Determination of shelf life and implications for food waste – how different food producers determine shelf life. Results from the preliminary project FastHold

Summary

The preliminary project FastHold, funded by the Foundation for Research Levy on Agricultural Products (Norway),
has examined challenges related to shelf-life determination and whether clearer guidance from the Norwegian
Food Safety Authority could reduce uncertainty among food producers. Such uncertainty may lead producers to
set shorter shelf lives than necessary to ensure food safety and appropriate product quality, thereby increasing
the risk of food waste. The work included a mapping of current practices for shelf-life determination and available
regulatory guidance, based on a survey, interviews, follow-up conversations and a workshop with food industry
stakeholders.
The results show that food safety carries the greatest weight, but sensory quality is decisive when determining
shelf life within safe limits. Shelf life is also influenced by raw material quality, processing, packaging, temperature
conditions and customer requirements. The stakeholders call for clearer sensory methods and product-specific
microbiological limit values, particularly for raw meat products, ready-to-eat and heat-treated products, and
composite products.
Important barriers include unclear limit values, limited suitable sensory methods for use by food producers,
resource-demanding shelf-life studies and uncertainty about temperature conditions in the value chain. This
contributes to several companies setting a shelf life that is too short rather than too long.
Current practice does not appear to make full use of the flexibility available under the regulations. It may therefore
be possible to change practices for some product groups, particularly where microbiological risk can be controlled
and documented, and where producers have good control of raw materials, processing, temperature and storage.
The producers’ need for guidance does not appear to be sufficiently addressed in Norway. There is a particular
need for more concrete support on understanding regulatory requirements, risk assessment, documentation and
the choice between “best before” and “use by”. Compared with Sweden and Denmark, Norwegian written
guidance practice appears less extensive and less specific. Based on the responses, shelf-life determination is
currently not used as an active measure to prevent food waste.

Read publication here:

NVA : hdl.handle.net/11250/5569455