Supply Chain Discussion

User Generated


Business Finance


Read case and statistics, based on supply chain to answer questions and find some extend questions.

length requirement?at least 16 pages double space???

This writing should highly relative with supply chain. 

I also post one PDF include questions that need to be answered (PDF '4OI3 Project5'), 

For extend questions, I can give two and you also need to think and write more extend questions: ? 1.How to use supply chain to improve food safety (chemical contamination)?  ?   2.Mention the reason of food recall.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

4OI3 Project 2021 4OI3 Supply Chain Management Read the attached documents. Conduct a study on the Canada food safety and supply chain management. Answer the following questions: 1. Do different microbiological food diseases imply different food risks? Why? How do you measure them? 2. For microbiological food diseases, what are the supply chain management measures that can improve the food safety? 3. For the same microbiological food disease, e.g., Salmonella, how would the supply chain management measures be different for different products, e.g., pork, beef or lamb? These questions are only the guidelines. The purpose is to combine the learning in O734 with a real life supply chain safety project. Some suggestions: 1. You may not have all the information for your study. How to find the information is part of the study. 2. You can use the Business Source Complete database. 3. Use a professional reference standard and format. 4. Whenever possible, use data to support your arguments. 5. Show your unfinished work to your instructor and discuss it with your instructor. 6. Start earlier. 1 1/19/2014 Statistics: Food Recall Incidents - About the Canadian Food Inspection Agency - Canadian Food Inspection Agency Canadian Food Inspection Agency Home > About the CFIA > Newsroom > Food Safety System > Food Recalls Incidents Statistics: Food Recall Incidents Share this page A food recall is an action taken by a company to remove potentially unsafe food products or products from the market that do not comply with relevant laws. It is the responsibility of industry to remove the product from sale or distribution. The CFIA's role is to inform the public, oversee implementation of the recall and verify that industry has removed recalled products from store shelves. The CFIA oversees approximately 250 recall incidents a year. Most recalls in Canada are voluntary; this means that the recalls are initiated and carried out by the responsible company, with oversight from the CFIA. If a company is unable or refuses to voluntarily recall a product, the Minister of Health has the power to order a mandatory recall for products that pose a health risk. To read more about food recalls, please consult our fact sheet. The CFIA distributes public advisories to media on high-risk recalls and posts them to the CFIA web site. You can also view public advisories on The CFIA also posts food recalls that are considered to be lower-risk on the CFIA website. Food Recall Incidents Description for bar graph - April 2006 - March 2013 Table Food Recall Incidents by Hazard 1/2 1/19/2014 Statistics: Food Recall Incidents - About the Canadian Food Inspection Agency - Canadian Food Inspection Agency Description for bar graph - April 2006 - March 2013 Table Glossary Undeclared allergen A food product contains ingredients such as peanuts, milk or eggs that are not identified on the label and that can cause adverse reactions in people who are allergic to the item. Chemical A food product contains chemical residues such as lead, mercury or pesticides that, at certain levels, can affect human health. Extraneous material A food product contains material from an outside source, such as metal, glass or hair. These are not necessarily a risk to human health. Microbiological A food product is contaminated by micro-organisms, such as bacteria, viruses or parasites, which have the potential to cause illness. Other A food product is of concern due to the presence of marine biotoxins or non-permitted food ingredients; or due to nutrition concerns, irradiation or other health concerns; or tampering. Date modified: 2013-10-30 2/2 1/19/2014 Improving Food Safety in Canada: Toward a More Risk-Responsive System Create an account | Sign In I want to... Topics Services About Us Careers Français Home > Centre for Food in Canada > Research > 2012 > Improving Food Safety in Canada Read the Full Report EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Improving Food Safety in Canada: Toward a More RiskResponsive System by Daniel Munro, Jean-Charles Le Vallée, and James Stuckey Tw eet 0 1 On This Page What's On Your Plate? Farm-to-Fork Sources of Risk Risk Management: A Shared Responsibility Like 0 E-mail Print Everyone—including governments, the