The NFCU's industry updates highlight the key risks and issues that may be impacting the food industry, share best practice to strengthen the industry’s response to food crime and inform on the ongoing work of the NFCU.

In this edition:

• Refrozen poultry labelling
• Operation OPSON
• Horizon scanning
• Food Fraud Resilience Self-Assessment Tool

Read the November Update here.

You can contact the NFCU Prevention team to feedback, raise a concern or possibly contribute to a future update.

 Artificial Intelligence (AI) is increasingly applied in food safety management, offering new capabilities in data analysis, predictive modelling, and risk-based decision-making.

A review of the literature identifies three primary areas of application: scientific advice, inspection and border control, and operational activities of food safety competent authorities.

Five country examples with the real-world use cases illustrate diverse uses of AI tools, including pathogen detection, import sampling prioritization, and language models for regulatory data processing.

Regulatory frameworks, as well as voluntary governance, addressing AI in the public sector are emerging worldwide. National and international initiatives often highlight the importance of data governance, transparency, ethical considerations, and human oversight. Challenges such as biased data, explainability, and data governance gaps appear across different contexts, along with potential risks from deploying AI systems prematurely. Access to high-quality, interoperable data and collaboration among stakeholders can support effective integration of AI technologies.

AI readiness often depends on understanding specific problems to be addressed, current capacities, and the quality of available data. Human oversight and continuous evaluation contribute to maintaining trust in AI systems.

Collaborative efforts involving academia, the private sector, and international organizations help build shared knowledge and resources for AI development in food safety. Overall, AI presents opportunities to enhance resilience, efficiency, and responsiveness in food safety systems. Careful consideration of governance, data management, and multi-stakeholder cooperation can shape AI’s contribution to achieving sustainable and equitable outcomes in agrifood systems.

Read full report here: https://openknowledge.fao.org/handle/20.500.14283/cd7242en

Job opportunity description

The vacancy is within the Unit JRC.4 “Food Integrity”, whose mission is to produce and validate the knowledge for ensuring authenticity, quality and sustainability of foods and to contribute to the fight against adulterated and illicit consumer products.

For complete information, please download the Vacancy Notice.

From Boardroom to Berlin: EFF-CoP in Action

For more than half a year, the EFF-Editorial Board has been steadily shaping the voice of a growing community. Through frequent meetings, the Editorial Board reviews ideas, discusses themes, and schedules each upcoming EFF-publication in the New Food Magazine.

Their collaborative rhythm has already produced three published articles, all available to registered users on the EFF-Hub, forming a reliable stream of insights for everyone across the food-fraud field. Read HERE the latest EFF-article.

That same spirit of shared expertise came to life at the International Food Fraud Conference 2025 in Berlin. EFF-CoP partners from across Europe gathered to exchange knowledge and spark new conversations. On the first day (5/11/2025), EFF-CoP led a workshop exploring the “state of the art and main challenges,” inviting participants to identify gaps and build a shared vision for safer, more transparent food systems.

The second day (6/11/2026) featured a joint session with the Watson Project, examining how climate change, geopolitical shifts, and economic pressures may reshape food fraud in the decade ahead. The day concluded with an uplifting presentation by EFF-CoP’s coordinator, Prof. Saskia van Routh, titled “The Power of We: The European Food Fraud Community of Practice Story,” in which she also introduced the Food Fraud Festival in Dublin (27–28 May 2026)—a future gathering where collaboration, innovation, and community will continue to grow, offering many insights into food fraud.

For more details, photos and videos, click HERE.

Finally, don’t forget to register on the EFF-HUB - the central meeting point for our food fraud community. There, members can chat, exchange knowledge, and access EFF-CoP’s materials, webinars, and workshop updates. Together, we’re not just learning about food fraud - we’re building the future of prevention, one workshop at a time.

This update has also been added to the FAN EFF-CoP page.

Workshops and Round Tables: The EFF-CoP Community Is Growing - and More Passionate Than Ever About Fighting Food Fraud

The EFF-CoP Consortium members are more active than ever, united by a single mission: to smash food fraud.

But how can we truly achieve this goal? Only if we communicate together, share our message, and act collectively - as a community of dedicated food fraud detectives.

