Looking for example Food Fraud Vulnerability Assessment
Salut,
je fais l’évaluation de la vulnérabilité des matières premières à la fraude alimentaire et j’utilise ce guide. Je ne comprends pas cette partie
si quelqu'un peut m'aider, s'il vous plaît.
Attached Files
Salut,
je fais l’évaluation de la vulnérabilité des matières premières à la fraude alimentaire et j’utilise ce guide. Je ne comprends pas cette partie
si quelqu'un peut m'aider, s'il vous plaît.
Hi belkayass,
Sorry but English is the standard Forum language.
Can you clarify what you do not understand ?
Is yr extract from the IFS Food Fraud Guide ?
hi,sorry for replying to this topic with franch
i am using IFS Product Fraud Guideline and for my evaluation of the vulnerability of raw materials to fraud I encountered problems with the two criters below in attachement
thanks
hello
i am searching for some exemple about Undertaking the Product Fraud Vulnerability Assessment
best regards
Thank you
but i am searching according to the method of the IFS guide
Hi Belkayass,
I can just about read some basic French, but can't speak/write anything much beyond a basic "je m'appelle pHruit" so will have to respond in English I'm afraid!
The two images you attached are from the section that provides guidance on areas that can be considered when determining how likely or unlikely fraud might be for a given ingredient.
For the first image:
Cost & complexity of fraudulent process
The simpler it is to adulterate/substitute/dilute a product, the more likely it is to occur - for example, it is very easy to mix lower grades of Olive Oil into Extra Virgin product, or liquid sugar into honey, and these are some of the more frequently encountered types of adulteration.
Staff involvement
There are potentially two ways to interpret this, in my opinion.
1) A large site with lots of people makes it very difficult to hide nefarious activity, and fraud is therefore less likely. Conversely, one could also argue that any given individual on such a large site is less likely to have detailed knowledge of the whole process / everyone else's activities, so it could actually be easier to commit some types of fraud.
2) A small site with very few people could provide more opportunity to conceal fraudulent activity, but in my experience smaller sites necessarily tend to have staff with a much broader knowledge of the whole operation, so one could argue that it's harder to commit fraud. Having said that, it is much easier in terms of human resources management to properly get to know the character of your staff on a small site.
You'll have to make your own decision on this - I'd just document why you've made whatever decision you choose, so you can defend it to the auditor if needed.
The second image is the fairly standard commercial risk factors:
Price
Higher price = more risk, as there is more to be gained from selling fewer units, so potentially more profit/less exposure for the fraudster.
E.g. If someone sells fake bottles of expensive whisky that cost them €2 and fetch €100 each, it can be far more profitable than selling fake chocolate bars that cost €0.25 and sell for €0.75.
Just look at fake clothes as an example - the items people fake tend to be Gucci, Hermes etc.
Availability of product
If it's hard to get hold of then it's easier to sell a fake version - and probably more profitable too, since availability and price are often linked - and buyers may also be less diligent because a lack of availability can put them under pressure.
For example, if Spain and Italy both have a terrible lemon crop then it's more likely that you'll find adulterated lemon juice being offered for sale.
Availability of adulterant
The easier it is to find a substance / substances that can be used to adulterate a product, the higher the potential risk that someone is doing it.
E.g. sugar syrup is cheap and plentiful, so mixing some of this in with honey, juice etc is fairly easy.
Price fluctuation
This is one of the factors that I consider most significant for the part of our own food fraud assessment that looks after the commodity trading aspects of the business - sizeable price changes in either direction can create a significant incentive to adulterate:
Huge increase in price makes it potentially very profitable to sell fraudulent product (same as the "price" category discussed above), but a significant decrease in price can also create an incentive. If a supplier has an ingredient that was purchased at a cost of say €10/kg and the market then falls to €7.50/kg, the supplier can either:
1)Hold it until the market moves upward, assuming that the product has sufficient shelf life, but this is still a gamble and also ties up working funds tied, so not particularly attractive;
2) Sell at a loss. No business really wants to do this;
3) Mix with a cheaper ingredient, making an adulterated product with an overall cost of say €5/kg, then sell at €7/kg so it looks attractive as it undercuts the market price, but still makes a profit of €2/kg.
THANK'S for the answers