《欧盟关于可追溯性Traceability方面的讲座PPT 04_pp_jrc_flt.ppt》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《欧盟关于可追溯性Traceability方面的讲座PPT 04_pp_jrc_flt.ppt（30页珍藏版）》请在三一文库上搜索。
1、Farm Level Traceability (FLT): a step ahead in CAP reform implementation,Paolo PIZZIOL (paolo.pizzioljrc.it),PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 2 / 17,Definitions,Traceability is the ability to trace the history, application or location of that which is under consideration (ISO 9001: 2000) Farm
2、 Level traceability is a concept which encompasses a wide range record keeping in farm management, starting from detailed geo-referencing of all individual parcels comprising the farm, to the dynamic correlation among parcels with a view of fine-tuning the farming system and achieving a more sustain
3、able and profitable farming.,PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 3 / 17,EU Legal basis (for traceability),-Traceability systems for Labelling/Certification were already in place PGI, PDO Plant Health Regime (plant passport system-since 1993) Animal Health Regime (since 1993),-After the BSE crisi
4、s, Traceability became a must Regulation (EC) 1760/2000,-General Food Law (GFL): Traceability for all food and feed Regulation (EC) 178/2002,-GMO Food and Feed Traceability and Labelling: Regulation (EC) 1830/2003,-GFL is among the SMR of cross compliance (CAP reform) Council Regulation (EC) 1782/20
5、03,Inside GFL, Minimum requirements are actually: keep record of one-step ahead /one step back partners and products label products to facilitate its traceability,PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 4 / 17,Traceability: why?,PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 5 / 17,Other definitions,Geo-tr
6、aceability : associates geographical coordinates to relevant information for production traceability Tracing: determining the history of a food throughout the food chain Upward: from farm to fork Downward: from fork to farm Tracking: determining the location of a certain food in the food chain in a
7、certain moment track back: one step down track forward: one step up Record keeping is collecting all relevant data and information,PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 6 / 17,Traceability: dedicated technologies,Traceability systems could range within different levels of complexity: Paper records
8、 Digital records DB, on-line DB, ad hoc SW solutions, GIS, remote sensing, GPS, GPRS, barcode scanners Automatic recording (RFID, bar code etc., wireless connections) to minimise burden and to require (target) from farmers only validation Anyway, a baseline information is needed (farm-diagnosis) to
9、assess what is appropriate for the specific business,PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 7 / 17,Traceability: available technologies and questioning,Traceability is actually a reality for many food producers e.g. EurepGAP Sectorial schemes (eggs, meat etc.) etc., Is there a problem of traceabili
10、ty systems compatibility? Could a Unique spatial ID help in the integration of different databases? Could LPIS be a basis for an effective traceability system? Of course, YES! Because LPIS provide updated information on the parcel (location- geo-referenced and surroundings-, size, shape, crop use, h
11、istory) Are there technologies facilitating record collection by minimising the active data entry on farmers side?,PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 8 / 17,Disclaimer: The views expressed are purely those of the writer, and may not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official positi
12、on of the European Commission. 1. Overview of the current situation 2. What we envisage,FLT(+ LPIS) and FAS: a step ahead in the CAP reform,PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 9 / 17,Conclusions (1),FLT consists basically of data acquisition, storage and analysis but FLT, as structured and consi
13、stent source of information, based on LPIS, could be an asset to add value and help farm diagnosis and improve farming systems ergo support CAP implementation FLT implementation requires know-how, competence, training, resources (Legal) FLT minimum requirements could be extended FAS could benefit fr
14、om the information granted by FLT. Integration of FLT data into FAS is desirable,PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 10 / 17,Conclusions (2),Risks of not implementing FLT(+ LPIS) Too much administration (application, contracts etc.) Extra cost for producers (especially if not IT literate) Liabil
15、ity of operator in case of problems Benefits Facilitated application procedure Saving useful information usually lost in the supply chain Simplified management if information is collected properly If the information collected is in the frame of a traceability systems (record keeping), this could pro
16、vide an automatic certification for Cross-compliance,PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 11 / 17,Conclusions (3),Which role could play JRC? Stimulate discussion Perform and/or coordinate research/studies Lead networking of MS administrations/private companies Define/promote best practices Provid
17、e guidelines drafting,We think that the challenge at this stage is to convince policy makers and farmers of the added value of an adequately implemented traceability and therefore perform studies demonstrating this.,PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 12 / 17,Thanks for your attention !,PETER Wo
