The Truth About Electronic Traceability: Lessons Learned from Working with the Seafood Industry

December 03, 2020

If you’re reading this, chances are you’ve heard the terms key data elements (KDEs), full chain, traceability, and interoperable; it’s enough to make your head spin. Traceability within the seafood sector is neither new nor novel – companies have been collecting varying levels of product information for decades. Then why are many still stuck using pen and paper? Why does implementing robust data collection practices or electronic traceability still seem so daunting?

FishWise is no stranger to this work. We’ve executed due diligence plans, conducted extensive research, dove deep into supply chains, and worked to implement electronic traceability across our retail partners. From this work, we’ve realized the value of sharing some of the takeaways – the ‘truths’ – behind implementing these kinds of systems. With enough preparation, capacity, and a healthy dose of patience, tackling electronic traceability doesn’t have to be daunting. In the spirit of SALT’s mission to share knowledge with a broader industry audience, FishWise hopes the following ‘truths’ will give you the inside scoop on how to set and manage expectations around implementing an electronic traceability platform.

Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

1. The pre-implementation phase is more important than you think

As with any project, you need to understand the who, what, when, where, why, and how of your work. This planning phase is designed specifically to answer key questions and develop the foundational processes that will guide you during actual implementation. Rather than jumping in head first, take time to understand what products or species the platform will cover. How will you communicate this change to your vendors? How many vendors will this change affect? Do you have the right software? What information is critical to collect? Spending time early on will not only answer these important questions, but greatly improve the chances of a successful platform and roll out.

2. Basic KDEs are still difficult to collect

Despite newly-released industry standards set by the Global Dialogue on Seafood Traceability (GDST) for data collection, companies may still find that step of deciding what to collect overwhelming. Realistically, companies continue to struggle with collecting even the most basic KDEs (e.g. species name, fishing method, fishing location) let alone more nuanced ones (e.g. transshipment KDEs). Prioritizing the collection of basic KDEs offers a strong foundation to build off of when you’re ready to expand; think quality over quantity. If you’re collecting too much information that’s poor quality, your data might fall victim to ‘garbage in, garbage out’; it won’t be useful for anyone.

3. Flexibility vs. standardization

Many traceability platforms sell well because of their capability to integrate with other systems (interoperability), which means they’re flexible. But, that flexibility often comes at a cost, mainly a lack of standardization. For example, legacy systems like ERP, or enterprise resource planning, are primarily focused on internal communications or communicating with outside systems rather than collecting or adhering to lists of sustainability information. It’s important to find a platform that offers both the flexibility to meet a company’s needs, and the ability to ensure any data received adheres to your chosen standardized lists and formats (i.e. GDST).

“

“57% of organizations take longer than expected to implement their ERP systems – largely because they had unrealistic expectations in the first place”

Synoptek

4. Electronic traceability is not a catch-all

Your work isn’t finished just because you now have an electronic traceability system up and running. Electronic traceability doesn’t equal sustainability and does not automatically identify – let alone mitigate – risk. You do, however, have greater supply chain transparency and access to data in near real-time. While a move to this type of system enables a company to identify data gaps and potential risks, without proper verification layered onto these systems, that information cannot be used to mitigate risk or make informed decisions.

5. Constant data verification is essential

...and self-reporting doesn’t count. Verifying the accuracy of data ensures you’re working to meet established sustainability, traceability, and/or social responsibility goals. Without it, there is no way to know whether data coming into the system is legitimate, thus placing a huge risk on your company. There is a critical need to ensure verification goes hand in hand with electronic traceability systems; they can – and should – happen in parallel.

“

“Traceability is not a trivial term, and its absence or incorrect utilization is at the basis of many issues affecting today’s seafood value chains, such as lack of transparency, trade in IUU-originated fish, fraud and species substitution, integrity and seafood safety. Traceability is required in order to ensure these latter attributes, yet per se does not guarantee them. Hence, it is important not to confuse traceability, which is a system, with verification, which is an action.”

Francisco Blaha - FAO’s Blockchain Application in Seafood Value Chains

Regardless of the realities, the hurdles of implementing electronic traceability systems don’t outweigh the benefits. With these systems, companies not only have access to more timely, accurate, and useful data, but also have increased supply chain transparency. Moreover, these companies are assuming a more proactive role in mitigating sustainability, illegal fishing, and social responsibility risks.