Executive Summary

Food fraud, non-compliance, and lack of transparency continue to undermine consumer trust and product integrity in organic and geographical indication (GI) food sectors. The THEROS project presents a technology-enabled approach to traceability, using tools such as IoT sensors, blockchain, and DNA authenticity kit. This brief presents the policy importance of traceability, using findings from THEROS, and recommends steps to support its uptake by control bodies, policymakers, and food industry stakeholders.

Introduction

As global food supply chains grow more complex, the risk of fraud, mislabelling, and non-compliance increases—especially in high-value segments like organic and GI-certified products. Traceability—the ability to track food products through all stages of production, processing, and distribution—is fundamental to ensuring food safety, authenticity, and sustainability. Traceability serves not only consumer protection but also regulatory compliance, brand value, and sustainability objectives. THEROS has developed a novel suite of tools and methodologies to support these goals through digital innovation.

Problem Description

Current traceability systems rely heavily on manual inspections and fragmented data sources, which are susceptible to errors, delays, and fraud. As seen in numerous food scandals, lack of traceability undermines consumer trust and exposes certification bodies to reputational risk. Organic and GI products are particularly vulnerable due to higher market premiums, making them frequent targets of mislabelling and adulteration. The absence of real-time, verifiable data limits the enforcement capabilities of regulatory authorities and hampers efforts toward sustainable, transparent food systems.

Policy Options: THEROS Toolbox Contributions

Option 1: Maintain the Status Quo – Fragmented and Paper-Based Systems

Most traceability practices in Europe still rely on a patchwork of paper records, stand-alone databases, and unverified certifications. While this option minimizes immediate disruption and costs:

  • Risks remain high for fraud, mislabelling, and human error.
  • Consumer trust deteriorates as inconsistencies arise in organic and GI labelling.
  • Enforcement is reactive, slow, and resource intensive.
  • Data verification is difficult, with limited cross-checking capability between actors.

This approach may satisfy minimal compliance but undermines long-term food integrity and competitiveness in premium food markets.

Option 2: Promote Sector-Specific Technology Upgrades Without Integration

In this option, authorities encourage or subsidize digital tools (e.g. blockchain for traders, IoT for logistics, or mobile apps for farmers) but leave integration and interoperability to market forces.

  • Some process efficiencies are gained, especially within individual supply chain stages.
  • However, lack of coordination results in data silos and repeated inputs.
  • Verification remains limited, with gaps between certification, transport, and origin data.
  • Trust is fragmented across actors using incompatible systems.

This option reflects a decentralized innovation strategy, but its benefits are uneven and often inaccessible to smaller producers and certifiers.

Option 3: Implement a Unified, Interoperable Traceability Framework Inspired by THEROS

This proactive approach involves establishing a harmonized digital ecosystem where all traceability components—from DNA testing and blockchain records to EO monitoring and environmental data, dDPP and mobile for MEMS—are interoperable. This is the model demonstrated by the THEROS project across multiple EU pilots.

  • Blockchain-enhanced traceability ensures immutable product histories.
  • IoT system tracks real-time product conditions.
  • MEMS system detects adulterations.
  • DNA-based authenticity kits verify species and origin.
  • Digital Marketplace integrates verified producer data into consumer-facing platforms.
  • Green Accountability Tool (GAT) links traceability to sustainability metrics.
  • Verification methodology ensures effectiveness in diverse real-world contexts.

The benefits of this option include:

  • End-to-end transparency across supply chains.
  • Data integrity and faster fraud detection.
  • Regulatory alignment with EU sustainability and digitalisation goals.
  • Stronger consumer confidence and international market positioning.

Though this requires initial investment, capacity building, and coordination, it offers the most reliable path to modern, secure, and fair food systems.

