Before long, nearly everyone in the food supply chain should have tools to trace products back to the point of origin. It's the law, and it's good for business.
Peter Bradley is an award-winning career journalist with more than three decades of experience in both newspapers and national business magazines. His credentials include seven years as the transportation and supply chain editor at Purchasing Magazine and six years as the chief editor of Logistics Management.
Over the summer, cantaloupes tainted by two strains of salmonella entered the food supply chain, killing at least three people and sickening more than 200 others before the scare was over.
The first illness was reported in early July, but it wasn't until late August that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced a recall of the cantaloupes, which were grown by Owensville, Ind.-based Chamberlain Farms. Several weeks later, watermelons from the same farm were added to the recall.
That may have been the most serious food recall of the year, but it was hardly the only one. The FDA website has a long list of food recalls, most often for salmonella contamination.
The recalls, implemented by grocers, food manufacturers, food-service distributors, and others in the food chain, are the most public indicator of just how serious participants have become about the safety of their products. Spurred in part by outbreaks of foodborne disease, the industry is focusing greater attention than ever on food safety.
Public health is the chief concern, followed by potential liability and brand protection issues. Added to that are long-delayed rules that will implement the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA), signed into law in early 2011. The law requires all companies in food supply chains to be able to trace foods back to the point of origin. It is unclear when the rules, which are being crafted with significant industry input, will be published, but industry experts expect it will be in the not-too-distant future.
The term that's been coined for the effort is "farm-to-fork traceability." And major grocers and food-service distributors, to ensure their own ability to comply with the regulations, will likely insist their suppliers take part.
They're liable to get a mixed response to those requests. Big growers have already begun complying with the FSMA, says Bruce Stubbs, director of industry marketing for Intermec, which provides printers, mobile computers, and other tracing technologies to the food industry. But that's not always the case with their smaller brethren, he says.
"Some of the smaller growers are starting to investigate ways to become compliant and use technology [to] do that," Stubbs says. "But others are pushing back at what they look at as [a significant] expense."
That resistance could cost them business in the long run, Stubbs warns. "What retailers are telling me is that once the mandate is out, they will start pushing back on smaller growers, telling them that if they don't become compliant, they are not going to do business with them," he says.
THE FDA'S TO-DO LIST
What will the FDA require? Dan Vaché, vice president of supply chain management for the United Fresh Produce Association, which is part of a group developing standards and processes for the produce industry, says the FDA will require the use of electronic records, development of a common language that everyone can use, and the ability to quickly trace a product, usually within 24 to 48 hours of a request for that information.
The agency will also want to know who handled the product and how it was moved through the supply chain, according to Vaché.
In some ways, the industry is well ahead of regulators. GS1 US, a nonprofit organization that is working across the industry to develop bar-code standards for identifying and tracking products, is collaborating with every major food sector to develop approaches for tracking food through the entire supply chain.
Michelle Southall, an implementation manager for GS1 US, says the organization's standards will meet the requirement to know what happened to a food shipment—"where it was harvested, when it was shipped, where it was put away, when it was received."
But achieving end-to-end visibility and traceability is complex given the number of players in food supply chains and the number of interactions. Kevin Payne, senior director of marketing for Intelleflex, cites a real-life example of 40 small blackberry farms shipping to a single packinghouse that then ships fruit to three DCs.
"Think about all the possible combinations. How do you deal with all that? Then multiply that by the number of products and the number of distributors, and the complexity becomes mind-boggling," Payne says. Intelleflex offers battery-assisted passive RFID tags and on-demand data visibility solutions for tracking and monitoring the temperature of produce, dairy items, meats, and frozen and packaged foods.
Distribution centers are right in the middle of it all. Mike Lee, president and CEO of Airclic, a company that offers cloud-based software for tracking goods moving in food-service distributors' private fleets, says one of the challenges facing his food-service customers is their position as intermediary between producers and end customers.
"Taking the whole idea of farm-to-fork traceability, how are they making sure that goods are properly tracked all the way through? Having this ability [to track items] all the way to the restaurant or hospital or school is something they are taking very seriously," Lee says.