18、rkshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 13 / 17,Traceability purposes: quality (not exhaustive!),Record keeping demonstrate/certify the production protocol in place (e.g. organic farming) Geo-referencing could certificate place of origin (and distances e.g. for GMO-free products) This certification is more
19、reliable if record are kept using state of art technology (RFID, bar code lectors, PDA, GPS etc.),PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 14 / 17,Traceability purposes: recalls,Recalls should be targeted to reduce the risk for consumers without jeopardising the entire food chain Recalls have a finan
20、cial impact for the operator(s) and for the Community. This impact can be minimised insofar the traceability system in place is accurate In case of plant products, the highest level of accuracy achievable is the identification of the parcel,PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 15 / 17,ADMINISTRAT
21、ION,Parcels,Crops,CAP implementation: the current situation,M A R K E T S,ADMINISTRATION,IACS-GIS,Public FAS,Private FAS,Traceability, Record keeping ,Application for subsidies,ADVICES,Subsidies,PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 16 / 17,but requiring a huge and repetitive transfer of informati
22、on,CAP implementation: the integrated solution (1),PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 17 / 17,IACS (LPIS) Declarations Administrative and and demands “on the spot” controls,CAP implementation: the integrated solution (2),PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 18 / 17,CAP implementation: the in
23、tegrated solution (3),Cooperatives,Farmers unions,Companies,Technical specifications Controls FLT - TRACEABILITY,PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 19 / 17,FAS Awareness Diagnosis,CAP implementation: the integrated solution (4),Cross-compliance,PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 20 / 17,IA
24、CS (LPIS) Declarations Administrative and “on the spot” controls,Technical specifications Controls FLT - TRACEABILITY,CAP implementation: the integrated solution (5),PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 21 / 17,IACS (LPIS) Declarations Administrative and “on the spot” controls,Technical specifica
25、tions Controls FLT - TRACEABILITY,FAS Awareness Diagnosis,CAP implementation: the integrated solution (6),Cross-compliance,PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 22 / 17,Admin. Tool N.1: Digital Elevation Model Averaged slope of the parcel,Admin. Tool N.2: Good Farm Practices guideline (database) R
26、ecommended practices,Admin. Tool N.3: CONTROLS Reduction and/or Exclusion according to Cross-Compliance,From parcel Info: Practice: Ploughing Location: parcel GeoID machinery GPS Date & time,Example: ploughing where it could be forbidden,FLT System,Farm Database,Erosion Sensitivity Index of parcels
27、(risk maps),1,PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 23 / 17,Admin. Tool N.1: Digital Elevation Model Averaged slope of the parcel,Admin. Tool N.2: Good Farm Practices guideline (database) Recommended practices,Admin. Tool N.3: CONTROLS Reduction and/or Exclusion according to Cross-Compliance,From
28、parcel Info: Practice: Plugging Location: parcel GeoID machinery GPS Date & time,Example: ploughing where it could be forbidden (2),FLT System,Farm Database,Conform advices supply,2,PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 24 / 17,From parcel Info: Practice: Plugging Location: parcel GeoID machinery
29、GPS Date & time,Example: ploughing where it could be forbidden (3),Admin. Tool N.1: Digital Elevation Model Averaged slope of the parcel,FLT System,Farm Database,On the spot control and negative incentives,Admin. Tool N.2: Good Farm Practices guideline (database) Recommended practices,Admin. Tool N.
30、3: CONTROLS Reduction and/or Exclusion according to Cross-Compliance,3,PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 25 / 17,An example: the EurepGAP approach,EurepGAP Central DB,Geo-Data Trustee,Farmer (field passport),Processing plant,Retailer/Consumer,Cooperative/Warehouse,Supply chain,INTERNET,PETER W
31、orkshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 26 / 17,Traceability: minimum requirements,Place of the treatment (geo-localized) Quality of the treatment Quantity of the treatment Date and conditions of the treatment This information need to be collected in a consistent way, and could be linked to a plot and a ba
32、tch,PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 27 / 17,3) Computer,4) Database,1) Electronic identifier,134.2 kHz,2) Reader,Power,Read,Scan,RF Wave,Electronic Animal Identification System,PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 28 / 17,Principle Technical Architecture,GPRS/GMS,GPS/ Galileo,GPRS/GMS,Rem
33、ote receiver,Positioning and time,Authorized users,Integration between EID and Navigation System (EC Reg 1/2005),PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 29 / 17,Is there any similarity between animal movement and agricultural production traceability?,One or more places (Parcel),One or more species (
34、crops types),One or more destinations (Silos number),One or more cropping systems (diversity of machinery EID and practices GPS),PETER Workshop, YORK 11-13 October 2006 30 / 17,Computer assisted cross check,Today, from 10 to 12h , you have ploughed on parcel 25 to wheat cultivation: “what depth? Orientation? Type of ploughshare? Which working speed?,Automatic info inside farmer GIS/database: Parcel 25 / 20 Ha Winter wheat -,Automatic info from field: Parcel 25 25/09/06 10h to 12h Tractor + plough,25 cm N/E (perpendicular to the averaged slope) Nb 2 4.5km/h,An example,