And how do we do that? By joining the EFF-CoP Workshops and Round Tables - the spaces where collaboration, learning, and innovation come to life.

That’s why EFF-CoP is thrilled to announce an in-person Workshop during the Food Fraud Conference 2025 in Berlin, taking place on November 5th, from 9:00 to 12:00.CEST
👉 Register now - seats are limited! Don’t miss the chance to be part of this dynamic, hands-on session.

Earlier this month, from October 8–10, EFF-CoP also organized an exciting workshop during the Final Meeting of the sensAIfood Project. The session was designed to foster collaboration and spark out-of-the-box thinking among participants.

It began with a short introduction to EFF-CoP and an overview of early results, followed by an energizing activity to get everyone engaged. Then came the main challenge - a creative exercise inviting participants to imagine a food fraud case in the year 2050.

They explored three key questions:

1. What type of fraud could occur, and who might be involved?
2. How could it be detected?
3. What measures can we take today to prevent it?

Around 50 participants joined, producing creative, insightful, and often humorous ideas - turning the workshop into a lively and inspiring conclusion to the conference. We truly hope everyone enjoyed the session as much as we did! The feedback from stakeholders in these workshops will be considered in the ultimate output of EFF-CoP work package 2, a White paper on the future research agenda given the current needs of the community.

This update has also been added to the FAN EFF-CoP page.

The FAN's Cost of Food Crime/ Fraud page  (third tab) has been updated with an estimate from Professor Chris Elliott.

Based on many decades of investigating food crime, Professor Chris Elliott has provided his estimate of the global cost of food crime under three different detection scenarios:

The final phase (Practices & Innovations) of the European Food Fraud Community of Practice (EFF-CoP) survey is now live and we would greatly appreciate your input please. 

You are invited to take part in a short survey (10 - 15 min maximum), which aims to collect information on real-world practices and strategies used in food fraud detection and prevention.

• Participation is voluntary, and responses are confidential.
• A Consent Form is provided at the start.
• Completion of the questionnaire allow you to enter the €20 Amazon gift card lucky draw.

Thank you for sharing your expertise and joining EFF-CoP's mission of revolutionising the fight against food fraud!

Europol, OLAF, DG SANTE and 31 countries across Europe and beyond, together with food and beverage producers from the private sector, joined forces in the fourteenth edition of Operation OPSON. This yearly effort targets the criminals behind counterfeit and substandard food and beverages. Law enforcement, customs and food regulatory agencies seized 259 012 packages, 1 416 168 litres of beverages and 11 566 958 kilograms of food, including meat and seafood.

Overall, Operation OPSON XIV saw:

• 631 individuals reported to judicial authorities;
• 101 arrest warrants issued;
• 13 organised crime groups disrupted;
• goods worth around EUR 95 million seized;
• 31 165 checks and inspections performed. 

A major activity frequently disrupted during OPSON XIV was the infiltration of waste disposal companies by organized crime groups to access expired food. Criminals removed original expiration dates and reprinted falsified ones, reintroducing expired and unsafe products, such as canned fish, into the supply chain.

Around 80% of the seafood consumed in the UK is imported. Much of it comes from Norway, Iceland, Vietnam, and more countries.

In the latest issue of Food Science and Technology, Ivan Bartolo explores the UK’s reliance on imported seafood, driven by consumer preferences, global supply chains, and the demands of fish processing factories.

The article also explains how food safety is maintained, how the country determines the origin of seafood, and the environmental and resilience challenges associated with these imports.

Access full article: https://doi.org/10.1093/foodst/vwaf044

Featuring over 120 entries from international experts, this Encyclopedia provides a comprehensive overview of the activities, ideas, issues and challenges that shape relationships between food systems and society.

Each entry includes an accessible and informative introduction to its topic, along with specific examples, recommended further reading and references to other sources.

This title contains some Open Access chapters:

Isotope Ratio Mass Spectrometry (IRMS) is increasingly applied across diverse fields—from forensic science to biology and geoscience. In the EU, the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) has an implementation timeline where rules apply to large companies from 30 December 2025, which is driving more IRMS testing.

