Quality Assurance of Food versus Limiting Food Loss and Waste

Transkrypt

Zarz¹dzanie i Finanse Journal of Management and Finance Vol. 13, No. 2/2015
Maria Œmiechowska*
Filip K³obukowski**
Maria Œmiechowska, Filip K³obukowski
Quality Assurance of Food versus Limiting Food Loss
and Waste
Introduction
The progressing globalization has caused a number of important
changes in terms, but not limited to, of food production and consumption.
Attitude and expectations regarding food have changed significantly.
Consumers focus not only on food safety but other quality factors. Unfortunately, next to some positive effects such as opening new sales markets,
increasing the availability of food products, globalization has caused
a whole range of negative changes in terms of food production and consumption. An example is the decreased food production in the countries
with lower economic potential that cannot compete with their food products on the global market.
The objective of this study is to evaluate current knowledge of the issue of food quality in connection with its waste and, consequently, its importance for natural environment, state budget and home dwellings.
1. The notion of quality
Quality is a notion which has accompanied the man since the oldest
times and it has evolved throughout the centuries. According to the most
ancient philosophers quality is a certain level of perfection [Horbaczewski, 2006, pp. 10–12]. Nowadays, food quality is mostly understood as
the degree of food healthiness, its sensual attraction and availability in
the broad consumers and community’s understanding. The notion of quality has been discussed in different aspects: philosophical, technical, economic, marketing, legal, sociological and psychological one. Therefore, it
has become necessary to clarify the definition of quality so that it can become doubtless, sound unambiguous and could be used in the commodity assessment.
* Prof., Ph.D. Hab., Faculty of Entrepreneurship and Commodity Science, Department of
Commodity Science and Quality Manage, Gdynia Maritime University, Morska 81-87,
81-225 Gdynia, m.smiechowska@ wpit.am.gdynia.pl
** M.Sc. Eng., Department of Chemistry, Ecology and Food Commodity Science, Medical
University of Gdañsk, Powstania Styczniowego 9b, 81-519 Gdynia, [email protected]
94
The definition of quality, according to the normalized standard
PN-EN ISO 9000:2006, implies the intention of fulfilling consumers’
wishes, their needs and expectations, which have been evolving and
changing constantly. It seems that new definitions of quality lean toward
this direction, however, their interpretation may differ.
According to E. Skrzypek quality means a number of product features which fully guarantee satisfying the external and internal consumer
expectations and demands, whereas it must be remembered that the need
for quality must nourish in the consumer himself, that the man must understand its idea and meaning in order to become its creator and strive for
its perfection [Skrzypek, 2000].
D. Ko³o¿yn-Krajewska i T. Sikora have formulated a slightly different
definition according to which quality means a degree to which product
can satisfy one’s needs and refer to the specified and expected needs [Ko³o¿yn-Krajewska, Sikora, 2010]. They indicate that the manufacturer, while
planning the quality of their products, must predict how, apart from the
already defined criteria, their product can satisfy the needs of consumers.
On the other hand, the health quality of food involves the health related safety of the product and its nutritious value. Food safety is a very
broad notion which is affected by many factors, including the quality
of environment and raw materials, processing methods, people, food additives, packaging, production machines and many others. Food law and
many organizations responsible for food inspection and supervision are
protecting food quality and safety [Stankiewicz, 2003, pp. 24–39].
In the era of economic crisis the definition of quality, especially in
the context of the consumer’s perceiving of quality, is subject to further
evolution and is heading towards the quality more and more strongly related to the product price. These are the consumers who assess the level of
quality according to the final product price. The consumers seem to say:
“Quality yes, but not for such price”. Such approach neither causes nor
guarantees the level of quality which would satisfy manufacturers. Nevertheless, manufacturers are forced to respect this order of things. Unfortunately, such approach is also presented by chain stores and therefore
distributors and wholesalers connected with these chain stores.
The analysis of numerous studies on the effect of the price over product quality has shown that such assessment gets weaker and weaker due
to the consumers’ habit of learning. The price is important when the product is bought for the first time, then, its importance decreases together
