2.3.3 Iso-elemental fingerprinting techniques

Scenario 3: E-commerce: criminal infiltration of online supermarket chains for home delivery of fake food Step 1 – Control of legitimate e-operators.

Step 2 – Selling fraudulent food as genuine through the controlled e-supermarkets. The adoption of these technological tools can be used to analyse the marketed products and determine if they are fraudulent, of low quality and whether they do not originate from the correct geographical location.

Step 3 – Expansion of e-commerce market through the creation of a Super E-food app.

Step 4 – Creation of dedicated social network groups/pages to sell fraudulent products to final customers.

2.3.3 Iso-elemental fingerprinting techniques

Technology submission 9

The term seafood provenance refers to determining both the geographic origin and production method of seafood. Seafood provenance has become increasingly important to consumers, seafood industries and regulatory bodies. Methods such as DNA and fatty acid profiling, stable isotope analysis and elemental profiling using inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) have been used to determine the origin of seafood as well as to distinguish between wild-caught and cultured seafood. Recently, bookkeeping methods such as blockchain or radio-frequency identification (RFID) have been added to trace the origins of seafood. However, each method has its advantages and disadvantages, with some methods excelling in determining the geographic origin and others better at distinguishing the production method.

The nuclear techniques used, including stable isotope analysis, ITRAX X-ray fluorescence, neutron activation analysis, and ion beam analysis technologies provide great precision in determining geographical locations of food.

The technology submission is based on iso-elemental fingerprint techniques, including stable isotope analysis and X-ray fluorescence (XRF) through the use of an Itrax scanner, to obtain the unique elemental and isotopic composition of seafood. The technology was tested on high valued seafood products such as Asian seabass and giant tiger prawns. These iso-elemental fingerprints were then used to create a provenance predicting model which could distinguish both the production methods and geographic origins of both species with greater than 80% accuracy. Following the success, a larger scale research project has been established to improve the prediction accuracy of the technology to distinguish between wild and farmed origin of seafood, including their geographical origins.

The iso-elemental fingerprint data is processed in a machine learning model where this information is analysed to find patterns in order to predict the provenance.

Furthermore, a portable method using handheld XRF to determine seafood provenance is being developed. It is expected that the portable method will be used to quickly screen seafood products, while complex samples will be analysed using the lab-based techniques to provide a higher accuracy. Regular screening points along the seafood supply chain using the handheld XRF technology in development will also ensure that any fraudulent produce is identified before it has a chance to be sold to consumers. This will provide consumers with the confidence that the product they are purchasing is legitimate, which in turn contributes to the market chain traceability. In addition to addressing seafood provenance, this technology provides the opportunity to make safety assessments for biosecurity purposes (i.e. if any bans are imposed on food products).

Submission received from the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO). Collaborators (University of New South Wales, Macquarie University, National Measurement Institute and Sydney Fish Market)

This submission allows us to discuss the possible use of iso-elemental fingerprint techniques to detect fraudulent activities and respond to some of the risks highlighted by the scenarios. Apart from laboratory analysis, this submission also includes the possibility to develop the use of portable methods to constantly check the supply chain and increase the chances that fraudulent food is identified before it reaches the consumer.

Interesting aspects of this submission include the wide use of iso-elemental fingerprints to determine the correct provenance of the food as well as its quality. Apart from fraudulent food detection, this could be an interesting method to ensure, for instance, that products labelled as Geographical Indications (GIs) are really produced in a specific area, respecting the established manufacturing processes. Producers and suppliers may also be able to use these iso-elemental fingerprints to brand the food, providing an option for the client to identify accurately labelled and high-quality products.

On the other hand, certain environmental factors can affect the stability of the isotopic and elemental signals. Using stable isotopes or the elemental profile alone tends to produce less reliable results when trying to predict provenance. However, using them together in mathematical models determines the geographic origin and production method of seafood (wild and farmed) with a high degree of accuracy (>80%). Therefore, using the multiple nuclear techniques can provide reliable and accurate predictions of seafood provenance.

In terms of the application of these technologies to the risk scenarios, this submission can identify frauds deriving from illicit repackaging operations and from the substitution of original products with counterfeit ones. It could also be used to identify the mislabelling of packages to promote false claims related to the origin, process or composition of the product. Furthermore, this technology can be used as a tool to examine evidence and to trace the geographical origin of the product in order to determine if there was an illicit infiltration in the supply chain or if any other illegal activities targeting the food were performed. It can also be used to identify if the product has adulterants in its composition.

In particular, for what concerns risk scenario 1, the forensic analysis element is capable of unequivocally identifying the geographical origin of the products as well as its production methods (wild or farmed). Nuclear and other analytical techniques only come into play once an incident occurs or once a suspicion arises. They cannot be used to prevent the criminal activity from happening, but they can be used to unequivocally identify the adulteration of a product. Consequently, these technologies may play a role in uncovering the following steps of the criminal plan:

 Control of the supply chain by using original packaging of the businesses controlled by the criminal group to market substandard and fraudulent products.

