THE DATA DILEMMA Is Data Driving Food Safety or Watching It Fail? By Joelle Mosso, Associate Vice President, Science Programs
Where do we start on our quest to remove food safety risk with big data? As with most grand journeys, we start at the beginning – critically thinking about what we are trying to do, and what risk we are trying to remove. We don’t start with more compliance data since it will not magically lead to intentional risk-reduction outcomes. Does overlap between compliance and risk-reduction exist? Of course. Much of the compliance data is collected around the hazards, factors and practices that matter for risk. But the overlap is incomplete. We usually miss critical data elements and continuous streams of measurement that allow us to visualize risk – capturing its dynamic, variable and context-dependent nature. The opportunity in big data lies not in checklists, but in systems capable of capturing the right signals at the right time and resolution. With this data, we can move past checklists and illuminate paths forward that prevent failures from occurring.
We live in an era where we recognize that data is currency, enormously valuable and spoken about with such grandeur and mystique that it might as well be the Holy Grail…or perhaps Pandora’s Box. Food safety data has that aura – it draws us in, tempts us with the idea that more data will solve our most elusive challenges. But does current food safety data offer these outcomes? Current systems for food safety are trapped in the box of compliance – checklists, audit scores, deviations and repetitive corrective actions. Yet, if there is one thing I have learned, compliance data does not equal risk data. I have seen flawless compliance programs fail catastrophically, while horrible compliance systems never falter into a crisis. Here’s the main point — food safety risk doesn’t care what your checklist performance is, or your last audit score. Risk can be independent of compliance. Risk doesn’t need to be measured to exist, but measuring it is an essential first step to resolving it. And therein lies the conundrum – leaning more strongly into “compliance data” as if it were “risk reduction data” is unlikely to unlock sweeping solutions in produce safety. Don’t misunderstand me, compliance data has its place. It verifies adherence to standards and provides measurable metrics as evidence of best practice controls. These are all critically important. But compliance data primarily does one thing — it lets you know if you are meeting the program, standards and/or regulations you’ve chosen to follow. When we talk about food safety promises from big data, we must recognize that solutions will come from the right data, and that checklist data will likely leave us wanting.
Western Growers’ GreenLink®, and our broader data efforts, represent much more than compliance. It’s our collective effort to leave the reactive compliance loop – unlocking a risk-based and sustainable solution to fresh produce food safety. Where are we going? Anywhere we choose…and that choice, powered with the right data, is where the true promise of food safety innovation lies.
10 Western Grower & Shipper | www.wga.com November | December 2025
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online