1. Burkhard Rüther University of Bonn, Germany
Risk management of unintended GMO contamination in the supply chain of maize and processed maize products
Burkhard Rüther
University of Bonn, Germany

2. Background RASFF shows an incomplete picture
Source: BVL 2009
Source: European Commission 2009
RASFF shows an incomplete picture
Contaminations in seeds are not included
Contaminations off the market are mostly not reported
GMO contamination risk results from imported products
rice, sweet potatoes, maize, maize gluten feed …
Source:
Bundesamt für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit. Standortregister 2009.
Portal of the  European Commission, DG Health and Consumers, Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed at “

3. How to manage the GMO risk?
Source: Dörner, Horvath, Kagermann (2000): Praxis des Risikomanagements, p.109
Source: Dörner, Horvath, Kagermann 2000

4. Problem and Objective Problem
No complete and reliable historical data available
Quantitative risk analysis not feasible
Objective
Raise data in order to provide information for enterprise risk management
Expert interviews as best information at hand

5. Data Collection Interviews in the German maize food chain
1st stage: personal interviews
2nd stage: formalized online interviews
450 invitations
18 data sets build the basis for further analysis (4%)

6. Risk assessment - Method
Extended FMEA
Evaluation of 3 risk characteristics (1-10 scale)
probability of a GMO contamination within the next 12 month (Pc)
probability of non-detection of a GMO contamination within the company (Pd)
economic impact of a GMO contamination (I)
The Risk Priority Number represents the GMO risk for company k

7. Risk assessment - Characteristics
Mean risk characteristics
“Seed”
(n = 4)
“Farm”
(n = 3)
“Processing”
(n = 11)
Probability of a GMO contamination within the next 12 month
4.00
3.50
4.55
Probability of non-detection of a GMO contamination within the company
3.60
6.00
5.91
Economic impact of a GMO contamination
4.80
1.25
4.73
Risk Priority Number
80.80
27.25
95.36

8. Risk assessment – Economic impact factors
Mean impact factors
“Seed”
(n = 4)
“Farm”
(n = 3)
“Processing”
(n = 11)
Loss in value of contaminated products
26.86
17.19
8.08
Reduction of profit due to business interruption
12.23
15.63
16.62
Decreasing brand equity
19.36
14.84
18.21
Deprivation of certificates (e.g. organic or marketing programs)
10.75
8.87
Delisting by food wholesale and retailers -
18.24
Costs of product withdrawal
15.61
14.21
Liability for losses in other companies (except costs of product withdrawal)
15.19
19.53
15.78
26.86
17.19
16.62
19.36
18.21
18.24
15.61
17.19
19.53

9. Risk control - Method Self-explicated model
Compositional approach of preference measurement
less cognitive skills on data providing capabilities
greater ease in data collection
Utility function for company k
wjk = the respondents k’s self-explicated importance weights for attribute j,
uijk = the respondents k’s self-explicated scores for level i of attribute j.
Part-worths (wjkuijk) indicate the effectiveness in reducing the risk of losses through GMO contaminations

10. Risk control – Measure overview
Mean effectiveness of risk reducing measures
Control biological processes
Change crop rotation of conventional plants
Installing pollen barrier around GM planting areas
Controlling secondary growth of GM plants
Advanced distances to GM planting areas (up to GM free zones)
Advanced information to neighbors of GM planting areas
Control technical processes
Cleaning of machines, transport- and storage containers
Spatial segregation of GM and conventional material flow
Control goods receiving
PCR analysis while receiving plant products or in supplying companies
Certificates on the non-existence of GMO in plant products
Quality management certificates of supplying companies
Personal examination of supplying companies
Crisis management
Implementing a crisis handbook
Regular crisis practice
Implementing a crisis management group
Implement a system for withdrawing products from the market
Archiving retain samples of products sold
Implement a traceability system

11. Risk control –The “seed” block
Mean effectiveness of risk reducing measures
Effectiveness
(n = 4)
(k = 16)
Ranking
Control biological processes
Installing pollen barrier around GM planting areas
10.86 3
Control technical processes
Cleaning of machines, transport- and storage containers
14.17 2
Spatial segregation of GM and conventional material flow
15.83 1
Control goods receiving
Crisis management