food industry, and consumers—has an abiding interest in safe food. Fortunately, Canada’s food safety system does a good job generally of protecting consumers from food safety hazards. Although there are close to 6.8 million cases of food-borne illness annually in Canada, the overwhelming majority are mild and involve only minor discomfort and inconvenience.1 Despite increasing public anxiety about food safety, it is exceptionally rare for debilitating illness or death to result from the consumption of unsafe food in Canada. Find out where most food-borne illnesses come from and what potential solutions could improve Canada’s current food safety system. Download the full report Learn More About CFIC Food impacts Canadians in an extraordinary range of ways. It affects our lives, our health, our jobs, and our economy. About the Centre Improving Food Safety in Canada: Potential Solutions Yet there is no reason to be complacent. There is room to improve Canada’s food safety performance. Although a Text box: Developing the precise figure is impossible to calculate given current data Canadian Food Strategy limitations, the health care costs and lost productivity attributable to food-borne illness are likely high.2 When high-profile outbreaks—or even increased fears of outbreaks—occur, businesses can experience significantly reduced sales, high recall costs, and lower consumer confidence. All of these not only threaten Canadians’ health, but can negatively affect the economic competitiveness and viability of the food industry on which we rely to meet our nutritional and dietary needs. When high-profile outbreaks—or fears of outbreaks—occur, businesses can experience significantly reduced sales, high recall costs, and lower consumer confidence. Moreover, a variety of factors are creating a more challenging food safety risk environment. The increasing globalization of the food supply presents a special challenge. Products and ingredients are being imported from a wider range of countries, many of which have food safety standards that are unclear or suspect. At the same time, Canadians are eating out more often—thereby increasing their risk of contracting a food-borne illness. And a rapidly aging population means that more people will be vulnerable to the effects of unsafe food. In short, although Canada’s food safety system has done a relatively good job to date, the risk environment is changing rapidly. If Canada’s food safety system is to continue to be risk responsive, then industry, government, and consumers will need to develop both better understandings of, and better risk management strategies for, existing and emerging food safety risks. What’s On Your Plate? Food is considered safe when, at the point of consumption, biological, chemical, or physical 1/5 1/19/2014 Improving Food Safety in Canada: Toward a More Risk-Responsive System hazards have been eliminated or reduced to levels low enough that they will not cause illness or death.3 Unfortunately, it is almost impossible for consumers to determine the safety of their food given that most biological and chemical hazards, and some allergens, are imperceptible to human senses. Food that looks, smells, and even tastes fine may contain pathogens, chemicals, or allergens that can cause illness. As a result, effective food safety systems require sophisticated approaches to hazard identification and risk management. Biological hazards such as pathogens, viruses, and bacteria continue to pose the most direct consequences for human health and the economy. Along with allergens, which create risks for certain segments of the population, biological hazards, such as E. coli, Listeria, Salmonella, and Campylobacter, are the most common source of food-borne illness in Canada. It is almost impossible for consumers to determine the safety of their food given that most biological and chemical hazards are imperceptible to human senses. Chemical hazards are also a concern. They are increasingly used in food production and processing in the form of pesticides, agrochemicals, fertilizers, veterinary drugs, and other inputs. Environmental and industrial contaminants (such as methyl mercury), and natural toxicants and allergens (such as seafood toxins) have become part of the chemical profile of some of the foods on the plates of Canadians. Over-exposure to these and other chemical hazards can lead to acute illness or even death, although they are more likely to contribute to health impacts that occur over a longer period (such as damage to neurological or reproductive development), and chronic diseases (including cancer). Farm-to-Fork Sources of Risk While a majority of food-borne illnesses result from what is done, or not done, at the latter stages of the farm-to-fork continuum—at the level of food service firms and households— food safety hazards can be