1 / 28

„The difficulties in traceability systems implementation in the Polish fish industry”

„The difficulties in traceability systems implementation in the Polish fish industry”. Olga Szulecka „ Peter Workshop ” "Consolidating and Exploiting EU Research on Food and Feed T raceability„ CSL, York, UK 11-13 th of October 2006. Parts of presentation.

michaela
Download Presentation

„The difficulties in traceability systems implementation in the Polish fish industry”

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. „The difficulties in traceability systems implementation in the Polish fish industry” Olga Szulecka „Peter Workshop” "Consolidating and Exploiting EU Research on Food and Feed Traceability„ CSL, York, UK 11-13th of October 2006

  2. Parts of presentation • Presentation of the Polish fish processing industry • Results from traceability survey in the Polish fish processing industry • Conclusions from the survey • Summary

  3. The Polish fish processing plants • 210 processing plans are approved to sell their products on the EU-market, • 53 processing plans are approved to sell their products only on the domestic market, • about 40 processing plants are still beingadjusted to the EU food and hygiene legislation,

  4. Production of the Polish fish processors • Total production in 2005: • 319200 tons, • 3,150 millions zł, SFI - assessment data

  5. Description of the survey • Aim: The evaluation of traceability systems implementation in the Polish fish industry. • Scope and methodology: The prepared questionnaire with 19 questions was sent by e-mail or fax to the Polish processing plants. 24 processing plants (small-6, medium-15 and big-3) fulfilled the questionnaires and sentthem back to Sea Fisheries Institute in Gdynia.

  6. Traceability implementation in the Polish fish processing industry • March 2004 – 22 processing plants were questioned – implementation of traceability – 95,24%, • September 2006 – 24 processing plants were questioned – implementation of traceability – 100%.

  7. Fish processing - March 2004 Source: Data from author’s survey

  8. Fish processing - Sep. 2006 Source: Data from author’s survey

  9. Fish processing - Sep. 2006 Source: Data from author’s survey

  10. Fish processing - Sep. 2006 Source: Data from author’s survey

  11. Fish processing - Sep. 2006 Source: Data from author’s survey

  12. Traceability - legislation requirements • Food and feed – Reg. No 178/2002 – 1.01. 2006. • GMO – Reg. No 1830/2003 - 1.2004, • Labelling of allergens – Dir. No – 2000/13/EC - 25.11.2005 • Food contact materials – Reg. No 1935/2004 – 27.10. 2006.

  13. Fish processing - Sep. 2006 Source: Data from author’s survey

  14. Fish processing - Sep. 2006 Source: Data from author’s survey

  15. Fish processing - Sep. 2006 Source: Data from author’s survey

  16. Fish processing - Sep. 2006 Source: Data from author’s survey

  17. Fish processing - Sep. 2006 Source: Data from author’s survey

  18. Traceability – requirements from art. 18 of Regulation No 178/2002 Food and feed business operators shall be able to identify any person from whom they have been supplied with a food, a feed, (…) and to identify the other businesses to which their products have been supplied.

  19. Fish traceability regulations Article 4 of Regulation No 104/2000 1. (…) the fish products (mentioned in art. 1 a,b,c) may not be offered for retail sale to the final consumer, irrespective of the marketing method, unless appropriate marking or labelling indicates: (a) the commercial designation of the species; (b) the production method (caught at sea or in inland waters or farmed); (c) the catch area. Article 8 of Regulation No 2065/2001 The information required concerning the commercial designation, the production method and the catch area shall be available at each stage of marketing of the species concerned. This information together with the scientific name of the species concerned shall be provided by means of the labelling or packaging of the product, or by means of a commercial document accompanying the goods, including the invoice.

  20. Fish traceability regulations • Fish products: • Live fish, • Fish, fresh or chilled, excluding fish fillets and other fish meat (…) • Fish, frozen excluding fish fillets and other fish meat (…) • Fish fillets and other fish meat (whether or not minced), fresh chilled or frozen • Fish, dried, salted or in brine; smoked fish (…); flours, meals and pellets of fish, fit for human consumption • Crustaceans, whether in shell or not, live, fresh, chilled, frozen, dried, salted or in brine; (…) • Molluscs, whether in shell or not, live, fresh, chilled, frozen, dried, salted or in brine; (…)

  21. Main difficulties in traceability systems implementation • Financial problems e.g. • lack of money for buying necessary IT equipment, • old fishing vessels - too expensive modernisation, • lack of networks in the old processing plants, • Technological problems e.g. • heavy processing environment for wireless networks, • fish processing plants unprepared for next modernisation,

  22. Main difficulties in traceability systems implementation • Organizational problems e.g. • shortage of data transmission between links in fish chains, • too many unnecessary documents – too less important information, • Inspectional problems e.g. • fish supply chain controlled by 5 different inspections, • insufficient transfer of information between the inspections, • Others e.g. • lack of sufficient communication in fish supply chain, • lack ofconviction of the traceability essence and benefits, • not enough bibliography and trainings about traceability in fishing industry.

  23. Difficulties with GS 1 (EAN) standard adoption • lack of GS1 (EAN) registration numbers implementation in fishermen and fish farmers and some part of processors (GLN, GTIN, SSCC), • very expensive IT equipment (for the Polish fishermen, fish farmers and fish processors), • lack of the Polish cheap software for traceability/ GS1 (EAN) standards implementation, (weighing machines, scanners, printers), • low interest of using bar codes in Poland,

  24. Difficulties with GS 1 (EAN) standard adoption • lack of necessary experience of the Polish IT companies at traceability systems implementation in fish industry, • anxiety of operators over the another system implementation, • necessary another modernisation of processing plant, • too long time of implementation.

  25. Conclusions from the survey • The Polish fish processing plants implemented the traceability systems, • The type of implemented system depends on needs and financial opportunities, • Due to those reasons the most of processing plans use only „paper data bases” which are not sufficient for fast reaction for alert and product recall, • Also not all processing plants are prepared for food packaging materials traceability.

  26. New requirement Polish Food and Nutrition Safety Act of the 25 August 2006, art.100. 1.7.: Who does not identify the food suppliers and recipients according to the requirements enclosed in Regulation No 178/2002 art. 18. will be punish by a fine.

  27. Summary Solutions for the future • Presentations of the benefits of traceability systems implementation, • Money from the accession funds (FIFG, EFF), • Training courses for fishermen and processors leading by the EU and Polish experts, • Cooperation with the EU IT- companies, • Solutions adopted in the other EU-countries.

  28. Thank you for your attention

More Related