Advertisement

Crime Prevention and Community Safety

, Volume 21, Issue 1, pp 42–60 | Cite as

Advancing understanding of pinch-points and crime prevention in the food supply chain

  • Jan Mei SoonEmail author
  • Louise Manning
  • Robert Smith
Original Article

Abstract

From a crime prevention perspective, food crime remains a challenge. Whilst opportunity for crime can be reduced by implementing situational measures and addressing the potential perpetrators, their possible actions and criminal behaviour, the trade-offs which occur in the food supply chain that motivate such activity still remains complex. These heuristic factors have led, in this study, to the consideration of “pinch-points” where crime could occur as a result of capability, opportunity, motivation, rationalisation and supply chain pressure. Pinch-points can be addressed using the Food Crime Countermeasures Framework conceptualised in this paper. We argue that conventional anti-fraud measures—detection, deterrence and prevention—are essential to support food fraud risk assessments, as are continuous interventions and response strategies. The implementation of countermeasures that initially drive prevention and deterrence and where required, detection, intervention and response form the basis of our approach. Whilst this paper focuses on the UK, however, it should recognise that food crime is a global issue.

Keywords

Continuous interventions Countermeasures Fraud Vulnerability 

Notes

References

  1. Beil, D. 2009. Supplier selection. Available at: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~dbeil/Supplier_Selection_Beil-EORMS.pdf. Accessed 2 Jan 2018.
  2. Bettman, J.R., E.J. Johnson, and J.W. Payne. 1990. A componential analysis of cognitive effort in choice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 45: 111–139.Google Scholar
  3. Borghesi, A. and B. Gaudenzi. 2013. Operational risk and supply chain risk management. In Risk management (pp. 117–137). Milan: Springer.Google Scholar
  4. Boulis, A., S. Ganeriwal, and M.B. Srivastava. 2003. Aggregation in sensor networks: An energy–accuracy trade-off. Ad Hoc Networks 1(2): 317–331.Google Scholar
  5. Campbell, D.E., and J.S. Kelly. 1994. Trade-off theory. The American Economic Review 84(2): 422–426.Google Scholar
  6. Carson, S., and R. Bull. 2003. Handbook of psychology in legal contexts. Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  7. Charlebois, S., A. Schwab, R. Henn, and C.W. Huck. 2016. Food fraud: An exploratory study for measuring consumer perception towards mislabeled food products and influence on self- authentication intentions. Trends in Food Science & Technology 50: 211–218.Google Scholar
  8. Chon, K.H.S. 2016. Cybercrime precursors: Towards a model of offender resources. Available at: https://openresearch-repository.anu.edu.au/handle/1885/107344. Accessed 2 Jan 2018.
  9. Christopher, M., and H. Peck. 2004. Building the resilient supply chain. International Journal of Logistics Management 15(2): 1–13.Google Scholar
  10. Clapton, W. 2014. Risk and hierarchy in international society: Liberal interventions in the post-cold war era. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  11. Clarke, R.V. 1995. Situational crime prevention, crime and justice Vol. 19, building a safer society: Strategic approaches to crime. Prevention 1995: 91–150.Google Scholar
  12. Closs, D.J. and E.F. McGarrell. 2004. Enhancing security throughout the supply chain. Washington, DC: IBM Center for the Business of Government. Available at: https://www-03.ibm.com/procurement/proweb.nsf/objectdocswebview/filesupply+chain+security+white+paper+and+assessment+guide+april+2004/$file/supply+chain+security+white+paper+and+assessment+guide+april+2004.pdf. Accessed on 2 Jan 2018.
  13. Cohen, L.E., and M. Felson. 1979. Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Association 44: 588–608.Google Scholar
  14. CPNI Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure. 2013. CPNI insider data collection study: Report of main findings. Available at: http://www.cpni.gov.uk/Documents/Publications/2013/2013003-insider_data_collection_study.pdf. Accessed 2 Jan 2018.
  15. Dane, E., and M.G. Pratt. 2007. Exploring intuition and its role in managerial decision making. Academy of Management Review 32(1): 33–54.Google Scholar
  16. Elliott Review. 2014. Elliott review into the integrity and assurance of food supply networksFinal report A national food crime prevention framework. HM Government, July 2014 London.Google Scholar