created at every stage of the chain. At the primary production level, for example, hazards may result from the misuse of chemicals or practices that lead to contamination of plants or animals (for example, through poor waste management practices). Food manufacturers and processors can also introduce hazards into the food supply by inadequately addressing the risks of contaminants (for example, through inadequate hygiene or sanitation practices). Retailers and wholesalers also occupy critical points in the food supply chain. As gatekeepers to the food supply for most Canadians, their storage, packaging, and processing practices are significant determinants of food safety outcomes. Risk Management: A Shared Responsibility Managing food safety risks in Canada is the shared responsibility of governments, food industries (including producers, processors, retailers, and food service establishments), and consumers. Improving Canada’s food system to address current and emerging food safety risks requires maximizing the contributions of each of these actors, and improving their interactions in the areas of risk assessment, risk management, and risk communication. Fortunately, the management of food safety risks is generally high in Canada, although performance is uneven and there is room for improvement. According to a 2010 ranking of food safety performance in 17 countries, while Canada ranked fourth overall, it is a “middle of the pack” finisher in terms of incidence rates related to selected biological hazards.4 Improving performance will require efforts on the part of government, industry, and consumers. Government Canada’s public food safety system is strong in many respects; much of its strength is the result of concerted government action. However, there is room for improvement. Some aspects of the food regulatory system have been slow to adapt to certain features of the 2/5 1/19/2014 Improving Food Safety in Canada: Toward a More Risk-Responsive System modern food economy. In particular, the system of pre-market approvals, which grants market access for new food products and food processing technologies, lacks both the transparency and capacity necessary to optimize the fruits of global food innovation—to the detriment of Canadian consumers. In addition, the measurable contribution made by government inspection activities in minimizing food safety risks is unclear. Industry Food safety depends on what industry does on a day-to-day basis to minimize risks. Market forces provide strong incentives for industry to take great care in preventing food safety lapses as these can result in loss of brand reputation, costly recalls, and lower sales. Market forces, however, do not provide equal incentive to all firms to implement adequate food safety measures. Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and food service companies face unique challenges to improving food safety, including costs, lack of expertise, time, low awareness, and workplace culture. The food service subsector, in particular, shows higher food safety risks compared with food prepared in the home. Consumers often underestimate the likelihood of food safety incidents—resulting from household practices—and fail to adopt appropriate risk management strategies. Many firms are adopting and implementing private standard systems, such as the CanadaGAP program or those under the Global Food Safety Initiative, to formalize and recognize additional aspects of food production control, to meet the demands of buyers (both institutional and consumer), or to improve compliance with public regulations. But private standards may be insufficient to address the risks and challenges faced by many SMEs and food service establishments. Consumers Even when governments and industry perform their food safety functions well, consumers can create new risks by failing to practice good food safety in food storage, handling, preparation, and cooking behaviours that would minimize risks. Unfortunately, consumers generally underestimate the likelihood of food safety incidents occurring as a result of household practices and therefore frequently fail to adopt appropriate risk management strategies. Improving consumers’ risk perceptions—and, in turn, their food safety behaviour —will be challenging, but essential to reduce food safety risks in Canada. Improving Food Safety in Canada: Potential Solutions Food safety is achieved through both formal and informal processes. While the formal elements of the system—for example, the policies and programs of governments and many food industries—perform well generally, there is a need and opportunity to improve practices in areas with limited or no formal food safety control—for example, among SMEs, food service companies, and households. In light of our analysis of the sources of food safety risk and effectiveness of the