PRODUCE INDUSTRY COMING CLOSE
A prime example of the efforts to improve chainwide traceability comes from the produce industry and its Produce Traceability Initiative (PTI), an effort that pre-dates FSMA. Vaché says the initiative, which includes his organization and three others, got its formal start in 2008, but that its origins go back to the spinach crisis in 2006. That crisis, in which spinach contaminated with E. coli caused dozens of illnesses and several deaths, cost the industry between $40 million and $70 million that year.
The following year was even worse for spinach growers and processors. "People just stopped consuming spinach," Vaché says. Investigators finally determined the contaminated spinach came from a single field on a 40-acre farm in California and was processed in one facility for a number of brand owners.
The spinach recall was just one of many in that period. Vaché says the industry had about 900 recalls in 2007 and 2008. "The response proved difficult and costly," he says.
The produce industry acknowledged it had to do a better job with traceability. The problem, Vaché explains, was the amount of time needed to trace food back to its origin under the existing processes. "It took an inordinate amount of time," he says. That led to creation of the PTI, which involves growers, shippers, wholesalers, and grocers.
Vaché admits that implementation is not as far along as participants might like. According to GS1 US, the goal was to have supply chain-wide electronic traceability for every case of produce by the end of 2012. Though the industry is unlikely to meet that goal, officials say it is making progress.
Even those who may have initially resisted because of the cost of implementation are coming around, Payne says. "Things have been slow," he says, "but of late we're seeing more interest in the general concept of traceability."
UNEXPECTED BENEFITS
Those who adopt technology to comply with the regulations (or the demands of their channel partners) are discovering it has other benefits. Some food businesses, particularly smaller growers, worry about the cost of the implementation. But Vaché says that all of the participants are learning that implementing tracking systems not only meets anticipated regulations, but can also provide valuable data for managing the supply chain.
He cites as an example emerging technologies that allow fruit to be tracked back to the worker who picked and packed it. That may be very useful in a recall. But it can also be put to use, for example, in managing payroll by keeping track of just how much a worker picked and packed, he says.
Stubbs of Intermec says companies adopting technology solutions for traceability are also using the information they provide to improve efficiency and reduce costs. In a case study posted on its website, Intermec describes the experience of Lindsay, Calif.-based LoBue Citrus, which implemented an automated system with an Intermec printer to cut the time needed to trace back shipments. The orange grower also found that the system boosted its inventory accuracy to between 98 and 99 percent from the low 90s, and eliminated the need to conduct daily physical inventories.
Intermec, Stubbs says, has a product for small growers—a "solution in a box"—that includes all the software and hardware needed to provide the information he expects the final rules will require. He says "smart" Intermec printers can be loaded with software that eliminates the need for workers in the field to connect to a server, a PC, or a laptop. Workers can simply create and apply labels in the field and scan them.
"We have done that in an economical manner so even small growers can become compliant," he says.
What will compliance cost? No one knows for certain. It will require investments across the food supply chain, but many of those investments could also yield benefits in other ways.
Payne of Intelleflex says, "What we are trying to explain to growers, shippers, and packers is that if you combine traceability and temperature monitoring, you're going to reduce the amount of food wasted and you will generate more revenues. Ultimately, paying for the solution improves the top line, and you get traceability for free."
Congestion on U.S. highways is costing the trucking industry big, according to research from the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI), released today.
The group found that traffic congestion on U.S. highways added $108.8 billion in costs to the trucking industry in 2022, a record high. The information comes from ATRI’s Cost of Congestion study, which is part of the organization’s ongoing highway performance measurement research.
Total hours of congestion fell slightly compared to 2021 due to softening freight market conditions, but the cost of operating a truck increased at a much higher rate, according to the research. As a result, the overall cost of congestion increased by 15% year-over-year—a level equivalent to more than 430,000 commercial truck drivers sitting idle for one work year and an average cost of $7,588 for every registered combination truck.
The analysis also identified metropolitan delays and related impacts, showing that the top 10 most-congested states each experienced added costs of more than $8 billion. That list was led by Texas, at $9.17 billion in added costs; California, at $8.77 billion; and Florida, $8.44 billion. Rounding out the top 10 list were New York, Georgia, New Jersey, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, and Tennessee. Combined, the top 10 states account for more than half of the trucking industry’s congestion costs nationwide—52%, according to the research.