 Distribution of the falsified goods via the criminal group comprehensive and well- structured network, which includes wholesalers and supermarkets controlled by their frontmen.

 Use of low-quality solid dairy products.

X-ray fluorescence can be used to analyse the quality in relation to the presence of essential elements and origin of products. The analysis of specific elements in the composition of a product also enables the clear authentication of the goods. Furthermore, as previously explained, by progressively analysing samples in the supply chain, it can also trace back to the source of the incident and present this evidence in court.

In the case of risk scenario 2, the technology may reduce the following steps of the criminal plan:

 Control of the anti-counterfeiting solutions to market fraudulent products using original packaging bearing authentication technology.

 Procurement of low-quality materials from areas with high levels of pollution, marketing vegetables grown using illicit pesticides as well as low-quality and diluted tomato concentrate.

 Develop a database of elemental fingerprints fully-fledged along select nodes in the supply chain for vegetables and solid dairy products.

If suspicions arose of criminal operations, the technology can be used to confirm what the criminal group was marketing fraudulently using the original packaging or what elements do not correspond to the original composition of the product, and this element can be used in court as evidence. This can be done in the case where trace-back to the products origin (i.e. geographic location and production method) is needed. This is dependent on the final product in the packaging to be unprocessed (e.g. raw fillets, uncooked vegetables, etc), in order to determine provenance accurately. If it is only necessary to trace a product back to a producer, it is possible to do this with processed foods. However, the technology will only be able to trace the product back to the factory that produced it (dependent on having that factory’s fingerprint in the database first).

The considerations already made in the case of risk scenario 1 are also valid for mitigating these steps of the criminal plan, since the technology is capable of recognizing the geographical origin of food products as well as their composition.

For what concerns risk scenario 3, the technology can limit the following step:

 Selling fraudulent food as genuine via the e-supermarkets controlled by the criminal group.

The same considerations presented for the previous risk scenarios also apply in this scenario in relation to analysis that can be performed in the case of incidents or following investigations to determine the nature of products marketed by the criminal group.

Summary table for submission 9: possible application to limit risks highlighted by the scenarios

Scenario

Scenario 1: Infiltration of the dairy supply chain Step 1 – Control of the distribution market by owning or controlling legitimate operators.

Applicability of the solution

Step 2 – Control of the supply chain using the technology owned by the controlled legitimate operators. X-ray fluorescence can be used to analyse the quality and origin of solid products, allowing the detection of counterfeit goods.

Step 3 – Copying local producers’ packaging design and subsequent infiltration of these products into the legitimate supply chain.

Step 4 – Procurement of low-level milk or dairy products, their packaging with falsified labels imitating the design of legitimate and well-known local producers, and their insertion into the supply chain. The same considerations described for the previous submissions apply. The technology solution can detect if solid products are fraudulent, and if they do not originate from the correct geographical location. However, it cannot prevent infiltration, rather, after it happens it can provide accurate information about the analysed product or the fraudulent behaviour of criminals involved in food fraud. Its frequent use over time can create a dissuasive effect on criminals.

Adulterations of solid daily products can be revealed by the technology.

Step 5 – Distribution of the falsified goods via the criminal group comprehensive and well- structured network, which includes wholesalers and supermarkets controlled by their frontmen. The features explained in step 3 also apply to this step.

Scenario 2: Parallel market for catering supplies Step 1 – Control over legitimate businesses.

Step 2 – Control of the anti-counterfeiting solutions used by the infiltrated businesses.

Step 3 – Develop a fully-fledged supply chain for vegetables and dairy products.

Step 4 – Use of low quality and diluted materials.

Step 5 – Building a parallel market for catering food supplies targeting small shops.

Step 6 – Distortion of competition. In case of proven or suspected criminal operations, the technology can be used to confirm what the criminal group was marketing using the original packaging and the anti-counterfeiting features if we need to trace back to the products origin (i.e. geographic location and production method), depending on the final product in the packaging being unprocessed; or if we only need to trace it back to a producer, it is possible to do this with processed foods. However, the technology will only be able to trace the product back to the factory that produced it (dependent on having that factory’s fingerprint in the database first).

The considerations analysed in risk scenario 1 also apply here. X-ray fluorescence can be used to analyse the quality and origin of solid products, allowing the detection of counterfeit goods, but cannot prevent the infiltration. Its continuous use over time might create a dissuasive effect on criminals.

The technology is capable of recognizing the geographical origin of solid food products as well as their composition, including the presence of toxic ingredients and if they have been adulterated.

The same considerations explained in step 3 apply to this step.