95
with the consumer’s growing knowledge from his/her own experience.
On a long term basis the price reflects the product quality, however, it becomes less useful for consumers as a piece of information on the product
quality [Nowak, 2008, pp. 93–110].
The conditions of operations of modern companies imply striving for
perfection, strategic quality management and operational management
of processes creating product quality in the context of the overall organization management [Lisiecka, 2013, pp. 2–9].
Quality has become a tool in the hands of manufacturers and an element of the sales market game. The possession of an appropriate certificate confirming the company’s implementation of a given quality system
has become an enormous advantage in commerce. Next to the obligatory
systems, some “voluntary” systems are being developed for which manufacturers, wholesalers and other participants of the goods and services logistic chain are being forced, otherwise they will be excluded from the successful operation in global commerce (figure 1).
The target for the private food standards is a food safety assessment
system with homogenous requirements and auditing procedures, assuming the mutual recognition of audit scores by all the participants of the
supply chain [Czupryna, Maleszka, 2008, pp. 21–26]. The number of systems is growing and in this situation some organizations are trying to limit the number of quality management systems to minimum so that one
created integrated system could guarantee the effectiveness of operation.
Quality systems have caused a kind of a race between food manufacturers
for a place in the peloton of producers who have become clients (business
partners) of the chain stores.
In the preliminary period of quality systems implementation the satisfaction of customers’ was observed, for whom the same products with
the same quality properties were available all over the world, regardless
of the customers’ current position. However, after a certain amount
of time, consumers stopped showing attention to these products and they
started to search for other products which would be different mainly by
sensory properties. Furthermore, globalization changes have caused
the entry of new food products on the market which were not always accepted by consumers. A symptom of food market globalization is not only
the growth of fast food production but also the growing interest in world
cuisines and national dishes, whereas some of these, very exotic ones,
such as sushi or pizza, have little to do with original dishes.
96
Figure 1. Obligatory and optional Health Safety and Quality Assurance and
Management Systems
Source: Own study based on: [Sikora, Strada, 2005].
As opposed to the idea of global food some new movements related
to slow food consumption are beginning, which are a sign of glocalization.
Localism is a response to the progressing globalization.
The world is overwhelmed by a specific kind of consumption race –
in food production, sale and consumption. As long as production and sale
is still possible to grow, it must be remembered that consumption, especially in the developed countries is not unlimited. Its limitations are the result of, but are not limited to, the societies’ growing awareness of health
hazards related to excessive consumption. All these problems induced
food losses and even food waste.
2. The causes of food waste and ways to counteract
The international research studies confirm that the degree of food
waste is very big and it is estimated in the following way: e.g. in Republic
of South Africa the costs of home food waste are about USD 2,7 billion annually, it is 0,82% of gross national product per annum [Nahman et al.
2012, pp. 2147–2153].
The scale of losses in USA was 124 kg/ citizen in 2008 which incurred
the cost of USD 390 per citizen annually [Buzby, Hyman, 2012, pp. 561–570].
97
According to the data of FAO of 2011 1,3 billion of tons of food are being disposed of every year. It constitutes over 30% of the manufactured
food suitable for consumption. 89 million of tons of food are being wasted
in Europe according to the European Committee. 20–30% of the bought
food of which 2/3 could be still consumed, is discarded in each European
household [D¹browska, Janoœ-Kres³o, 2013, pp. 14–26]. The statistical data
show that only in the European Union food waste rate is 89 million tons
per year it is, which is 179 kg per each citizen [Raport Federacji Polskich
Banków ¯ywnoœci, 2013]. The studies carried out in UK have confirmed
that consumers dispose of 31% of the food that they buy most often
[Iacovidou et al., 2012, pp. 1–7].
Food waste can also be a result of improper distribution, transport,
storing and preparation of food for companies and private households. It
should be remembered that globalization is becoming subject to food falsification and inauthenticity, both in terms of food production and consumption [Œmiechowska, 2013]. The results of scientific research outline