12. Risk control – The “farm” block
Mean effectiveness of risk reducing measures
Effectiveness
(n = 4)
(k = 11)
Ranking
Control biological processes
Control technical processes
Control goods receiving
PCR analysis while receiving plant products or in supplying companies
18.61 3
Certificates on the non-existence of GMO in plant products
20.56 2
Personal examination of supplying companies
21.11 1
Crisis management

13. Risk control – The “processing” block
Mean effectiveness of risk reducing measures
Effectiveness
(n = 4)
(k = 12)
Ranking
Control biological processes
Control technical processes
Control goods receiving
PCR analysis while receiving plant products or in supplying companies
20.70 1
Certificates on the non-existence of GMO in plant products
14.05 3
Personal examination of supplying companies
17.88 2
Crisis management

14. Risk control – Ranking overview
Mean effectiveness of risk reducing measures
Rankings
“seed”
“farm”
“processing“
Control biological processes
Change crop rotation of conventional plants
Installing pollen barrier around GM planting areas 3
Controlling secondary growth of GM plants
Advanced distances to GM planting areas (up to GM free zones)
Advanced information to neighbors of GM planting areas
Control technical processes
Cleaning of machines, transport- and storage containers 2
Spatial segregation of GM and conventional material flow 1
Control goods receiving
PCR analysis while receiving plant products or in supplying companies
Certificates on the non-existence of GMO in plant products
Quality management certificates of supplying companies
Personal examination of supplying companies
Crisis management
Implementing a crisis handbook
Regular crisis practice
Implementing a crisis management group
Implement a system for withdrawing products from the market
Archiving retain samples of products sold
Implement a traceability system

15. Conclusion – Risk assessment
GMO risk is perceived low or moderate in maize producing and processing companies
Seed breeding companies and farms are more concerned with product related losses
Processing companies are more concerned with intangible losses

16. Conclusion – Risk control
Differences in the effectiveness of measures for risk reduction exist
Crisis management is less important than more preventive risk measures
Seed breeding companies emphasis more on control of biological and technical processes
Farms and processing companies emphasis more on control of products receiving

17. Outlook Enlarge the sample size to improve quality of results
Analyze the chain in more detail
Include decompositional instruments

18. Questions?

19. Risk control – Relative weights
Measure group
seed
(n1 = 4)
(k2 = 4)
farm
(n1 = 3)
(k2 = 3)
processing
(n1 = 11)
Control biological processes
41.25
13.33 -
Control technical processes
30.00
22.82
Control goods receiving
11.25
73.33
64.14
Crisis management
17.50
13.05
Total
100
W3 = 0.291, P = 0.32
W3 = 0.233, P = 0.49
W3 = 0.361, P = 0.01

20. Conclusion – Data quality
Presented data derived from experts opinion
Partly not significant results
Small sample size
Potential differences in underlying risk situations
Results not representative

21. Risk control –The “seed” block
Mean values of attributes and top 3 risk reducing measures
Effectiveness
(n = 4)
(k = 16)
Ranking
Control biological processes (5 measures)
41.25
Installing pollen barrier around GM planting areas (10.86) 3
Control technical processes (2 measures)
30.00
Cleaning of machines, transport- and storage containers (14.17) 2
Spatial segregation of GM and conventional material flow (15.83) 1
Control goods receiving (4 measures)
11.25
Crisis management (6 measures)
17.50
Total
100

22. Risk control – The “farm” block
Mean values of attributes and top 3 risk reducing measures
Effectiveness
(n = 4)
(k = 11)
Ranking
Control biological processes (5 measures)
13.33
Control technical processes (2 measures)
Control goods receiving (4 measures)
73.33
PCR analysis while receiving products or in supplying companies (18.61) 3
Certificates on the non-existence of GMO in plant products (20.56) 2
Personal examination of supplying companies (21.11) 1
Crisis management (6 measures) -
Total
100

23. Risk control – The “processing” block
Mean values of attributes and top 3 risk reducing measures
Effectiveness
(n = 4)
(k = 11)
Ranking
Control biological processes (5 measures) -
Control technical processes (2 measures)
22.82
Control goods receiving (4 measures)
64.14
PCR analysis while receiving products or in supplying companies (20.70) 1
Certificates on the non-existence of GMO in plant products (14.05) 3
Personal examination of supplying companies (17.88) 2
Crisis management (6 measures)
13.05
Total
100