risk management activities of government, industry, and consumers, we offer the following potential government, industry, and consumer actions that may help improve food safety outcomes in Canada: 1. Provide SME Restaurants and Food Service Operators with Management Advice Given the relatively high rates of food-borne illness that are attributable to the food service subsector, there is a need to improve the voluntary adoption and application of good food safety practices among the country’s food service establishments. One possibility for achieving this is for governments and sector groups to assist by providing timely management advice and information to SME restaurant and food service operators on how they can minimize food safety risks and take rapid effective action in the case of outbreaks. 3/5 1/19/2014 Improving Food Safety in Canada: Toward a More Risk-Responsive System 2. Encourage Better Behaviour Among Consumers Although consumers appear to know what they should be doing in their own homes to protect themselves from food-borne illness, many fail to put that knowledge to use. It is important to encourage consumers to practice what they know. There is an opportunity for governments to build on current consumer awareness initiatives to better engage consumers in their part of food safety risk management. 3. Harmonize Private Standards to Protect the Public Interest There is an alphabet soup of private food safety standards that, theoretically, make an important contribution to enhanced food safety. However, little is known empirically about how well they achieve food safety objectives. More clarity is needed on what private standards are contributing, and how they might be further harmonized to foster wider, and more efficient, uptake among industry participants. 4. Make Greater Use of Technology to Improve Visibility and Traceability Technology has a substantial role to play in reducing food safety risks through innovations in manufacturing processes, better machinery, food additives, and/or in information technologies that can improve the visibility and traceability of product and ingredient origins. Yet, Canadians appear to be conservative and sceptical about innovation, especially as it relates to products they ingest. This is reflected in regulatory approaches to new technology approval that are slow and hamper much-needed innovation in the sector. Canadians would benefit from an open debate on the regulatory process, and a deeper understanding of how the system makes its judgements regarding risks. 5. Add Resources to Address Food Safety Risks Due to Globalization open + Developing the Canadians get more of their food from international Canadian Food sources than ever before. The volume of imports makes it difficult for Canada’s import control system to ensure that Strategy imported foods meet the same standards as domestic foods. To reduce food safety risks as trade increases and proliferates, Canada could consider adding resources for risk management of international sources while maintaining current domestic resourcing levels. Government and industry could discuss jointly how industry involvement in food safety assurance in the international arena could be increased to complement government efforts. One possible strategy would be to explore how international industry standards for food safety processes could be harmonized to a high standard. 1 See Appendix A in the full report for calculation. 2 See Appendix A in the full report for an explanation of the challenges related to calculating the financial impact of food-borne illness in Canada. 3 This definition is adapted and modified from the definition used by the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations: “Food safety refers to all those hazards, whether chronic or acute, that may make food injurious to the health of the consumer.” Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and the World Health Organization, Assuring Food Safety and Quality, 6. 4 Charlebois and MacKay, World Ranking, 21. ^ top of page Daniel Munro Principal Research Associate Organizational Effectiveness and Learning Jean-Charles Le Vallée Senior Research Associate Organizational Effectiveness and Learning James Stuckey Research Associate Organizational Effectiveness and Learning 4/5 1/19/2014 Improving Food Safety in Canada: Toward a More Risk-Responsive System Contact Us | About Us | Careers | Sitemap | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Accessibility Insights. Understanding. Impact. Follow Us We are dedicated to building a better future for Canadians by making our economy and society more dynamic and competitive. © Copyright 2014 The Conference Board of Canada,* 255 Smyth Road, Ottawa ON K1H 8M7 Canada *Incorporated by AERIC Inc., Agreement No. 40063028 5/5
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