  17. EC 178/2002. 2002. Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European parliament and of the council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety. Official Journal of the European Communities L31/1: 1–24.Google Scholar
  18. Feng, C.W., L. Liu, and S.A. Burns. 1997. Using genetic algorithms to solve construction time-cost trade-off problems. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering 11(3): 184–189.Google Scholar
  19. Franks, N.R., A. Dornhaus, J.P. Fitzsimmons, and M. Stevens. 2003. Speed versus accuracy in collective decision making. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences 270(1532): 2457–2463.Google Scholar
  20. Gigerenzer, G., and W. Gaissmaier. 2011. Heuristic decision making. Annual Review of Psychology 62: 451–482.Google Scholar
  21. Gregson, N., and M. Crang. 2017. Illicit economies: Customary illegality, moral economies and circulation. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 42(2): 206–219.Google Scholar
  22. Häubl, G., and V. Trifts. 2000. Consumer decision making in online shopping environments: The effects of interactive decision aids. Marketing Science 19(1): 4–21.Google Scholar
  23. Hollis, M.E., and J.M. Wilson. 2014. Who are the guardians in product counterfeiting? A theoretical application of routine activities theory. Crime Prevention and Community Safety 16(3): 169–188.Google Scholar
  24. Huber, O., and U. Kunz. 2007. Time pressure in risky decision-making: Effect on risk defusing. Psychology Science 49(4): 415.Google Scholar
  25. Jack. L. 2015. Food fraud awareness and detection in your business. NSF Food Crime Conference. Available at: http://www.nsf-food-conf.eu/assets/6_food_fraud_awareness_and_detection_ljack.pdf. Accessed 2 Jan 2018.
  26. Johnson, E.J., and J.W. Payne. 1985. Effort and accuracy in choice. Management Science 31: 394–414.Google Scholar
  27. Kerstholt, J. 1994. The effect of time pressure on decision-making behaviour in a dynamic task environment. Acta Psychologica 86(1): 89–104.Google Scholar
  28. Kirby, S., and S. Penna. 2010. Policing mobile criminality: Towards a situational crime prevention approach to organised crime. In eds. K. Bullock, R.V. Clarke and N. Tilley.Google Scholar
  29. Kirby, S., and L. Nailer. 2013. Reducing the offending of a UK organized crime group using an opportunity-reducing framework—a three year case study. Trends in Organized Crime 16(4): 397–412.Google Scholar
  30. Klapwijk, C.J., M.T. van Wijk, T.S. van Rosenstock, P.J.A. Asten, P.K. Thornton, and K.E. Giller. 2014. Analysis of trade-offs in agricultural systems: Current status and way forward. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 6: 110–115.Google Scholar
  31. Kowalska, A., J.M. Soon, and L. Manning. 2018. A study on adulteration in cereals and bakery products from Poland including a review of definitions. Food Control 92: 348–356.Google Scholar
  32. Luce, M.F., J.W. Payne, and J.R. Bettman. 1999. Emotional trade-off difficulty and choice. Journal of Marketing Research 36(2): 143–159.Google Scholar
  33. Makwasha, T., and B. Turner. 2013. Evaluating the use of rural-urban gateway treatments in New Zealand. Journal of the Australasian College of Road Safety 24(4): 14.Google Scholar
  34. Manning, L. 2016. Food Fraud, policy and food chain. Current Opinions in Food Science 10: 16–21.Google Scholar
  35. Manning, L. 2018. Institute of food science and technology. Food and drink - good manufacturing practice: A guide to its responsible management (GMP7) 7th ed. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  36. Manning, L., R.N. Baines, and S.A. Chadd. 2005. Deliberate contamination of the food supply chain. British Food Journal 107(4): 225–245.Google Scholar
  37. Manning, L., R. Smith, and J.M. Soon. 2016. Developing an organizational typology of criminals in the meat supply chain. Food Policy 59: 44–54.Google Scholar
  38. Manning, L., and J.M. Soon. 2016. Food safety, food fraud and food defense: A fast evolving literature. Journal of Food Science 81(4): R823–R834.Google Scholar
  39. Manning, L., Soon. J.M. de Aguiar, L.K., Eastham, J.F. and Higashi, S.Y. 2017. Pressure: driving illicit behaviour in the food supply chain. In 12th Research Workshop on Institutions and Organisations (12th RWIO) Brazil 10–11 July 2017.Google Scholar
  40. Marvin, H.J., Y. Bouzembrak, E.M. van der Janssen, H.J. van Fels-Klerx, E.D. Asselt, and G.A. Kleter. 2016. A holistic approach to food safety risks: Food fraud as an example. Food Research International 89: 463–470.Google Scholar
