Jan 15, 2020
Over the years, food adulteration has been a pain for the industry as well as the FSSAI; but it doesn’t end there as there are also misleading claims on labels, untrue brand narratives, unlawful food processing (unapproved premises / unauthorised techniques), fudged food certification, unchecked food hoarding and wastage.
Wilful dishonesty in food production or supply that may be detrimental to consumers or overall public interest isn’t just food fraud…it’s a crime! Ironically, our recollection of food scams and human suffering, including death that goes with them, is very short lived; as the memory dies, so does the culpability of the perpetrators.
Food crime erodes consumer trust and confidence in the system, the sector, and the nation at large. It eventually leads to loss of wealth for the business, the industry and the exchequer, and inevitably, to loss of jobs and reputation as well. If we agree that this is too heavy a price to pay, we must take a united stance to fight food crime.
The key to averting or diminishing food crime, as with any other crime, is to mitigate the means, the motivation, or the opportunity to commit it. Basically, make it unthinkable or unattractive for Food Business Operators (FBOs) to cheat, at any stage in its supply chain. Difficult? Yes. But worth it.
All-inclusive, there are two factors that override the moral compass of the FBO and drive him or her to food crime—the need for business survival (reducing business margins from intense competition), and the greed for increasing profitability.
When legit FBOs face unfair competition from operators who use fraud to increase their margins, they’re forced to either quit or otherwise “play the game”. If they choose the latter, they inevitably transition from mere negligence in food safety to outright dishonesty.
Changing expiry dates to cut impending losses from products expiring shortly, is an example. Getting away with fraud like this emboldens operators to indulge in further unfair practices, until a point that they simply do not know where to draw the line anymore. Sad, considering the unofficial oath of an FBO is to never feed his customer something he wouldn’t eat himself.
So the first level of responsibility lies with the individual FBO himself; the next level with other FBOs within his supply chain; and the final level (when the first two fail), with food safety and law enforcement agencies administered by the government.
Counter fraud involves measuring the market impact of each food fraud and its financial benefit to its perpetrators. Based on this, resources of the food safety authorities and law enforcement agencies must be proportionately allocated, and punishment if any, proportionately assigned. Mined data must be used for future monitoring of FBOs.
The 110th report (2018) on the functioning of the Food Safety & Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) highlights some very candid findings of the committee (including the unholy nexus between corrupt food inspectors and unethical FBOs), and makes some fairly practical recommendations.
We need:
- Public awareness campaigns about food crime and its impact
- More technocrats rather than bureaucrats in the system
- Strong F&B business intelligence and investigative capabilities
- Food testing authorisation only to food laboratories accredited by NABL (National Accreditation Board for Testing and Calibration Laboratories)
- More whistle-blowers reporting food crimes
- Zero-tolerance towards food criminality—by food safety officials and law enforcement agencies
It is very hard it would be to implement such recommendations but it would be best for F&B entrepreneurs and consumers to at least do whatever is within their control and take that first step—to be the change they want to see.