how big a burden is the food production for the environment (water footprint, carbon footprint) [Konieczny et al., 2013, p. 51].
Management literature mentions several main types of waste. It includes excessive production (overproduction), unproductive waiting, unnecessary transport, excessive or unnecessary processing, excessive stock,
unnecessary movements, any kinds of defects, unused employees’ creativity, waste of data, quality waste, costs of incompliance, waste in accounting and office work, wasted managers’ time [Burka, 2012, pp. 37–41].
It is surprising that even with such high standards of food production, which are confirmed by numerous certificates and quality signs, consumers continue to question the quality of some products. Are there any
solutions which could stop this scenario so unfavourable for humanity
and, in consequence, diminish the scale of waste?
The following aspects influencing the reduction of food can be distinguished:
– natural losses – connected with storing conditions;
– losses – resulting from inappropriate handling of food products and
faults in production processes, processing, transport and storing;
– food waste – the result of inappropriate distribution, transport, storing
and food preparation (table 1) [Gosiewska, 2013, pp. 41–44; Papargyropoulou et al., 2014, pp. 106–115; Raport Federacji Polskich Banków
¯ywnoœci, 2013; Wrzosek et al., 2014].
98
The scale of food waste has also been noted in relation with the implementation of the cleanness and order law in the communes [Górska, 2013].
The law has introduced the obligation of the selective collection of communal waste, including biodegradable communal waste [ustawa, 1996;
ustawa, 2012].
Balanced consumption actions and building up the ecological consciousness of society are meant to reduce the excessive consumption including food and implementing the rules of appropriate handling of food
waste.
The most of food is thrown out by:
– private households (42%), where 2/3 of the waste could have been
avoided. The most common cause of disposing of food is the consumers’ lack of knowledge about the reasons and effects of food products
waste;
– food manufacturers (39%), that is food industry companies where
the problem of inappropriate estimation of production volumes, packaging and products wasting due to damage contribute to such a high
rate of wasted food;
– food suppliers (14%), including restaurants and catering services companies, where the disposal of food is determined by the lack of portioning of the ordered meal, consumers’ preferences or creating too
much stock of products;
– sellers (5%), due to the mismanagement of stock, lack of marketing
strategies and improper storing of food.
The most common reasons of food disposing by consumers are:
– expiry of the product (51%),
– improper storing (31%),
– inappropriate amount of food products (26%) [Achremowicz, 2012,
pp. 45–47].
Actions in favour of sustainable consumption and the increase of the
ecological awareness of the society are meant to limit the excessive consumption including food and to implement the proper food waste handling procedures and rules (table 1).
The idea of sustainable production and sustainable consumption
seems to be the right alternative. Unfortunately, this concept has many
opponents in economic circles, who do not want to give up overproduction and aggressive marketing. A sustainable and conscious consumption
cannot be measured by means of the units of economic success used so far
99
[Adamczyk, 2012, pp. 177–191]. Building the society’s ecological awareness might be the beginning of implementation of sustainable consumption.
Table 1. The food waste hierarchy
Stage of the proceedings
Prevention
Procedure
Avoid surplus food generation throughout food
production and consumption
Prevent avoidable food waste generation
throughout the food supply chain
Re-use
Re-use surplus food for human consumption for
people affected by food poverty through
redistribution networks and food banks
Recycle
Recycle food waste into animal feed
Recycle food waste via composting
Recovery
Treat unavoidable food waste and recover energy
e.g. via anaerobic digestion
Disposal
Dispose unavoidable food waste into engineered
landfill with landfill gas utilisation system in place,
only as the last option
Source: [Papargyropoulou et al., 2014, pp. 106–115].
The idea of balanced development which assumes three basic targets:
economic, ecologic and social one has been adopted in many countries.
Unfortunately implementing such solutions encounters many barriers resulting from its interfering with the holistic interpretation of the issue. The
role and significance of the ecologic target has often been omitted or underestimated in practice. This determines many factors where economic
crisis is seen on the foreground. Global ecological problems have been
