Opinion of: Fraser Edwards, co -founder and CEO, Cheqd
Brutal honesty has its place, especially after they encounter symptoms. Here is one that can not be sweetened with honey: 96% of the imported honey within the UK are unsuitable! Tests showed that 24 out of 25 glasses were suspicious or not the official standards.
The self-sovereign identity (SSI) can fix this.
The British agency for food standards and the European Commission each urge the reform to oversee this problem by creating a sturdy database for traceability in supply chain networks to make sure the transparency and trust of consumers. However, data isn’t the issue. The problem is that individuals manipulate about it.
This isn’t the primary time that products are undeveloped. The Honey Authenticity network illuminated that a 3rd of all honey products were fake in 2020, a fraudulent industry of three.4 billion euros (3.65 million US dollars) were fake who entered the EU in 2023, because the European Commission was reported.
What is EMA and the way does it affect honey?
Economically motivated falsification (EMA) deliberately accommodates helpful ingredients through inexpensive products akin to sweeteners or oil of low quality. This practice results in serious economic and health complications – and in some cases diseases – because of the toxic additives of substitute products.
The falsification often includes the creation of an ultra-diluted mix that accommodates a minimal dietary value, and counterfeits call it … honey.
Fraudsters dilute the product with a corn syrup with high fructose or increase the thickness with starch or gelatin. These adulterers imitate the chemical profile of honey rigorously and make it extremely difficult to acknowledge with conventional tests akin to the mass spectrometry of the isotope ratio. Fake honey is missing the essential enzymes that give real honey its taste and nutrients. In order to make things worse, the properties of honey vary on nectar sources, the harvest time, geography and way more.
Some firms filter pollen content, a crucial identification of the geographical origin of a honey before they’re exported to mediation countries akin to Vietnam or India with a purpose to further disguise the method. As soon as this is completed, the products are delivered to supermarket shelves and labeled with false certifications to master higher prices. This tactic uses the incontrovertible fact that many regulatory authorities lack the funds to envision every program.
The hidden costs for food fraud
The supply chain is deeply broken because a glass honey hits six to eight details in the provision chain before it arrives on the shelves in Great Britain. Current practices make the authenticity test extremely difficult. In conjunction with the inefficient bureaucracy based on paper, which makes it difficult to pursue attempts to trial in mediation countries, we cannot reliably determine the true extent of food fraud.
An estimate by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) suggests that at the least 1% of the worldwide food industry, possibly as much as $ 40 billion a yr, is affected – and it could possibly be even higher.
New: WHat is a decentralized identity in blockchain?
Fraudulent practices not only harm consumers – they destroy the livelihood of beekeepers, flood the market and destroy the profitability for legitimate dealers. Ziya Sahin, a Turkish beekeeper, explained the frustration concerning the regulation of food fraud:
“Our beekeepers are indignant and so they ask why we do nothing to stop it. But we’ve got no authority to examine,” he said. “I can't even ask street sellers if their honey is real.”
While there may be a growing appetite for more reliable tests and stricter enforcement, the solutions are back. The last attempt by the EU to repair this? Digital product passes are designed in such a way that they pursue the origins and composition of Honey, but they’re already being manipulated as ineffective and simple to control and ultimately leave the door open in order that fraud is sustained.
EU passes are an ineffective solution
The digital product pass of the European Union goals to combat this by improving the traceability and transparency in its supply chains. By 2030, all goods within the EU should have a digital product pass that accommodates detailed information concerning the life cycle, origin and environmental effects of the product.
While the concept sounds promising, it doesn’t recognize to what extent fraudsters can smear certificates and dark origins by with the ability to pass on products along with the officials who make a watch.
At the guts of this problem is trust. Although history shows that these rules can and are bent, we depend on governments to implement laws and regulations. The technology, then again, is agnostic and doesn’t deal with money or incentives.
This is the fundamental error of the EU approach – a system based on human supervision that’s at risk of corruption for which these supply chains are already known.
Self -Romanesque identity (SSI) for products
Many persons are already aware of the scalability trilemma, however the Trust trust triangle is a key concept for SSI that defines how trust between issuers, owners and verification is set. It is way more difficult, since each product must be supported by verifiable proof of authorization of a trustworthy source with a purpose to prove that it’s real.
As manufacturers or certification sites, issuers create checkable registration information that confirms the authenticity of a product. The owner, often the product owner, stores and presents these login information if vital. Verifiers – akin to retailers, customs officials or consumers – can check the validity of the cancellation information without counting on a government.
Checkable login information is protected by cryptography. If someone tries to sell fake products, their missing or invalid login information immediately reveal the fraud.
The government's reforms must transcend the present regulatory supervision and research the approach described within the Trust trilemma for securing the provision chains from widespread falsification and fraud.
SSI provides the underlying infrastructure that’s vital to reliably pursue the identity of products over several bodies, standards and regions. By enabling manipulation-proof, end-to-end traceability in each individual product OB, a glass honey or a designer handbag delight SSI be certain that sufficient validators confirm that the info is correct to combat fraud and veiling tests.
SSI also enables consumers to review products independently without counting on third -party databases. Buyers can scan the product with a purpose to authenticate its origin and history directly via the cryptographic certification confirmed by the validators with a purpose to further reduce the chance of misinformation, even when it reaches the shelves. This would also help reduce corruption and inefficiencies, since many checks are carried out on paper that could be easily modified and are a slow process.
Since the methods between honey fraud proceed to expand, consumers and native firms also damage themselves. Steps to combat these methods must due to this fact expand. The EU's digital product passes aim to enhance traceability. But unfortunately they’ve the fraudsters' sophistication. The implementation of SSI is a vital step to effectively tackle the extent of the fraudsters to be certain that your product arrives on shelves.
Opinion of: Fraser Edwards, co -founder and CEO, Cheqd.
This article serves general information purposes and mustn’t be considered legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts and opinions which can be expressed listed here are solely that of the writer and don’t necessarily reflect the views and opinions of cointelegraph or don’t necessarily represent them.
