Having good data drives smarter choices, fairer markets and sustainable growth. We’re already seeing what is possible, with food and drink manufacturers using insights to make powerful decisions around food safety, health and more.
Among the raft of technology to hit the scene is next generation barcodes, as Chris Tyas, OBE, chair of GS1 UK elaborates: “QR codes powered by GS1, are transforming the way consumers engage with food.
“With one scan, shoppers can access verified information on nutrition, allergens, provenance and sustainability.”
A key word Tyas mentions here is ‘verified’. In order to realise the true benefits of data, it needs to be accurate and trusted, as well as interoperable and secured.
Trusted data
“At GS1 UK, we believe that trusted data begins with trusted identification,” Tyas said.
“Our globally unique identifiers, such as the Global Trade Item Number (GTIN) for products, the Global Location Number (GLN) for sites and the Serial Shipping Container Code (SSCC) for logistics units, provide a consistent and reliable foundation for data across the supply chain. Because each identifier is issued from a single, non-overlapping system, the information linked to it is clear, unambiguous and specific to that item or location.”
But as Tyas points out, identification is only the first step to trusted data.
“We also help ensure data quality through services like the GS1 Registry Platform and Verified by GS1. These allow brand owners to upload a core set of validated product attributes, which are then checked for accuracy and linked to the correct licence holder. Retailers, marketplaces and regulators can query this information in real time, giving them confidence that the data is genuine and up to date.”
Then, to support the traceability of this data, GS1 uses the EPCIS 2.0 standard. This enables businesses to share detailed information about the movement and condition of products as they travel through the supply chain.
“This creates a clear, tamper-evident record of each item’s journey, helping to close gaps where errors or fraud might otherwise occur.”
Harmonising data
Having your own verifiable set of data is only part of the puzzle. The next, bigger step – which we haven’t quite figured out yet – is harmonising that information across the entire supply chain.
The Food Standards Agency (FSA), for example, has been encouraging the use of root cause analysis for qualifying incidents (e.g. allergens, pathogens, foreign bodies) for several years, asking businesses to share this data with them. However, there is an opportunity for this to go one step further and use this insight to identify patterns within food safety incidents.
A uniformed way of collecting data is needed
The problem is that a lot of the data the FSA receives currently is free text so it’s difficult to interpret it.
“Free-text data can be useful for capturing detail, but it’s difficult to compare, analyse or share because everyone describes things differently,” Tyas commented.
“The solution is to bring structure to how data is captured, described and shared.”
While the FSA has set up several Joint FSA/FSS industry groups to look at Root Cause Analysis received to extract the learnings, determine where sectors should be shining a light, and developing further technical guidance, Tyas says GS1 Standards may be in a position to assist through its globally unique identifiers, which places data into a consistent format.
“Information collected during an inspection or audit can flow directly into a retailer’s or regulator’s system without needing to be retyped or translated,” he added.
Tyas also noted the importance of using shared vocabularies.
“Even structured data loses value if organisations use different terms for the same thing,” he continued.
“The FSA has already published open code lists for food categories and business types. Aligning with these lists helps everyone speak the same language and makes it easier to group and analyse data across different regions or sectors.”
Data needs to be accessible
Then, once data is structured and consistent, it needs to be made accessible. This can be achieved through publicly available application programming interfaces – or APIs.
“Open APIs allow regulators, researchers and industry partners to access the information they need in real time. This helps reduce duplication and ensures everyone is working from the same single source of truth,” Tyas said.
But we also need to make sure that older free-text records aren’t left behind and AI could serve as a good way to capture these ‘memories’.
“AI tools like natural language processing can help extract key details and convert them into structured formats, making it possible to use historical data alongside newer sources.”
Data needs to be secured
Whilst sharing data will no doubt unlock fantastic opportunities, companies need to know that their data will be protected, used responsibly and shared in ways that deliver value without exposing them to risk.
“Security is a key part of that,” Tyas said. “Whether data is held in the cloud, on local servers or shared through APIs, it needs to be protected by robust systems and clear governance. That means using certified platforms, carrying out regular audits and making sure access is controlled and traceable. It also means giving data owners clear rights over how their information is used and the ability to withdraw consent if needed.”
But trust isn’t just about technology, it’s also about understanding how data will be used – just as consumers want transparency, so too do businesses.
“Businesses are more likely to share data when they understand how it will be used, who will see it and what they’ll get in return. That’s why it’s important to create neutral, well-governed spaces for collaboration, places where competitors can contribute without giving away commercial advantage.
“Pre-competitive data sharing is a good example. When businesses share information on things like product safety, sustainability or provenance, everyone benefits. It helps reduce duplication, improve compliance and unlock insights that no single organisation could achieve alone.”
What about competition law?
Some may wonder if data sharing might open is issues with regards to competition law. But when it comes to data sharing, this law already plays a role in how businesses share data and that is set to continue.
“The direction from regulators is increasingly supportive of responsible, pre-competitive collaboration, especially when it helps address shared challenges like food safety, sustainability or emissions,” said Tyas.
“In the UK, the Competition and Markets Authority has made it clear that data sharing in support of environmental or public interest goals can be compatible with competition law. Its Green Agreements Guidance confirms that sharing non-commercially sensitive data, such as provenance, safety or lifecycle metrics, is unlikely to raise concerns when it benefits the wider sector. The guidance also provides practical examples of how businesses can collaborate within the law.
“The EU has taken a similar approach. Its updated Horizontal Cooperation Guidelines include a dedicated section on sustainability agreements. These make it clear that pooling data on issues like emissions or traceability is not only permitted but encouraged when it helps solve collective problems and does not distort competition.
“Legislation is also helping to clarify the rules. In the UK, the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act strengthens protections for commercially sensitive data, making it safer for businesses to contribute to shared registries. In the EU, the Data Act sets out clear terms for business-to-business data access, requiring that data be shared on fair and non-discriminatory terms while allowing for the protection of trade secrets.
“We expect to see clearer guidance from regulators on what constitutes acceptable, pre-competitive data sharing.”