  41. Maule, A.J., G.R.J. Hockey, and L. Bdzola. 2000. Effects of time-pressure on decision-making under uncertainty: Changes in affective state and information processing strategy. Acta Psychologica 104(3): 283–301.Google Scholar
  42. Mawby, R.I. 2017. Defensible space. In Oxford research encyclopedia of criminology and criminal justice, ed. Henry. Pontell. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  43. McElwee, G., R. Smith, and J. Lever. 2017. Illegal activity in the UK halal (sheep) supply chain: Towards greater understanding. Food Policy 69: 166–175.Google Scholar
  44. McGloin, J.M., C.J. Sullivan, and L.W. Kennedy. 2011. When crime appears: The role of emergence. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  45. Mitenius, N., S.P. Kennedy, and F.F. Busta. 2014. Chapter 35: Food defense. In Food safety management: A practical guide for the food industry, ed. Y. Motarjemi and H. Lelieveld, 937–958. Massachusetts: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  46. Monghasemi, S., M.R. Nikoo, M.A.K. Fasaee, and J. Adamowski. 2015. A novel multi criteria decision making model for optimizing time-cost-quality trade-off problems in construction projects. Expert Systems with Applications 42(6): 3089–3104.Google Scholar
  47. Moreto, W.D. and R.V. Clarke. 2013. 11 Script analysis of the transnational illegal market in endangered species. Cognition and Crime: Offender Decision Making and Script Analyses, p. 209.Google Scholar
  48. Newman, O. 1972. Defensible space: People and design in a violent city. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  49. NFU Mutual. 2017. Rural crime now. Rural crime report 2017. Available at: https://www.nfuonline.com/nfu-online/news/nfu-mutual-rural-crime-report-2017/. Accessed on 21 May 2018.
  50. NSF. 2014. Final report risk modelling of food fraud motivationNSF Fraud Protection Model intelligent risk model scoping project. Available at: https://www.food.gov.uk/sites/default/files/NSF%20Final%20report.pdf. Accessed 2 Jan 2018.
  51. O’Connor, A.M., F. Légaré, and D. Stacey. 2003. Risk communication in practice: the contribution of decision aids. BMJ: British Medical Journal 327(7417): 736.Google Scholar
  52. Olson, D.L., and D. Wu. 2011. Risk management models for supply chain: A scenario analysis of outsourcing to China. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 16(6): 401–408.Google Scholar
  53. PAS 96. 2017. Guide to protecting and defending food and drink from deliberate attack. London: BSI.Google Scholar
  54. Perline, I.H., and J. Goldschmidt. 2004. The psychology and law of workplace violence: A handbook for mental health professionals and employers. Springfield: Charles C Thomas Publisher.Google Scholar
  55. Pil, F.K., and M. Holweg. 2006. Evolving from value chain to value grid. MIT Sloan Management Review 47(4): 72.Google Scholar
  56. Power, M. 2013. The apparatus of fraud risk. Accounting, Organizations and Society 38: 525–543.Google Scholar
  57. Prendergast, C. 2002. The tenuous trade-off between risk and incentives. Journal of Political Economy 110(5): 1071–1102.Google Scholar
  58. RASFF. Portal. 2018. The rapid alert system for food and feed. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/food/sites/food/files/safety/docs/rasff. Accessed 2 Jan 2018.
  59. RASFF. 2018. The rapid alert system for food and feed. In Conclusions from the Ministerial Conference on the follow up of the fipronil incident. Brussels, 26 September 2017 Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/food/sites/food/files/safety/docs/rasff_fipronil-incident_conclusions_201709.pdf. Accessed 2 Jan 2018.
  60. Read, T. and N. Tilley. 2000. Not rocket science. Problem-solving and crime reduction. ISBN 1-84082-494-8.Google Scholar
  61. Reynald, D.M. 2009. Guardianship in action: Developing a new tool for measurement. Crime Prevention and Community Safety 1(1): 1–20.Google Scholar
  62. Roy, H.E., J. Peyton, D.C. Aldridge, T. Bantock, T.M. Blackburn, R. Britton, P. Clark, E. Cook, K. Dehnen-Schmutz, T. Dines, and M. Dobson. 2014. Horizon scanning for invasive alien species with the potential to threaten biodiversity in Great Britain. Global Change Biology 20(12): 3859–3871.Google Scholar
  63. Sarkis, J., P. Gonzalez-Torre, and B. Adenso-Diaz. 2010. Stakeholder pressure and the adoption of environmental practices: The mediating effect of training. Journal of Operations Management 28(2): 163–176.Google Scholar
