Safeguarding food safety in a world of shifting supply chains

We’re hearing a lot of discussion at this year’s conference about resilience, transparency and collaboration across the food system. From your perspective, what are the most important shifts or priorities emerging from the conversations here this week?

Well, the conversations have been really encouraging. It’s been 26 years since GFSI was created and we’re celebrating 25 years of conference. When GFSI was created, the founding intent was clear about resilience, collaboration and transparency. And it has worked to a point.

But there is definitely more to do as people change and the industry evolves. I was really encouraged by the call to action and the willingness of people to get engaged and continue working with us on a journey. Though we are not necessarily the owner of these things or the developer of them, in some of these spaces GFSI is essentially the convenor. This conference excellently demonstrates our convening power.

From a resilience perspective, I talked about data a lot on the first day. A delegate said to me, “you mentioned data three or four times,” but it’s not just about data. We are not a data-holding organisation. Essentially, what we look at from an organisational perspective is where resilience needs to be built in the supply chain and how we, as an entity, can assist to make it happen.

Over the past decade the industry has invested heavily in strengthening supply chain oversight and collaboration on food safety. From your perspective, what changes have made the biggest practical difference in how companies manage food safety across global supply chains today compared with ten years ago?

Of the practical advances that have most materially altered how the food industry manages safety across global supply chains, two stand apart for the depth of their impact: whole genome sequencing and blockchain-based traceability. Each addresses a distinct but complementary dimension of the verification challenge.

Whole genome sequencing - This is a massive positive in terms of the information it brings and the opportunity for traceability for example, during outbreak investigations. I’m from the UK and have worked closely with UK retailers and other parts of industry in the past, so I was very aware of some of the food safety notifications linked to outbreaks that have taken place and how the Food Standards Agency (FSA) and governments are using whole genome sequencing to help them track and link clinical outbreak to a specific point of contamination in a supply chain. Prior to its widespread adoption, traditional investigative techniques required a level of epidemiological inference that could leave significant room for uncertainty.

There are a range of tools that must be used to influence conclusions and the power of information is key. It’s been amazing to see how technologies such as that can be harnessed. Whole genome sequencing has definitely been a game changer and is a powerful tool in the armoury.

Of the practical advances that have most materially altered how the food industry manages safety across global supply chains, two stand apart for the depth of their impact: whole genome sequencing and blockchain-based traceability.”

For food businesses operators, a parallel advancement has been the adoption and greater use of blockchain as an instrument of supply chain integrity – helping them to shore up their traceability, build trust into their systems and strengthen how they gather and store information. It has given businesses more certainty and more confidence in the data they’re being provided. With no opportunity for data to be overwritten or rewritten, it gives them confidence.

These technologies do not operate in isolation. Together, WGS and blockchain represent a shift in the industry’s capacity to establish and verify trust not through procedural assertion alone, but through the quality and immutability of the underlying evidence. That shift has been among the most significant developments of the past decade, and its implications for how GFSI approaches benchmarking and harmonisation continue to grow in importance.

Food supply chains today can involve multiple regions, suppliers and intermediaries before products reach consumers. Where do you think companies still struggle most when it comes to maintaining strong food safety controls across these increasingly complex networks?

I can give my view. A food business operator may give you a different one. What I will say about responsible businesses, and particularly larger sized businesses, is that the procedures and policies they put in place are very robust.

They’re very rigorous in the management of their supplier assurance to influence the trust and integrity of their supply chains. You would have seen the video from Dirk Van de Put, Chairman and CEO of Mondelēz International, where he talked about food safety being non-competitive and the utmost priority. That’s definitely what I’ve seen when I’ve worked with and speak to businesses.

In response to your question on where they struggle. As you say, supply chains are very complex. I don’t want to single out any particular part of the sector, but some of the more fragmented industries – small and medium types of businesses – may struggle with the tools, knowledge and resources needed to meet growing and changing regulatory requirements and supplier assurance standards.

That said, it’s not insurmountable. Businesses are adapting and changing so they can support those types of suppliers. The spice industry is one example. It is quite fragmented, with many small co-op-type farmers and aggregation of their product.

As an example, the spice industry has built in resilience to ensure it has good and robust vulnerability assessments to understand where the risks are in individual supply chains and try to mitigate those risks.

Political unrest is also an important factor. We’re all familiar with the current state of affairs, particularly in the Middle East.

All of these things have the potential to disrupt supply chains. Businesses have to change their sourcing patterns and adapt very quickly. What I will say is they are quite agile in ensuring they can quickly verify new supply routes and new supply options.

Food safety isn’t necessarily compromised in these situations. As consumers, what we might see instead is a little disruption – perhaps an out of stock line for a short period. But the food system is very resilient and adapts quickly to these types of changes.

In recent years companies have had to react quickly to supply shocks – from climate events to geopolitical disruptions – sometimes switching suppliers at short notice. When speed becomes a priority, where do food safety vulnerabilities tend to emerge in that process?

The operating environment within which global food supply chains function has grown more complex and volatile. Geopolitical incidents, climate change – these factors all have an effect.

Similar to my previous answer, food safety remains the core of what businesses prioritise. Personally, I am confident in saying that food safety is not compromised, because it remains the fundamental principle for all responsible businesses.

You would have seen in some of the conference sessions – I definitely saw it today in a presentation given by Mars – the principle that, if it’s not safe, it’s not food.

That remains the core principle of how most businesses operate. Before they move a supplier, source or raw material, all the necessary risk assessments take place to ensure they mitigate anything that could affect food safety.

What consumers might see instead is a shift in patterns. During COVID, for example, we saw some shortages including reduced product ranges or different pack sizes. You might not have the variety you’re used to because a brand had to adapt quickly to a change in its supply chain, but consumers can be assured that food safety is the top priority.

Finally, looking ahead, what supply chain trends do you think will have the biggest impact on food safety over the next decade?

The challenges ahead are not modest. Geopolitical instability will continue to test the agility of sourcing systems. Climate change will intensify its pressure on primary production and introduce new risk vectors that require proactive rather than reactive mitigation. The question of how governments and businesses can work together to address these risks collectively remains, in many respects, open. The technological transformation of assurance is accelerating, but its full integration into the governance frameworks that give it systemic force is work in progress.

What is not in question is the animating principle. If it is not safe, it is not food. This is not a slogan. It is the ethical and operational foundation of everything GFSI has built over twenty six years, and everything it will build in the decades ahead. Resilience, by design, begins there.

If it is not safe, it is not food. This is not a slogan. It is the ethical and operational foundation of everything GFSI has built over twenty six years, and everything it will build in the decades ahead.”

The 2026 Vancouver conference closed with a sense of momentum that is, in itself, a form of institutional asset. The willingness of a global community of food safety leaders to engage with a shared agenda to commit to a journey whose destination is a more resilient, more transparent, and more equitable food system is the foundation upon which the next decade of progress will be built.