Conclusion and Recommendations

Traceability is no longer optional. It is a policy imperative. THEROS proves that a holistic, scalable, and interoperable framework is achievable. Policymakers should:

  1. Mandate interoperability and digital traceability as a core compliance requirement in organic and GI food supply chains.
  2. Support adoption of THEROS tools by public authorities through funding incentives and training programs.
  3. Update certification schemes to incorporate technology-based traceability standards (e.g. blockchain, sensor data).
  4. Promote public-private partnerships to test and scale traceability innovations.
  5. Establish EU-wide guidance on data harmonisation and traceability verification using platforms like THEROS.

Endnotes

Young & Quinn (2002). Writing Effective Policy Papers.
THEROS Project – Horizon Europe, GA No. 101083579.
European Commission Regulations on Organic and GI Products (EU 2018/848).

Executive Summary

Modern agri-food systems are awash with data—from satellites, sensors, DNA tests, and supply chain transactions. Yet without seamless interoperability across systems, this diversity remains underutilized, fragmented, or even contradictory. The EU-funded THEROS project demonstrates how harmonising data streams through a unified digital framework can empower certification bodies, improve compliance monitoring, and support more sustainable agriculture. This policy brief outlines the interoperability challenge and proposes actionable strategies for unlocking the full value of diverse data in food systems.

Introduction

The digitalisation of agriculture and food governance has brought a surge of new data sources, offering enormous potential to improve oversight, reduce fraud, and enhance sustainability. However, most systems—public or private—operate in isolation. This siloed structure creates inefficiencies, errors, and gaps in decision-making. THEROS, a Horizon Europe project, has developed a comprehensive platform architecture designed to enable data interoperability across critical functions: food authenticity verification, traceability, environmental performance, and certification support.

Problem Description

Despite the availability of rich datasets, control authorities and food system actors often struggle to connect and interpret them effectively. Key challenges include:

  • Incompatible data formats across technologies (e.g. Earth Observation, IoT, lab results).
  • Lack of shared standards for integrating public and private digital tools.
  • Limited real-time interoperability, making compliance checks reactive instead of proactive.
  • Data overload without actionable insights due to disconnected infrastructures.

In short, the value of data is being lost in translation—with critical consequences for food integrity, environmental accountability, and regulatory enforcement.

Policy Options

Option 1: Maintain Fragmented Digital Systems
  • Low-cost in the short term but perpetuates inefficiencies and weakens systemic oversight.
Option 2: Promote Sector-Specific Digital Innovations
  • Encourages development but increases integration burdens across different actors and contexts.
Option 3: Advance Interoperability-First Policy Frameworks

THEROS has demonstrated how to achieve system-wide harmonization:

  • Data Harmonisation Platform: Integrates inputs from satellite imagery, mobile apps, DNA-based lab results, IoT monitoring, and certification systems.
  • Verification Engine: Applies business logic to incoming data to verify authenticity, origin, and compliance.
  • Operational Toolbox Architecture: Modular system enabling flexible integration with existing tools via open APIs and translators.
  • Cross-Pilot Validation: Deployed across Greece, Spain, Serbia, and Czech Republic with confirmed cross-system functionality.
  • Green Accountability Tool: Visualizes harmonized data to assess environmental impacts in real-time.

Conclusion and Recommendations

As food systems become more data-driven, interoperability must become a policy priority—not a technical afterthought. Policymakers can catalyse this shift by:

  1. Setting minimum interoperability standards for food traceability and certification systems.
  2. Funding shared data infrastructure, like harmonisation platforms and open-source APIs.
  3. Mandating compatibility across public procurement and certification platforms.
  4. Establishing national or regional digital food observatories, modelled on THEROS architecture.
  5. Incentivizing private sector compliance with interoperable formats through certification benefits.

Endnotes

Young & Quinn (2002). Writing Effective Policy Papers.
THEROS Project – Horizon Europe, GA No. 101083579.
The Digitalisation of the European Agricultural sector.
Interoperability in data spaces: Building Europe’s digital future.