But with its growing reach, many labs new to the technique face challenges in ensuring data accuracy and comparability.

The updated IRMS Good Practice Guide, produced by members of the FIRMS Network, offers essential insights into:
✅ Instrument setup & calibration
✅ Measurement techniques
✅ Data handling & uncertainty
✅ Quality assurance & troubleshooting
✅ Sampling

Whether you're new to IRMS or looking to refine your approach, this guide is a must-read for generating reliable, interpretable data. 

Access the guide.

This guide has been added to the 'Quality' section of this website.

Apimondia has published a statement on Immature Honey Production that constitutes the official position of Apimondia, which aims to be a trusted source for authorities, traders, supermarkets, retailers, manufacturers, consumers, and other stakeholders of the honey trade chain to ensure they stay updated with the current concepts. 

Access statement: https://doi.org/10.1080/0005772X.2025.2557068

 A new JRC study reveals cases of fraud and non-compliance with the food safety legislation in cinnamon sold at EU retailers. 

As part of the European Commission efforts to fight fraud in the herbs and spices sector, JRC scientists used four in-house developed innovative screening methods to detect and identify possible fraudulent practices. 

They went beyond identifying the substitution of Ceylon cinnamon the most valuable variety, with cassia, a cheaper and less aromatic alternative, and identified other likely types of substitution, investigated compliance with existing European legislation and international standards. The analysis involved  104 cinnamon samples – 44 of which were labelled as Ceylon cinnamon – purchased at retailers in 10 EU countries, and in the UK, Serbia and Sri Lanka.

Over 66 % of the samples analysed failed to meet international quality standards, were non-compliant with EU food safety legislation, suspected of fraud, and/or potentially exceeded the legal coumarin limits. Coumarin is a natural aromatic compound found in cassia and other plants, potentially toxic for liver.

The results of the investigation can help the scientific community and policy makers to set threshold values for the different cinnamon components, and to define when to consider a sample as suspicious. This will allow to undertake a more detailed surveillance and help competent authorities take action.

In 2023, cinnamon was the fifth most imported spice in the EU following ginger, paprika, pepper and turmeric; with cinnamon demand expected to grow over the next years, cinnamon is an attractive target for fraudsters.

Read full article.

International Food Policy Research Institute's (IFPRI) 2025 Global Food Policy Report examines the evolution and impact of food policy research and assesses how it can better equip policymakers to meet future challenges and opportunities.

The 2025 Global Food Policy Report takes a sweeping view of the past half-century, reviewing the evolution of both policies and policy research, highlighting lessons learned, and presenting key considerations for addressing the challenges and opportunities of today and tomorrow. Policies play a key role in advancing food systems and the health of all people and the planet. While many factors influence policymaking, evidence-based food policy research is crucial for informing policy choices, policy implementation, and policy adaptation.

Crime is mentioned in relation to challenges for adaptation as is the need for food value chains to be resilient to 'shocks' including rising cybercrime.

Read synopsis or full report.

Considering recent market developments and the growing risk of fraudulent practices in the fruit juice sector, the International Fruit and Vegetable Juice Association (IFU) has released this updated information to safeguard industry integrity and consumer trust.

The combination of reduced crop volumes, price volatility, and increasingly sophisticated methods of deception—including misleading specifications, falsified documentation, and the use of AI-generated promotional materials—has heightened the vulnerability of the global juice supply chain. By providing timely guidance and reinforcing compliance expectations, we aim to prevent adulteration and ensure that only authentic, safe, and high-quality juices reach consumers worldwide.

Supplier verification and laboratory testing to ensure compliance with international legislation and food safety standards is key. IFU recommends the following tools to prevent adulteration:
1. IFU Methods: The IFU offers a range of analytical methods and recommendations to detect adulteration. These are some examples:

• IFU 58 - Determination of Hesperidin and Naringin HPLC (2005) to determine different citrus.
• IFU 59 - Determination of Total Carotenoids and Individual Groups (2008) to distinguish orange from mandarin.
• IFU 71 - Anthocyanins and Betalains by HPLC (2023) to compare typical anthocyanin profiles.
• IFU R03 - The Use of Isotopic Procedures in the Analysis of Fruit Juices (2020) to detect different types of adulteration in juices
• IFU R17 - How to estimate the juice content of juice-based drinks and nectars (2025) to estimate juice content accurately across a wide range of juice-based beverages and nectars.
• IFU R18 - The Use of DNA Methods in the Analysis of Fruit Juices, Purées & Concentrates (2013) to detect adulterations in low levels.