aggravating, in spite of undertaking actions for protection. Growing production and consumption increase the anthropological pressure upon
the natural environment. Are there any solutions which could stop this
humanity unfriendly scenario and, in consequence, reduce the scale
of waste?
On 19th January 2012 the European Parliament adopted the resolution
summoning for specific actions towards reducing the rate of waste by half
until 2025 and providing access to food for poor citizens. This is an important initiative aiming at building the European consciousness of the
100
importance of the proper handling of food [Rezolucja Parlamentu Europejskiego, 2012].
Changes which can be described as de-consumption have been taking place in the sphere of consumption. These are the tendencies for limiting the scale of consumption.
The changes in the current consumption model can involve:
– limiting consumption due to growing economic uncertainty (assecuration consumption)
– limiting the consumption quantity for the sake of growing quality,
– limiting the consumption of material goods for the sake of consumption of non-material goods,
– limiting consumption for the purposes of its rationalization.
Conclusion
The aim of this study was to present some of the problems related to
food waste. The progressing civilization and globalization enhance waste.
Globalization of food production and consumption on one hand increase
the access to food products and, on the other hand, cause the expiry of tradition and eliminate regional and local foods. The implementation of food
quality assurance and safety systems require certain conduct and procedures in terms of food. It is these rules that determine the lifetime of products on store shelves. Also these rules require eliminating some expired
meals and dishes from bars and restaurants menus, in accordance with
HACCP requirements. This is a specific type of waste encountered in fast
food chains. It refers to different meals, e.g. sandwiches, which, being constantly heated, are not suitable for consumption after 10–15 minutes,
therefore they get discarded.
It is considered to put two expiry dates on food products labels, that
is: “Best before… (expiry date)…” and “Expiry date (to be consumed not
later than)…” therefore, to sell any damaged products or close to expiry
products at reduced prices. It is especially important for consumers to understand these two definitions included in the Regulation of European
Parliament and Council (EU) No. 1169/2011 of 25th October 2011. The first
one is connected with the product quality whereas the second with its
safety. Furthermore, the packaging should be designed in such way to
protect the product against going off in a best possible way, and it should
be available in different sizes in order to make it possible for consumers to
buy a desired amount or size of product [Regulation of European Parliament and Council (EU) No. 1169/2011].
101
The problem of waste is thus very complex and the difficulties in
counteracting against it arise from various backgrounds of waste there
of from the conflict of political, economic and social interests. Strong dependencies exist certainly between the food quality and its waste rate.
High quality food, especially in terms of sensory quality, will be consumed more frequently and eagerly thus reducing the risk of becoming
past expiry date. However, it must be remembered that it is mainly
the manufacturers to keep responsibility for cutting down any excessive
production and for adjusting the supply to the realistic food product demand.
References
1. Achremowicz B. (2012), Czy staæ nas na marnowanie ¿ywnoœci?, „Przemys³ Spo¿ywczy”, nr 66(10).
2. Adamczyk W. (2012), Wspó³czesne problemy zrównowa¿onej produkcji
i zrównowa¿onej konsumpcji, „Zarz¹dzanie i Finanse”, t. 3, nr 2, Uniwersytet Gdañski, Gdañsk.
3. Bielawa A. (2011), Postrzeganie i rozumienie jakoœci-przegl¹d definicji jakoœci, „Studia i Prace Wydzia³u Nauk Ekonomicznych i Zarz¹dzania”
nr 21, Uniwersytet Szczeciñski, Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczeciñskiego, Szczecin.
4. Burka I. (2012), O marnotrawstwie w literaturze nauk o zarz¹dzaniu,
„Problemy Jakoœci”, nr 7/8.
5. Buzby J. C., Hyman J. (2012), Total and per capita value of food loss in
the United States, “Food Policy”, No. 37.
6. Czupryna M., Maleszka A. (2008), Prywatne standardy ¿ywnoœciowe
w Polsce, „Problemy Jakoœci”, nr 6.
7. D¹browska A., Janoœ-Kres³o M. (2013), Marnowanie ¿ywnoœci jako problem spo³eczny, „Handel Wewnêtrzny”, nr 4(345).
8. Gosiewska M. (2013), Nie marnuj ¿ywnoœci – myœl ekologicznie, „Przemys³ Spo¿ywczy”, nr 67.
9. Górska E. (2013), Œwiat z perspektywy œmietnika, „Problemy Jakoœci”, nr 4.
10. Horbaczewski D. (2006), Filozoficzne Ÿród³a wspó³czesnego pojmowania jakoœci, „Problemy Jakoœci”, nr 10.
11. Iacovidou E., Ohandja D.-G., Voulvoulis N. (2012), Food waste disposal
units in UK households: The need for policy intervention, „Science of the