The metro areas with the highest congestion costs include New York City, $6.68 billion; Miami, $3.2 billion; and Chicago, $3.14 billion.
ATRI’s analysis also found that the trucking industry wasted more than 6.4 billion gallons of diesel fuel in 2022 due to congestion, resulting in additional fuel costs of $32.1 billion.
ATRI used a combination of data sources, including its truck GPS database and Operational Costs study benchmarks, to calculate the impacts of trucking delays on major U.S. roadways.
There’s a photo from 1971 that John Kent, professor of supply chain management at the University of Arkansas, likes to show. It’s of a shaggy-haired 18-year-old named Glenn Cowan grinning at three-time world table tennis champion Zhuang Zedong, while holding a silk tapestry Zhuang had just given him. Cowan was a member of the U.S. table tennis team who participated in the 1971 World Table Tennis Championships in Nagoya, Japan. Story has it that one morning, he overslept and missed his bus to the tournament and had to hitch a ride with the Chinese national team and met and connected with Zhuang.
Cowan and Zhuang’s interaction led to an invitation for the U.S. team to visit China. At the time, the two countries were just beginning to emerge from a 20-year period of decidedly frosty relations, strict travel bans, and trade restrictions. The highly publicized trip signaled a willingness on both sides to renew relations and launched the term “pingpong diplomacy.”
Kent, who is a senior fellow at the George H. W. Bush Foundation for U.S.-China Relations, believes the photograph is a good reminder that some 50-odd years ago, the economies of the United States and China were not as tightly interwoven as they are today. At the time, the Nixon administration was looking to form closer political and economic ties between the two countries in hopes of reducing chances of future conflict (and to weaken alliances among Communist countries).
The signals coming out of Washington and Beijing are now, of course, much different than they were in the early 1970s. Instead of advocating for better relations, political rhetoric focuses on the need for the U.S. to “decouple” from China. Both Republicans and Democrats have warned that the U.S. economy is too dependent on goods manufactured in China. They see this dependency as a threat to economic strength, American jobs, supply chain resiliency, and national security.
Supply chain professionals, however, know that extricating ourselves from our reliance on Chinese manufacturing is easier said than done. Many pundits push for a “China + 1” strategy, where companies diversify their manufacturing and sourcing options beyond China. But in reality, that “plus one” is often a Chinese company operating in a different country or a non-Chinese manufacturer that is still heavily dependent on material or subcomponents made in China.
This is the problem when supply chain decisions are made on a global scale without input from supply chain professionals. In an article in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Kent argues that, “The discussions on supply chains mainly take place between government officials who typically bring many other competing issues and agendas to the table. Corporate entities—the individuals and companies directly impacted by supply chains—tend to be under-represented in the conversation.”
Kent is a proponent of what he calls “supply chain diplomacy,” where experts from academia and industry from the U.S. and China work collaboratively to create better, more efficient global supply chains. Take, for example, the “Peace Beans” project that Kent is involved with. This project, jointly formed by Zhejiang University and the Bush China Foundation, proposes balancing supply chains by exporting soybeans from Arkansas to tofu producers in China’s Yunnan province, and, in return, importing coffee beans grown in Yunnan to coffee roasters in Arkansas. Kent believes the operation could even use the same transportation equipment.
The benefits of working collaboratively—instead of continuing to build friction in the supply chain through tariffs and adversarial relationships—are numerous, according to Kent and his colleagues. They believe it would be much better if the two major world economies worked together on issues like global inflation, climate change, and artificial intelligence.
And such relations could play a significant role in strengthening world peace, particularly in light of ongoing tensions over Taiwan. Because, as Kent writes, “The 19th-century idea that ‘When goods don’t cross borders, soldiers will’ is as true today as ever. Perhaps more so.”
Hyster-Yale Materials Handling today announced its plans to fulfill the domestic manufacturing requirements of the Build America, Buy America (BABA) Act for certain portions of its lineup of forklift trucks and container handling equipment.
That means the Greenville, North Carolina-based company now plans to expand its existing American manufacturing with a targeted set of high-capacity models, including electric options, that align with the needs of infrastructure projects subject to BABA requirements. The company’s plans include determining the optimal production location in the United States, strategically expanding sourcing agreements to meet local material requirements, and further developing electric power options for high-capacity equipment.
