retail traceability is very rare in practice even in E.U. although many consumers think
that this is the system prevailing in E.U. Instead, batch traceability is the most common
traceability system in E.U., yet less common in U.S. On the processing stage, batches are
typically larger in U.S. than E.U.
For U.S. meat slaughter and processing plants, traceability is voluntary beyond the record
keeping required by food safety regulation (Federal Meat Inspection Act, Wholesome
Meat Act, HACCP plans of 1996 and BSE regulations of 2004). A related mandate is
country of origin (COOL) regulations (a 2002 Farm Bill provision) which requires
appropriate labeling as to the country of origin of product. However, the implementation
of mandatory COOL for all covered commodities (beef, pork, lamb, etc.) except wild and
farm raised fish and shellfish was postponed on November 2005 until September 2008.
COOL requires that firms maintain verifiable record keeping audit trail. Self-certification
is not enough, which implies identification and segregation as to the country of origin.
Meanwhile, in order to make COOL voluntary, Meat promotion Act of 2005 was
proposed. Trade associations such as American Meat Institute (AMI), state processor
associations, and some producer associations (National Cattlemen’s Beef Association,
NCBA) support voluntary COOL. Lusk and Anderson (2004) report that voluntary
COOL has not been seen in the market place even though this option is available to plants
and some willingness to pay is reported (Loureiro and Umberger, 2004). Some producer
associations (R-Calf USA) and consumer groups such as Consumer Federation of
America seek mandatory COOL. In line with this, there are some legislative efforts to
speed COOL up to September 2007. Perhaps, the issue with COOL will be resolved as
part of Farm Bill 2007. Amid this regulatory turmoil, how meat plants are preparing
regarding COOL is not known.
The stakeholders on the demand side of food market seek improvements in U.S.
traceability system. Consumer representatives such as Consumer Federation of America
(CFA) calls for a mandated Animal ID system and a tracking system from slaughterhouse
to farm (Consumer Federation of America, 2004).3 Moreover, in an open letter to FDA
Consumers Union called for a comprehensive traceability system from farm to table so
that regulators can quickly and easily trace the origin of a given food item.4 Finally,
consumer studies (such as Loureiro and Umberger, 2004) found willingness to pay for
traceability even more than country of origin labeling. Nevertheless, the current state of
traceability in U.S. is supported by representatives from grain and meat industry for being
more efficient than mandatory traceability system in E.U. because of its flexibility to
meet a given specific food safety and quality goals (Farm Outlook Report, 2004). U.S.
market meat processors think that introducing traceability beyond batch (lot based) level
would slow down the throughput (Mennecke and Townsend, 2005). Although lot-based
system can control recalls via multiple daily lots (e.g. four lots per shift or two shifts per
day) can avoid big recalls, it may not be adequate in providing the source assurance
necessary for effective branding (Mennecke and Townsend, 2005). In line with this, some
3 More information about this organization can be found at http://www.consumerfed.org/ .
4 More information about this organization can be found at
http://www.consumersunion.org/.