georgia Tech Research Institute (Doug Britton), CSIRO (Leif Lundin), University of Sydney (Sandra Margon), Nuctech (Wang Zheng), SourceTrace (Venkat Maroju), SGS Australia (Alex Rodriguez), Cryptoloc (Jamie Wilson), Result Group / EVRYTHNG (Michael Dossor / Niall Murphy), Ternes Scientific (Julian Hill), Trust Codes (Sam Hardy), FreshChain Systems (Greg Calvert), Source Certain International (Nathan Dubrich), Matthews Australia (Mark Dingley), Trust Alliance NZ / TrackBack (Semanie Cato), Wessex Technology (Alan Bell), Mackas Australian Black Angus Beef (Robert Mackenzie), Sealed Air / Cryovac (Tiffani Burt), Ulma (Mikel Kortabitarte), Visy (Anthony Pratt), Marel (David Bertelsen), Consumer Physics (Assaf Carmi)
AMPC: Stuart Shaw & Matt O'Bryan
AMPC Executive & Board: Chris Taylor, John Berry, Melissa Fletcher, Dean Goode, James Hardwick (c/o Luke Hardwick), Leanne Heywood, Noel Kelson, Tom Maguire, Bruce Rathie & Brad Teys
AMIC: Patrick Hutchison, Terry Nolan, Jamie Ralph (c/o James Ralph) & Claire House
Australia's and CSIRO's Lead Scientists: Cathey Foley & Larry Marshall
General Manager @ Vetident | Meat Processing, RFID Animal Identification, IOT, Automation
1 年RFID tags embedded to the vacuum packs. You may also think about using RFID tags with temperature sensors for better tracking, but these may not be as affordable as you'd like. On the other hand, low-cost RFID tags that are embedded are easy to scan, and the information stays with the product. it's important to think about what your market really wants. Do they truly want to trace each item back to the animal? We face difficulties, especially when explaining the traceability system to customers. This challenge is most evident when we try to show them the value of the system. Whether they choose to invest in the setup depends on whether they see enough value in doing so. On another note, another viable solution might involve matrix-coded packing materials. There could be some improvements on the vacuum packing machines to make the matrix codes more readable. They're easy to scan with a regular phone camera, and no extra app is needed. An online web app can handle everything. Just to mention, our current barcoded tracking system and RFID solutions in meat processing and packing plants are effective, tracing products back without losing any information. Choose what aligns with your market's preferences and priorities.?
Advisor MatV?rden I Digital Marketing Specialist I Food Industry Developer I CEO J?rvs? Gr?na AB
4 年Viktor Varan you should hook up with this guy ??
MD of Wessex Technology - Anti-Counterfeit and security protection for your documents and products
4 年Hi Sean I would like to present Countermark, Countermark is a better digital identifier than a #QR code, here are some of the reasons.. 1) Countermark is human and machine readable - this means that if the contrast ratio is not sufficient for a machine read, or some of the code is missing then the Countermark can be read by eye. 2) Following on from 1) The top line of Countermark is searchable, so can be included on invoices and delivery manifests, this allows audits to be undertaken long after the meat has been sold or consumed. 3) In tests using Lasers Countermark took about 1/6 of the time of a QR code to produce a readable code (admittedly on steel plates) 4) Countermark is a closed system with built in mechanisms to defeat Counterfeiting 5) QR Codes are an open system that can be easily spoofed. 6) We have an API that 3rd parties can use for printing and reading 7) All Countermark transactions can be secured on Ethereum Blockchain The first use of Countermark is to replace QR codes on #ISO9001 #certificates in use in China. Can we arrange a call to talk about how we can help? Alan www.countermark.com
Technologist | Innovator | Venture Builder
4 年Great article Sean Starling. Besides the technology challenges that you have highlighted above, there is an acute lack of validated data standardisation and product taxonomy to connect the various value chain participants. For scale solutions one must look beyond the vertically integrated value chains and consider incentive driven collaboration in a distributed ecosystem. #KPMGOrigins