Food fraud has emerged as a significant and under-recognised public health threat, with documented global incidents resulting in severe illness, hospitalisations, and fatalities. International estimates suggest that up to 9% of the global food trade is adulterated.
In South Africa, evidence of mislabelling, substitution, counterfeit products, illicit trade, and the use of unauthorised additives continues to surface, yet the national burden and regulatory response remain insufficiently characterised.This review synthesised peer-reviewed literature and articles from reputable South African media sources published from 2015 to December 2025, focusing on food fraud within the South African context. Searches were conducted across Web of Science (WoS), Scopus, and PubMed, supplemented by Google Scholar and the EU Food Fraud Database, with emphasis on studies reporting fraud associated with South African food products. Standard PRISMA procedures guided the final selection of fifteen (14) eligible articles.
These studies reveal widespread food fraud driven mainly by economic gain. Common practices include substituting high-value products, mislabelling meat and seafood, altering dates on expired goods, and producing counterfeits with unauthorised additives and packaging. Collectively, these factors compromise consumer health, undermine industry integrity, and impede effective surveillance. Strengthening South Africa’s food fraud prevention ecosystem will require coordinated multisectoral engagement, targeted investment in detection technologies, and robust regulatory reforms.
Figure 1 of the paper shows a hazard-based ranking of food fraud concepts based on severity and potential public health impact. The model categorises seven common food fraud types, i.e., unapproved enhancements, substitution, dilution, concealment, mislabelling, counterfeiting, and grey market, according to their relative risk. Higher tiers represent a greater potential for consumer harm due to toxicity, allergen exposure, or deception, while lower tiers reflect economic or regulatory concerns with minimal direct health risk.
Read full paper here.
Comments