Executive Summary

The EU agri-food sector faces mounting challenges: climate change, food fraud, sustainability requirements, and increasingly complex compliance obligations. Traditional systems of inspection, traceability, and certification—largely paper-based and labour-intensive—are no longer sufficient to ensure transparency and integrity. Digital solutions offer a transformative opportunity to modernize compliance, improve traceability, and reduce the burden on both regulators and producers. This policy brief outlines the need for scalable, secure, and interoperable digital tools within the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) framework. Drawing on insights from the Horizon Europe THEROS project, it highlights how emerging technologies like blockchain, AI, Earth Observation (EO), and mobile sensors can be integrated to support compliance with organic, environmental, and food safety standards.

Introduction

The EU Green Deal, Farm to Fork Strategy, and CAP 2023–2027 call for a digital and sustainable transformation of agriculture. Central to this vision is the ability to verify claims—about sustainability, organic status, and food quality—through reliable, data-driven systems. Yet, many monitoring and verification processes are still manual, prone to error, and difficult to scale. Digital technologies are no longer optional—they are essential for ensuring the resilience, credibility, and efficiency of Europe’s agri-food systems. Projects like THEROS demonstrate how digital tools can be effectively deployed for traceability, fraud prevention, environmental monitoring, and compliance verification.

Problem Description

The current regulatory and monitoring system suffers from key limitations:

  • Manual inspections and declarations are time-consuming and susceptible to fraud or error.
  • Data silos and paper-based systems hinder transparency, traceability, and coordination between actors.
  • Small producers and authorities often lack access to cost-effective compliance tools.
  • Lack of integration between systems (e.g., soil, crop, transport, certification) reduces the impact of isolated digital tools.

The EU is falling short in its capacity to monitor organic production, ecological practices, and sustainability claims at scale. Without a coordinated digital transformation, enforcement gaps will widen as regulations become more complex and data intensive.

Policy Options

Option 1: Continue with Analog and Fragmented Digital Systems

This option maintains the status quo: limited use of digital tools, often developed independently with no shared standards. While familiar and low risk in the short term, this approach cannot scale with the increasing demands for transparency, environmental data, and product authentication.

Option 2: Promote Digital Innovation at Sector Level

Member States or sectors (e.g. organic certification bodies) may adopt technologies independently. While this fosters experimentation, it risks fragmentation and redundancy. Without interoperability, trust and data utility are diminished.

Option 3: Advance an EU-Wide Digital Compliance Framework (THEROS Approach)

This strategic option involves coordinated investment and policy support for a unified, interoperable digital ecosystem. Drawing on the THEROS toolbox, the framework would include:

  • Mobile-enabled MEMS spectrometers for field-level quality and soil analysis.
  • EO-based monitoring services for organic farming and CAP compliance.
  • Blockchain-enabled traceability systems to record and verify transactions along the supply chain.
  • Green Accountability Tools for environmental performance monitoring.
  • Digital marketplaces integrated with verified datasets to connect producers and consumers transparently.

These tools are interoperable, scalable, and validated through real-world pilots in Greece, Spain, Serbia, and the Czech Republic.

Conclusion and Recommendations

Digital transformation is not a matter of convenience—it is a requirement for a modern, credible, and sustainable food system. The EU must seize this opportunity to embed digital solutions into agri-food compliance structures.

Key Policy Recommendations:

  • Mandate digital recordkeeping and traceability as part of CAP compliance and official inspections.
  • Establish open standards and APIs for interoperability between national, EU, and private sector platforms.
  • Invest in digital infrastructure and cloud-based compliance tools, especially for smallholder and organic producers.
  • Incentivize innovation and adoption through CAP eco-schemes, digital vouchers, or certification fast-tracking.
  • Support cross-border pilot projects to refine and harmonize digital solutions, building on projects like THEROS.

Endnotes

Young & Quinn (2002). Writing Effective Policy Papers.
THEROS Project – Horizon Europe, GA No. 101083579.
European Commission (2020). Farm to Fork Strategy.
Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 on CAP Strategic Plans.