More information: List of all IFU Methods - International Fruit and Vegetable Juice Association. 

2. AIJN Code of Practice (CoP): The AIJN CoP provides guidelines for the authenticity and quality of fruit juices, ensuring that products meet established standards in Europe and other areas.

3. SGF/IRMA Approval: Purchasing from SGF/IRMA approved suppliers ensures that raw materials are authentic and comply with industry standards.
More information: Voluntary Control System.

4. Regulatory Frameworks: Adherence to Codex Alimentarius, EU regulations, FDA standards, and national food laws is essential to maintaining industry credibility.

Also, feel free to contact IFU Technical Director Aintzane Esturo at aintzane@ifu-fruitjuice.com.

This UK Food Standards Agency (FSA) 'Food for Thought' seminar breaks down key findings based on FSA project FS900408 Guidance for Point Of Contact Technologies.

Industry experts Malcolm Burns and Gavin Nixon of the National Measurement Laboratory present results from a current review of the potential for point of contact technology for food testing for both official controls and the wider food sector. They provide an overview of key terms, technologies, trends and barriers to adoption, and provide recommendations to further develop a framework to support point of contact food testing.

This seminar has been added to the eSeminars section of FAN's training pages.

FSA’s monthly Food for Thought seminars share insights from FSA and external research on topics relevant to the food system. Each session features a presentation followed by a Q&A. Recordings of previous seminars are available to watch back on the FSA’s YouTube channel.

The seminar series is open to all - if you’d like to receive future invitations, please sign up to the Food for Thought mailing list. 

Are you involved in detecting or preventing food fraud?

We are conducting a research study under the European Food Fraud – Community of Practice (EFF-CoP) to collect current knowledge, systems, and technologies used globally to combat food fraud. Your input will support the development of a shared database, which will be available in EFF-HUB for researchers, regulators, and industry professionals.

If you work in:
• Official control
• Food businesses
• Academia or research
• Certification bodies
• Laboratories
• Technology and innovation in food integrity
We would value your contribution in a series of three short questionnaires (15–25 minutes each):
• Research Questionnaire 
• Practices and Approaches Questionnaire 
• Innovations Questionnaire 

Please take part and complete the questionnaire(s) by 4 November 2025 for a chance to win €20 Amazon gift cards! 

Please share with colleagues or peers.

Thank you for supporting this collaborative initiative.

The report for the Food Authenticity Network (FAN) 2023 Partner Projects is now available.

This report describes two projects delivered in 2023 by LGC, via FAN, which were jointly funded by Defra, Food Standards Agency and Food Standards Scotland with the aim of supporting UK analytical lab capability for food authenticity testing, ensuring industry and law enforcers have access to information on emerging/ topical analytical testing issues.

 Project 1: Open Data Project

The report describes the development and production of a searchable online 'Open-Data' tool, signposting to organisations that have food databases that contain information can be used to help verify food authenticity.

Currently the Food Authenticity Database Tool signposts to 220 authenticity databases.

If you owner of an authenticity database and would like FAN to signpost to it then please contact us at Secretary@foodauthenticity.global. 

Project 2: Compendium of Food Authenticity Testing Techniques Project

This project involved the development of a compendium of food authenticity testing techniques, designed for food industry stakeholders who do not have an analytical science background but may be required to interpret and apply the results of food authenticity analysis. The compendium is comprised of 10 sections, each covering an overview and explanation of a different technique, including Mass Spectrometry and Stable Isotope Ratio Analysis. The compendium is written at a technical level appropriate to food industry professionals with a strong scientific background, but no analytical expertise.

The Compendium of Analytical Techniques is available in the Research and Methods section of the FAN website.

This report has been added to FAN's Research Reports section.

