The revelations that have been unearthed by the horsemeat scandal have (in a relatively safe way) highlighted a series of weaknesses in the food supply chain.
Various factors have all come together at once to lead to the inevitable outcome of switching ingredients. Horsemeat is perfectly edible (the Japanese call it 'Basashi' and dip it in soy sauce and the Italians shred it finely for salads and call it 'Sfilacci' for examples). Indeed, horsemeat is only taboo in the UK, as the favoured animal has such strong associations as worker and pet. So the main issue is with renewed distrust of the food chain (although you would be forgiven for questioning the hygiene standards of operators who knowingly switch one meat for a cheaper one).
There is no excuse, but there are plenty of reasons. We all like a bargain, consumers, retailers, manufacturers and primary processors alike. This means that the whole supply chain is looking (particularly when times are austere), to save costs in a bid to retain some margin. Not only does this tempt some to switch ingredients, but it also discourages people from (the costs of) auditing, testing and checking their supply chains. Products are normally priced according to their cost of production plus a profit margin. Commodities are not; their value is unrelated to cost of production but the balance of supply and demand. The point at which commodities are incorporated into a product supply chain causes pricing (and therefore margin) problems as the input will vary in price notoriously more than the product. So, when meat prices continue to rise, the margins become even slimmer or possibly even zero. Bingo, in pops some dubious horsemeat.
While the consumer has a closer emotional link to food than any other fast moving consumer good (FMCG) as it is ingested, we have (or had) a huge amount of trust in the supply chains. Maybe this will change from now on. Errors occur because of ignorance (for example over 50% of tuna is apparently incorrectly labelled in store) but it is the dishonesty that is causing such concern here, and rightly so.
So what is the answer and how can the supply chain improve as a result? Many buyers (including the supermarkets) have already been talking about shortening and simplifying the supply chains, procuring more from local producers (which needs defining) and arranging longer term contracts. All these are fine ideas, however they only provide the opportunity to simplify the supply chain not guarantee quality. Horsemeat has appeared in very local supply chains (meat from a Welsh meat specialist in Wales tested equine- positive), and also in local produce (horsemeat has been found in other UK-only supply chains demonstrating that the UK is not free from rogues). However it does mean that the ability to audit and check the suppliers' credentials is somewhat easier and open the supply chains to greater transparency.
Some suppliers have found this year that making a commitment to source solely from the UK has not been possible in difficult years for farming with both Hovis and McCain recently changing their procurement policies from UK-only. However, the shorter the supply chain and the better known each member is to each other, will surely facilitate the auditing and trust that is shared between the sections. The episode has been great for local butchers, as well as the organic sector. How long lasting this change in consumption patterns continues will depend on whether any health issues are highlighted as a result but the opportunity for the industry to refocus and repair is now considerable.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