Executive Summary

Organic and Geographical Indication (GI) food products represent the highest standards of quality, tradition, and sustainability in the EU. However, their premium value also makes them frequent targets of fraud—ranging from false labelling and adulteration to unauthorized use of certification logos. Food fraud not only undermines consumer trust but also damages producers, distorts markets, and erodes the credibility of the EU’s quality schemes. The THEROS project offers a new toolbox of digital and scientific solutions—such as blockchain traceability, DNA-based authentication, MEMS-based field testing, and satellite monitoring—to detect and prevent fraud in real-time. This policy brief calls for stronger enforcement, digital transformation, and harmonized approaches to protect the integrity of organic and GI products across the EU.

Introduction

EU quality labels—such as Organic, Protected Designation of Origin (PDO), and Protected Geographical Indication (PGI)—are essential for promoting rural development, preserving cultural heritage, and enabling consumers to make informed choices. Yet, their growing popularity and market value also expose them to fraudulent practices. According to the European Commission, food fraud costs the EU billions annually and is increasingly sophisticated. To remain credible, organic and GI certification systems must evolve with modern tools that can verify claims, detect anomalies, and support rapid enforcement. Projects like THEROS demonstrate that such tools are now viable, scalable, and field-ready.

Problem Description

Fraud in organic and GI products can take many forms, including:

  • Mislabeling: Conventional products sold as organic or falsely bearing PDO/PGI labels.
  • Adulteration: Dilution, substitution, or contamination of products (e.g. adding non-certified ingredients).
  • False origin claims: Products marketed as coming from specific regions or using traditional methods without proper certification.
  • Certification abuse: Forged or expired certificates, unverified logos, or unregulated supply chain actors.

Challenges in combating this fraud include:

  • Manual inspection systems that are reactive and resource limited.
  • Limited traceability between farm, processor, distributor, and retailer.
  • Lack of harmonized data standards across Member States and certifying bodies.

Insufficient real-time tools to verify claims or detect fraud signals at scale.

Policy Options

Option 1: Strengthen Traditional Inspections and Documentation Requirements

This approach increases paperwork and manual audits. While it may catch some forms of fraud, it is expensive, time-consuming, and difficult to scale—particularly as organic and GI markets grow.

Option 2: Promote Voluntary Adoption of New Technologies

Encouraging industry-led innovation (e.g. QR code tracking or random product testing) can yield some success. However, without official validation and regulatory integration, these tools often lack legal weight and consistent use.

Option 3: Institutionalize a Multi-Layered Digital Anti-Fraud Framework (THEROS Model)

This proactive and systemic approach involves the coordinated adoption of smart tools developed and tested by the THEROS project:

  • Blockchain Traceability: Secure, tamper-proof tracking of supply chain events.
  • MEMS Photonic Sensors: Handheld field devices for in-situ testing of food composition and purity.
  • DNA Authenticity Kit: Portable device for scientific validation of product origin or species.
  • EO Monitoring Tools: Remote sensing of farming practices, land use, and crop cycles to verify organic claims.
  • Green Accountability Tool: Assesses sustainability performance using traceable environmental data.
  • Digital Marketplace Integration: Allows transparent consumer-facing verification of quality labels.

Together, these tools offer a resilient, real-time defence system against fraud in organic and GI food chains.

Conclusion and Recommendations

Protecting the credibility of organic and GI food systems is not only about consumer protection—it’s about economic fairness, sustainability, and rural integrity. Food fraud undermines every one of these goals. Digital and scientific tools now offer a clear path to more effective, efficient, and trusted enforcement.

Key Policy Recommendations:

  • Make digital traceability mandatory for organic and GI-certified supply chains.
  • Recognize blockchain and scientific testing as official compliance and fraud-detection tools.
  • Harmonize anti-fraud procedures across Member States, using interoperable platforms.
  • Support certifying bodies with capacity-building and digital infrastructure funding.
  • Incorporate THEROS-style technology pilots into CAP eco-schemes and organic policy frameworks.

Endnotes

Young & Quinn (2002). Writing Effective Policy Papers.
THEROS Project – Horizon Europe, GA No. 101083579.
2020 Annual Report: The EU Agri-Food Fraud Network.
EU Regulation 2018/848 on organic production.