This 2019 publication, by Food Authenticity Network Advisory Board Member, Dr John Spink, is now free to download. The food fraud prevention update includes a practical recommendation for ‘How to Start?’ and ‘How Much is Enough?’

A practical approach to food fraud prevention was laid out in the Food Fraud Implementation Method (FFIM). This method has been refined over the years and was finally formalized and published in 2019 and is applicable today.

After conducting an incident review and hazard identification, the method includes 10 questions, 2 concepts, 7 steps and 1 decision. (To note, the article had seven questions but over time this was later expanded to ten.)

Photo by Irham Setyaki on Unsplash

The Food Fraud Implementation Method (FFIM): “How to Start”

“10 Questions”: For this first pass, the response is just “yes” or “no.”

1. Have you conducted at least one Food Fraud Vulnerability Assessment (Y/N)
2. Is it written (and can you show it to me now) (Y/N)
3. Have you created a Food Fraud Prevention Strategy (Y/N)
4. Is it written (and can you show it to me now) (Y/N)
5. Can you demonstrate Implementation (Y/N)
6. Do you have Executive Level Sign-off (Y/N)
7. Have you minimally conducted an annual Food Fraud Incident Review (Y/N)
8. Do you have a method to review your incidents and general market incidents (Y/N)
9. Note: Do you address all types of Food Fraud (e.g., adulterant-substances, stolen goods, diversion, intellectual property rights counterfeiting, etc.) (Y/N)
10. Note: Do you address all products from both incoming goods (e.g., ingredients) and outgoing goods (e.g., finished goods) through to the consumer.” (Y/N)

“2 Concepts”:

1. Concept One—Formally and specifically, mention food fraud as a ‘food’ issue (e.g., in a formally approved and published corporate policy handbook)
2. Concept Two—Create an enterprise-wide food fraud prevention plan (e.g., this is the Food Fraud Prevention Strategy, and it is the only link between the food fraud incident assessments and calibration with the risk tolerance assessment to the enterprise-wide system)

“7 Steps”:

1. Convene a Food Fraud Task Force
2. Create an Enterprise-wide Food Fraud Policy/Mission Statement and begin drafting a Food Fraud Prevention Strategy/Plan
3. Conduct the pre-filter Food Fraud Initial Screening (FFIS) (e.g., this is a very high-level vulnerability assessment that covers all products across the entire enterprise. One risk matrix or assessment could meet the objective.)
4. Review additional needs, including additional information or a more detailed Food Fraud Vulnerability Assessment (FFVA) (e.g., in ERM/ COSO terms, this is a “detailed assessment.”)
5. Review-specific Food Fraud vulnerabilities in an enterprise risk map (Enterprise Risk Management)
6. Consider countermeasures and control systems to address the ‘very high’ and ‘high’ vulnerabilities (e.g., it is helpful to provide examples of possible countermeasures or control systems. These examples will help calibrate if there is enough information to make a confident resource-allocation decision.)
7. Propose a Food Fraud Prevention Strategy, including the calibration of the Food Fraud risks on the enterprise risk map (E.g., this should be in a corporate human resources template to facilitate actual resource-allocation decision discussions.)

“1 Decision”:

• Finally, after the FFPS proposal is submitted, the last step is for management to decide on the optimal plan. It is essential to consider that no decision on the new proposal is a decision – no decision is a decision that accepts the status quo. In some situations, the total resources applied to the problem may be reduced.

Enterprise Risk Management: How Much is Enough?

The connection of the Food Fraud Vulnerability Assessment to the enterprise-wide risk assessment leads to a calibration of the problems. The enterprise-wide risk map defines the issues that are above the risk tolerance. The most valuable part of the process is that the same map illustrates when there is “enough” of a risk treatment. Zero risk is not practical and often not even possible.

The FFIM has been added to the 'Guides' tab of FAN's Food Fraud Prevention section.

A draft CEN standard titled 1 'Food authenticity - Non-targeted testing methods - Part 1: General considerations and definitions' (WI 00460015) is available for comment via national standards body:

Please contact your national standards body and submit any comments to them.

For example, in the UK visit British Standards Institution - Project input comments by 23/09/2025.