  64. Shugan, S.M. 1980. The cost of thinking. Journal of Consumer Research 7(2): 99–111.Google Scholar
  65. Smith, R. 2010. Policing the changing landscape of rural crime: A case study from Scotland. International Journal of Police Science and Management 12(3): 373–387.Google Scholar
  66. Smith, R. 2017. Documenting entrepreneurial opportunism in action: A case study of sheep theft in the UK from a food supply chain perspective. British Food Journal 119(1): 105–121.Google Scholar
  67. Smith, R. and G. McElwee. 2017. Illegal activity in the Horse Meat’ supply chain: Understanding food fraud in the context of the 2013 Horsemeat Scandal. ISBE, Belfast, 8–9 November, 2017.Google Scholar
  68. Smith, R., L. Manning, and G. McElwee. 2017a. Critiquing the inter-disciplinary literature on food-fraud. International Journal of Rural Criminology 3(2): 250–270.Google Scholar
  69. Smith, R., G. McElwee, and P. Somerville. 2017b. Illegal diversification strategies in the farming community from a UK perspective. Journal of Rural Studies 53: 122–131.Google Scholar
  70. Soon, J.M., and L. Manning. 2017. Whistleblowing as a countermeasure strategy against food crime. British Food Journal 119(12): 1–25.Google Scholar
  71. Spink, J. 2011. The challenge of intellectual property enforcement for agriculture technology transfers, additives, raw materials, and finished goods against product fraud and counterfeiters. Journal of Intellectual Property Rights 16(2): 183–193.Google Scholar
  72. Spink, J., and D.C. Moyer. 2011. Defining the public health threat of food fraud. Journal of Food Science 76(9): 157–163.Google Scholar
  73. Spink, J., and D.C. Moyer. 2013. Understanding and combating food fraud. Food Technology 67(1): 30–35.Google Scholar
  74. Spink, J., D.C. Moyer, H. Park, Y. Wu, V. Fersht, B. Shao, M. Hong, S.Y. Paek, and D. Edelev. 2015. Introduction to food fraud including translation and interpretation to Russian, Korean and Chinese languages. Food Chemistry 189: 102–107.Google Scholar
  75. Spink, J., D.C. Moyer, and P. Whelan. 2016. The role of the public private partnership in Food Fraud prevention—includes implementing the strategy. Current Opinion in Food Science 10: 68–75.Google Scholar
  76. Spink, J., D.L. Ortega, C. Chen, and F. Wu. 2017. Food fraud prevention shifts the food risk focus to vulnerability. Trends in Food Science & Technology 62: 215–220.Google Scholar
  77. Stanley, M.C., J.R. Beggs, I.E. Bassett, B.R. Burns, K.N. Dirks, D.N. Jones, W.L. Linklater, C. Macinnis-Ng, R. Simcock, G. Souter-Brown, and S.A. Trowsdale. 2015. Emerging threats in urban ecosystems: a horizon scanning exercise. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 13(10): 553–560.Google Scholar
  78. van Ruth, S.M., W. Huisman, and P.A. Luning. 2017. Food fraud vulnerability and its key factors. Trends in Food Science & Technology 67: 70–75.Google Scholar
  79. Weisel, D.L. 2003. The sequence of analysis in solving problems. Crime Prevention Studies 15: 115–146.Google Scholar
  80. WHO. 2002. Food safety issues: terrorist threats to food: guidance for establishing and strengthening prevention and response systems 2002. Switzerland. ISBN 9241545844.Google Scholar
  81. Winter, S., N. Berente, J. Howison, and B. Butler. 2014. Beyond the organizational ‘container’: Conceptualizing 21st century sociotechnical work. Information and Organization 24(4): 250–269.Google Scholar
  82. Wolfe, D.T., and D.R. Hermanson. 2004. The fraud diamond: Considering the four elements of fraud. CPA Journal 74(12): 38–42.Google Scholar
  83. Yakovleva, N., and A. Flynn. 2004. Innovation and sustainability in the food system: A case of chicken production and consumption in the UK. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning 6(3–4): 227–250.Google Scholar
  84. Yaniv, I., and D.P. Foster. 1995. Graininess of judgment under uncertainty: An accuracy-informativeness trade-off. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 124(4): 424.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Limited 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.International Institute of Nutritional Sciences and Applied Food Safety Studies, School of Sport and WellbeingUniversity of Central LancashirePrestonUK
  2. 2.Harper Adams UniversityNewport, ShropshireUK
  3. 3.School of Business and EnterpriseUniversity of the West of ScotlandDumfriesUK

Personalised recommendations