Industry trends
Safely does it
Food producers face
increasingly high
consumer expec-
tations regarding
health and safety.
Text Elaine McClarence Photography Ruben Keestra
T
hanks to the Internet, it’s never
been easier for food produc-
ers to lose a good reputation
because of a health and safety
scare. In fact, the US Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) and the National
Institutes of Health launched the Safety
Reporting Portal website in May 2010 to
make it even simpler for consumers and
industry professionals to submit reports
about food and other products. The FDA
expects the number of reported incidents
related to food to rise significantly.
The new FDA website comes against
a backdrop of growing consumer inter-
est in where and how food is produced.
“Traceability is the challenge for the food
industry,” says Ian Greaves, Manag-
ing Director of IGI Ltd, a specialist firm
of consultants working internationally on
health and safety issues for the food in-
dustry. “The ‘Farm to Fork’ concept is
now a key issue. Although the food in-
dustry has always been able to follow its
product, there will be more pressure from
agencies on food suppliers, manufactur-
ers and retailers to prove where their food
came from and show all the steps it took
to get to the consumer.”
Traceability is inextricably linked to
health and safety. Greaves believes that
the food industry is already well-regulat-
ed and has recognized safety systems in
place. “These may be ISO or in-house
quality standards,” he says. “HACCP
[Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point]
has been part of the manufacturing in-
dustry for years, but now enforcement of-
ficers are more familiar with the concept,
and, as legally required, they are looking
at process management and in-house
monitoring a lot more.”
When it comes to process manage-
ment, the introduction of automation and
robotics has clear benefits. Alan Spreckley,
Channel Partner Manager at ABB, says,
“For the consumers who buy the products,
the risk of contamination needs to be low-
ered as much as possible. This can on-
ly be done by automating and removing
human intervention. Direct contact with
machinery should be minimized, and in
the more uncomfortable areas of pro-
duction, most of the workforce should
be removed.”
Greaves adds, “Most food safety is-
sues are caused by people. Therefore
if you take the ‘dirty hands’ away, the
food is safer. However automation can
lead to physical contamination if it is not
monitored or maintained well. Moreover,
IGI Ltd
IGI provides a complete range of
food safety services, from creat-
ing the right processes and train-
ing staff to supporting companies
through any incidents or investiga-
tions to microbiological testing of
foodstuffs and water. All of its con-
sultants are qualified Environmental
Health Officers and members of the
Chartered Institute for Environmen-
tal Health.
For more information about IGI Ltd,
visit igint.co.uk.
there are still areas in the food indus-
try in which automation is too difficult
or costly to implement. And when com-
panies do introduce a new process or
a piece of equipment, they have to en-
sure that the staff who interact with it are
trained to use it correctly and safely.”
“Most food safety issues
are caused by people.”
Spreckley points out, “Robots tradi-
tionally remove people from hazardous
and unhealthy environments. High repeti-
tion – for example feeding or unloading
machinery – invariably results in lapses
in concentration. It only takes a split sec-
ond for an accident to occur, and that
can have long-term consequences. Ro-
bots can perform these tasks to a con-
sistent quality and at a higher consistent
speed than a human being. Industry suf-
fers from lost days due to work-related
injuries such as repetitive strain, not to
mention the subsequent compensation
claims. Robots definitely minimize these
instances by removing people from dull,
dirty and dangerous tasks.”
Training and maintaining the high-
est hygiene standards, however, remain
at the heart of safe food production. As
Greaves notes, “Good food producers
have an overall ethic on quality, service
and safety. The words ‘safety culture’ are
often used to describe a producer who
does not compromise on training its staff,
monitoring its product and always look-
ing to improve. A safe food company
is one where the directors down to the
shop floor understand the need for safe-
ty and want to be part of that culture.”
And for those companies who get it right,
he says the benefits are “safer product,
enhanced reputation, less wastage and
motivated staff.”
ABB robotics 2|10
17