As a part of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the BABA Act aims to increase the use of American-made materials in federally funded infrastructure projects across the U.S., Hyster-Yale says. It was enacted as part of a broader effort to boost domestic manufacturing and economic growth, and mandates that federal dollars allocated to infrastructure – such as roads, bridges, ports and public transit systems – must prioritize materials produced in the USA, including critical items like steel, iron and various construction materials.
Hyster-Yale’s footprint in the U.S. is spread across 10 locations, including three manufacturing facilities.
“Our leadership is fully invested in meeting the needs of businesses that require BABA-compliant material handling solutions,” Tony Salgado, Hyster-Yale’s chief operating officer, said in a release. “We are working to partner with our key domestic suppliers, as well as identifying how best to leverage our own American manufacturing footprint to deliver a competitive solution for our customers and stakeholders. But beyond mere compliance, and in line with the many areas of our business where we are evolving to better support our customers, our commitment remains steadfast. We are dedicated to delivering industry-leading standards in design, durability and performance — qualities that have become synonymous with our brands worldwide and that our customers have come to rely on and expect.”
In a separate move, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also gave its approval for the state to advance its Heavy-Duty Omnibus Rule, which is crafted to significantly reduce smog-forming nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from new heavy-duty, diesel-powered trucks.
Both rules are intended to deliver health benefits to California citizens affected by vehicle pollution, according to the environmental group Earthjustice. If the state gets federal approval for the final steps to become law, the rules mean that cars on the road in California will largely be zero-emissions a generation from now in the 2050s, accounting for the average vehicle lifespan of vehicles with internal combustion engine (ICE) power sold before that 2035 date.
“This might read like checking a bureaucratic box, but EPA’s approval is a critical step forward in protecting our lungs from pollution and our wallets from the expenses of combustion fuels,” Paul Cort, director of Earthjustice’s Right To Zero campaign, said in a release. “The gradual shift in car sales to zero-emissions models will cut smog and household costs while growing California’s clean energy workforce. Cutting truck pollution will help clear our skies of smog. EPA should now approve the remaining authorization requests from California to allow the state to clean its air and protect its residents.”
However, the truck drivers' industry group Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) pushed back against the federal decision allowing the Omnibus Low-NOx rule to advance. "The Omnibus Low-NOx waiver for California calls into question the policymaking process under the Biden administration's EPA. Purposefully injecting uncertainty into a $588 billion American industry is bad for our economy and makes no meaningful progress towards purported environmental goals," (OOIDA) President Todd Spencer said in a release. "EPA's credibility outside of radical environmental circles would have been better served by working with regulated industries rather than ramming through last-minute special interest favors. We look forward to working with the Trump administration's EPA in good faith towards achievable environmental outcomes.”
Editor's note:This article was revised on December 18 to add reaction from OOIDA.
A Canadian startup that provides AI-powered logistics solutions has gained $5.5 million in seed funding to support its concept of creating a digital platform for global trade, according to Toronto-based Starboard.
The round was led by Eclipse, with participation from previous backers Garuda Ventures and Everywhere Ventures. The firm says it will use its new backing to expand its engineering team in Toronto and accelerate its AI-driven product development to simplify supply chain complexities.
According to Starboard, the logistics industry is under immense pressure to adapt to the growing complexity of global trade, which has hit recent hurdles such as the strike at U.S. east and gulf coast ports. That situation calls for innovative solutions to streamline operations and reduce costs for operators.
As a potential solution, Starboard offers its flagship product, which it defines as an AI-based transportation management system (TMS) and rate management system that helps mid-sized freight forwarders operate more efficiently and win more business. More broadly, Starboard says it is building the virtual infrastructure for global trade, allowing freight companies to leverage AI and machine learning to optimize operations such as processing shipments in real time, reconciling invoices, and following up on payments.
"This investment is a pivotal step in our mission to unlock the power of AI for our customers," said Sumeet Trehan, Co-Founder and CEO of Starboard. "Global trade has long been plagued by inefficiencies that drive up costs and reduce competitiveness. Our platform is designed to empower SMB freight forwarders—the backbone of more than $20 trillion in global trade and $1 trillion in logistics spend—with the tools they need to thrive in this complex ecosystem."