View attached explanation and answer. Let me know if you have any questions.


Supply Chain

Student Name
Course Code and Title
Instructor’s Name

Supply Chain
The food sector plays an essential role in the economic development of a country. The
food sustainability of a country is dependent on the effectiveness of the food supply chain
system and supply chain management (Liu, 2018). Depending on the type of food, after
harvest, it is stored and then distributed to the consumers.

Effective supply chain

management ensures that the food is effectively and efficiently delivered to consumers.
Effective supply chain management also ensures that the safety standards and regulations are
adhered to (Koufteros & Lu, 2017). The government strives to ensure that the food safety
standards are complied with by all the stakeholders such as farmers, distributors, and
retailers. However, despite the safety regulations, there are several incidences of food safety
issues in Canada and globally. Various factors contribute to food safety incidents. For
example, Canada imports food from many countries such as China, Mexico, Italy, France,
and the United States. Thus due to the different regulations on Canada and import countries,
regulating the sector becomes complicated. Therefore, it is critical to analyze various aspects
of food supply chain management and safety in Canada.

This report uses scholarly

information and corporate websites to analyze the food supply chain safety in the Canadian
An Overview of Food Safety in Canada
In Canada, everyone, including the government and consumers, has obligations to
ensure food safety. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) is tasked with ensuring
that the food safety regulations for domestic and imported food are adhered to. However,
despite the strict safety standards, the safety risk cannot be eliminated. According to Canada
and Vallée (2012), there are 6.8 million cases of food poisoning in the country; an indicator
that more needs to be done to improve the food supply chain safety. The majority of the food
poisoning cases cause minor discomforts such as stomach aches and diarrhea. The instances

of large-scale food poisoning are rare, which is in contrast to other countries such as China.
However, there are likely to be increased incidences of food safety issues in the country is
due to the complexity of the supply chain associated with globalization (Pinstrup-Andersen,
2013). For example, the ingredients to manufacture some products are imported from various
countries, some of which have unclear food safety standards. Also, as the population is
aging, more people are becoming more vulnerable to food-borne infections. Thus, if the
country is to continue assuring the citizens of food safety, it must continue updating the food
policies to deal with the changing environment. The next part addresses various questions
about food safety in Canada.
Do Different Microbiological Food Diseases Imply Different Food risks? Why? How do
you Measure Them?
The different microbial food diseases imply different food risks. The reason behind
this assertion is that different microbial diseases have different levels of risks. For example,
food pathogens require different temperatures to be destroyed; hence the food carries
different risks. The risk associated with foods is assessed through microbial risk analysis.
Microbial risk analysis is essential in determining the safety of different foods. Microbial risk
analysis is a process of risk associated with the biological hazards in foods (Dunn et al.,
2015). The food's risk can be assessed in various ways.
Qualitative Risk Assessment
Qualitative risk analysis is one of the popular methods used to measure microbial
food diseases risk. According to the World Health Organization (2009), the method is used
to assess imports of animals and their products. Traditionally, this method is used for
assessing the risk associated with exotic pathogens entering an importing country; for
example, although foot and mouth disease is not a public health concern, governments of
many countries ban the importance of contaminated products to prevent the spread of the

pathogen in the country. The purpose of qualitative assessment is to evaluate whether the
products have acceptable risk and if the safeguards such as testing, freezing, cooking, and the
total ban should be applied. The assessment establishes whether the pathogens are present
and the number of pathogens in the products.

The qualitative risk assessment follows

various principles: hazard identification, risk question definition, determining the steps in the
risk pathway, information gathering, conducting logical analysis of information, and ensuring
that all the information is credible and fully referenced (World Health Organization, 2009).
The qualitative method is appropriate where it is not necessary to quantify the risks;
for example, the retailers use rating systems to assess food safety; thus, risk quantification is
not necessary when rating scales and systems are used. However, the qualitative assessment
has been criticized for relying on subjective judgments and opinions (Chen et al., 2020). For
example, when the expert assesses the risk of food qualitatively, he rates the risks as high,
low, and negligible; however, in doing so, he or she uses personal judgment that can differ
from one person to another. To deal with this issue, the transparent documentation of data
that led to a conclusion is necessary (World Health Organization, 2009). An example of
qualitative risk assessment documentation extract is indicated in figure 1.
Figure 1:
Qualitative Risk Estimates and Conclusions


Adapted from the World Health Organization (2009).
When the assessor indicates that the risk of a particular pathogen causing the disease
is negligible, it means that that the risk cannot be differentiated from zero. Zero is not used in
the microbial analysis because it is impossible to rule out risk (World Health Organization,
Quantitative Assessment
The quantitative assessment uses numerical data to support the evidence of a risk
assessment. This type of assessment can either be deterministic or probabilistic. Deterministic
means that the model is described by single values like percentiles and means, while the
probabilistic model uses the probability distributions. The models used most for determining
the food safety risk are probabilistic quantitative risk analysis.

Using numerical values

means that this approach can provide a more refined and detailed analysis of risk than the
qualitative analysis, facilitating a comparison between the risks and risk management
strategies. The main limitation of the probabilistic models is complexity, which makes them
hard to understand by the stakeholders without statistics or mathematical knowledge. The

quantitative models combine with the parameters; probability of the risk occurring and the
impact of the...

I was struggling with this subject, and this helped me a ton!


Related Tags