Total Environment”, No. 423.
102
12. Ko³o¿yn-Krajewska D., Sikora T. (2010), Zarz¹dzanie bezpieczeñstwem
¿ywnoœci – teoria i praktyka, Wyd. C.H. Beck, Warszawa 2010.
13. Konieczny M., Mroczek E., Kucharska M. (2013), Œlad wêglowy w zrównowa¿onym ³añcuchu ¿ywnoœciowym i jego znaczenie dla konsumenta ¿ywnoœci, „Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development”, No. 3.
14. Lisiecka K. (2013), Zarz¹dzanie jakoœci¹ produktów a jakoœæ zarz¹dzania organizacj¹, „Problemy Jakoœci”, nr 2.
15. Nahman A., Lange de W., Oelofse S., Godfrey L. (2012), The costs
of household food waste in South Africa, “Waste Management”, No. 32.
16. Nowak P. (2008), Wykorzystanie ceny w ocenie jakoœci produktów, Zeszyty
Naukowe Wy¿szej Szko³y Humanitas. Zarz¹dzanie, nr 2, Sosnowiec.
17. Papargyropoulou E., Lozano R., Steinberger J. K., Wright N., bin Ujang
Z. (2014), The food waste hierarchy as a framework for the management
of food surplus and food waste, “Journal of Cleaner Production“, No. 76.
18. PN-EN ISO 9000:2006 Systemy zarz¹dzania jakoœci¹ – podstawy
i terminologia, Polski Komitet Normalizacyjny.
19. PN-EN ISO 9001:2009 Systemy zarz¹dzania jakoœci¹ – wymagania,
Polski Komitet Normalizacyjny.
20. Raport Federacji Polskich Banków ¯ywnoœci, Zapobieganie marnowaniu ¿ywnoœci z korzyœci¹ dla spo³eczeñstwa. Warszawa 2013.
http://www.niemarnuje.pl/, accessed 15.03.2015.
21. Rezolucja Parlamentu Europejskiego z dnia 19 stycznia 2012 r. Jak
unikn¹æ marnotrawienia ¿ywnoœci: strategie na rzecz poprawy wydajnoœci ³añcucha ¿ywnoœciowego w UE (2011/2175(INI)), ust. 35.
www.europarl.europa.eu, accessed 15.03.2015.
22. Rozporz¹dzenie Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady (UE) nr 1169/2011
z dnia 25 paŸdziernika 2011 r. w sprawie przekazywania konsumentom informacji na temat ¿ywnoœci, zmiany rozporz¹dzeñ Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady (WE) nr 1924/2006 i (WE) nr 1925/2006
oraz uchylenia dyrektywy Komisji 87/250/EWG, dyrektywy Rady
90/496/EWG, dyrektywy Komisji 1999/10/WE, dyrektywy 2000/13/WE
Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady, dyrektyw Komisji 2002/67/WE
i 2008/5/WE oraz rozporz¹dzenia Komisji (WE) nr 608/2004.
23. Sikora T., Strada A. (2005), Safety and Quality Assurance and Management Systems in Food Industry An Overview, in: The Food Industry in Europe, Agricultural University of Athens, Athens.
24. Skrzypek E. (2000), Jakoœæ i efektywnoœæ, Wyd. Uniwersytetu Marii
Curie-Sk³odowskiej, Lublin.
103
25. Stankiewicz D. (2003), Nadzór nad jakoœci¹ i bezpieczeñstwem ¿ywnoœci,
Informacja BsiE, No. 963.
26. Œmiechowska M. (2013), Autentycznoœæ i identyfikowalnoœæ w aspekcie
zapewnienia jakoœci i bezpieczeñstwa towarów, Wyd. Akademia Morska
w Gdyni, Gdynia.
27. Œmiechowska M. (2015), Zrównowa¿ona konsumpcja a marnotrawstwo
¿ywnoœci, “Annales Academiae Medicae Gedanensis” (in print).
28. Ustawa z dnia 14 grudnia 2012 r. o odpadach, Dz.U. z 2013 r. poz. 21
ze zm.
29. Ustawa z dnia 13 wrzeœnia 1996 r. o utrzymaniu czystoœci i porz¹dku
w gminach, t.j. Dz.U. z 2013 r. poz. 1399 ze zm.
30. Wrzosek M., Ko³o¿yn-Krajewska D., Krajewski K. (2014), Ocena strat
i marnotrawstwa ¿ywnoœci w obiektach handlowych a dzia³ania strategiczne
handlu – wyniki badañ, „Marketing i Rynek”, nr 6.
(Summary)
The aim of this article is to present the subject of food quality in the context
of its waste. Food quality is most often understood as its health value, sensory appeal and availability in a wide range of consumer and social significance. However, the approach to quality changes. In one of the latest definitions it says that
quality is the degree of the ability of the product to meet the needs identified and
expected.
In times of economic crisis, the approach to quality continues to evolve and
is moving towards quality increasingly linked to the price of the product. Quality
has become a tool in the hands of producers and part of the game market. Possession of the appropriate certificate confirming the implementation of an appropriate quality system becomes a bargaining chip in trade. An increasing number
of quality systems, which wholesalers and other participants of the logistics chain
of goods and services are forced to meet, increases, because otherwise they would
not be able to successfully participate in the global trade. It is surprising that with
such high standards in food production, repeatedly confirmed with certificates
and quality marks, consumers question the quality of products which in turn
leads to waste.
Insiders believe that the solution to the problem can be sustainable production and sustainable consumption.
Keywords
quality of food, food waste

Quality Assurance of Food versus Limiting Food Loss and Waste

Transkrypt

Podobne dokumenty

Graduate Opportunities in Quality Assurance

Laptop radiation protection

Aktualne problemy wasnoci intelektualnej HTXMPDFKXFW

Problemy prognoza i diagnoza pogody PLPDF

The Culinary Route