Blockchain and more - Algorithm driven food traceability

Creydt, Marina; Fischer, Markus

doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2019.05.019

Cited by 179 publications

(120 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

120

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Commenting on this feeding measure, Kamilaris et al (2019) argue that the need for such intermediaries may compromise the building of decentralized trust for BC technology. An increasing number of studies suggest the use of IoT sensors to automatically enter data to ensure that the feeding process remains objective by eliminating human interaction and the risk of input errors or fraudulent behaviours (Creydt and Fischer, 2019;Kamble et al, and products/packaging upgrades (Li, 2013) (1) Unsuitability for average users: product authentication can require specific equipment, training, or the involvement of trained inspectors, such as public or private certification bodies or law enforcement services (Li, 2013) (2) Packaging cloning: these measures can be subject to cloning and reuse on counterfeit products (Pustjens et al, 2016) (3) No protection against upstream counterfeiting*: these measures do not prevent potential unfair practices, such as food adulteration and non-compliance with compulsory production specifications…”

Section: Blockchain Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing blockchain systems to prevent counterfeiting in wine supply chains: a multiple-case study

Danese

Mocellin

Romano

2021

IJOPM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to contribute to the debate on blockchain (BC) adoption for preventing counterfeiting by investigating BC systems where different options for BC feeding and reading complement the use of BC technology. By grounding on the situational crime prevention, this study analyses how BC systems can be designed to effectively prevent counterfeiting.Design/methodology/approachThis is a multiple-case study of five Italian wine companies using BC to prevent counterfeiting.FindingsThis study finds that the desired level of upstream/downstream counterfeiting protection that a brand owner intends to guarantee to customers through BC is the key driver to consider in the design of BC systems. The study identifies which variables are relevant to the design of feeding and reading processes and explains how such variables can be modulated in accordance with the desired level of counterfeiting protection.Research limitations/implicationsThe cases investigated are Italian companies within the wine sector, and the BC projects analysed are in the pilot phase.Practical implicationsThe study provides practical suggestions to address the design of BC systems by identifying a set of key variables and explaining how to properly modulate them to face upstream/downstream counterfeiting.Originality/valueThis research applies a new perspective based on the situational crime prevention approach in studying how companies can design BC systems to effectively prevent counterfeiting. It explains how feeding and reading process options can be configured in BC systems to assure different degrees of counterfeiting protection.

show abstract

Section: Blockchain Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing blockchain systems to prevent counterfeiting in wine supply chains: a multiple-case study

Danese

Mocellin

Romano

2021

IJOPM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We are not suggesting that BC can replace the various technologies daily used to assess food safety and integrity, but that BCTs can enhance them through a higher traceability (Creydt & Fischer, 2019; Galvez et al., 2018). Furthermore, BCTs can improve the ability of food companies to mitigate food safety failures by quickly identifying and linking outbreaks back to their specific sources (Levitt, 2016).…”

Section: Traceability In the Agrofood Industrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Blockchain technology and traceability in the agrifood industry

Patelli

Mandrioli

2020

Journal of Food Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Distributed ledgers are becoming commonly used technologies to trace agrifood supply chains in view of their safety, immutability, transparency, and scalability. In the present review, we discuss the most relevant case studies of agrifood supply chain traceability using blockchain (BC) and other distributed ledgers technologies. Considering that each supply chain actually has specific requests of traceability, we here suggest a logical scheme in order to favor the identification of the BC structure that is more appropriate for each agrifood supply chain, including the identification of supply chains where complex BC technologies are actually not necessary.

show abstract

“…RFID tags have broad application prospects for the following reasons: (i) they offer a large storage capacity (one to thousands of bytes); (ii) their readable distance through a scanner has a wide range (from a few centimeters to about two hundred meters); (iii) they can be operated without contact, and no particular angle is needed to read information; (iv) they are readable in diverse conditions (even in the dark or under water); and (v) they are recyclable. 129,130 However, the biggest disadvantage of RFID is its cost, which is a stumbling block to wide-spread commercialization. Using RFID tags in IFP, the link of the supply chain at which the food begins to corrupt can be identied and RFID can speed customer checkout by recognition technology.…”

Section: Communicating Technologies In Ifp Using Pesmentioning

confidence: 99%