Executive Summary

While EU labels like Organic, Protected Designation of Origin (PDO), and Protected Geographical Indication (PGI) are designed to signal quality, tradition, and sustainability, many consumers still lack a clear understanding of what these labels mean, how certification works, or how to verify authenticity. This knowledge gap limits the impact of quality schemes, reduces consumer trust, and leaves room for fraud and greenwashing. Digital tools—such as QR-code-based traceability, blockchain verification, and mobile transparency apps—can play a vital role in making label information accessible, trustworthy, and easy to understand. This policy brief outlines the need for enhanced consumer education, digital transparency mechanisms, and EU-level strategies to empower shoppers and reinforce the credibility of quality labels.

Introduction

The EU has invested decades in building robust quality schemes to promote regional identity, biodiversity, animal welfare, and food authenticity. The Organic and GI labels are among the most recognized symbols in Europe’s food system—but recognition does not equal understanding. In a 2020 Eurobarometer survey, while 96% of EU consumers recognized the organic label, only a fraction could correctly define what it means or distinguish it from similar, uncertified claims. With rising concerns over sustainability, health, and food fraud, empowering consumers with clear, credible information is more important than ever.

Problem Description

Despite wide label visibility, consumer knowledge remains shallow and inconsistent:

  • Many consumers cannot distinguish certified organic/GI products from vague or misleading marketing claims.
  • QR codes and certification numbers are often ignored due to poor interface design or lack of explanation.
  • Younger and lower-income groups are especially vulnerable to misinformation or price-based deception.
  • Limited feedback loops between certifiers, producers, and consumers reduce transparency and engagement.

As a result, well-intended EU quality labels are underutilized, and their market potential is not fully realized.

Policy Options

Option 1: Continue Awareness Campaigns Without Systemic Change

While basic promotional campaigns raise label visibility, they often fail to convey actionable knowledge or engage consumers in meaningful ways. This low-impact approach cannot keep pace with rising consumer demand for verified, transparent food information.

Option 2: Promote Decentralized Digital Transparency Tools

Mobile apps, QR-code tracing, and producer websites can offer more information—but without coordination or verification, these tools are fragmented and can be misused. Consumers are left to interpret inconsistent data on their own.

Option 3: Develop a Coordinated EU Consumer Transparency Strategy Using THEROS-Inspired Tools

This approach integrates public information campaigns with modern technology and participatory verification tools:

  • QR-code integration with blockchain-based traceability platforms for verified supply chain data.
  • User-friendly mobile MEMS that translate certification data into clear claims and visual scores (e.g., purity, organic compliance).
  • Digital Dynamic Product Passport (dDPP) that consolidate all relevant product information—origin, certifications, compliance history etc. into a single, scannable interface.
  • Interactive maps and storytelling tools that showcase regional value and environmental benefits of GI/organic practices.
  • Digital Marketplace platforms with built-in fraud alerts, certification status, and product origin verification.

Conclusion and Recommendations

Consumers are key actors in enforcing food integrity—but only if they are well-informed and empowered. The EU must go beyond passive awareness and deliver actionable, verified, and easy-to-use digital transparency tools to bridge the knowledge gap.

Key Policy Recommendations:

  • Support interoperable digital transparency tools that connect certification systems with consumers in real time.
  • Mandate the use of scannable, verifiable QR codes on all organic and GI-labelled products.
  • Fund digital literacy and food label education campaigns, especially targeting youth and urban consumers.
  • Integrate consumer feedback and fraud reporting systems into digital platforms to close the accountability loop.
  • Include transparency and consumer engagement metrics in CAP and Organic Action Plan evaluations.

Endnotes

Young & Quinn (2002). Writing Effective Policy Papers.
THEROS Project – Horizon Europe, GA No. 101083579.
Food labelling in the EU: Consumers can get lost in the maze of labels.
EU Organic Regulation 2018/848.