Food recalls: The brutal lessons they can teach manufacturers

Posing significant financial and reputational risks, recalls are often extremely disruptive for production and, in the worst cases, a serious administrative and legal headache.

Why do recalls happen?

There can be a whole host of reasons as to why they happen and they can affect anyone - even the world’s biggest manufacturers, who seemingly have all their ducks in a row, aren’t immune.

With production lines having so many moving parts and supply chains often fragmented and complicated, recalls are arguably an unavoidable part of the food system.

We’re human, mistakes are bound to happen occasionally and sometimes the problem isn’t even in your factory but further upstream with your suppliers.

Whether the recall is actioned due to concerns over erroneous allergen labelling, bacteria, or even foreign body contamination, what’s important is that the issue is dealt with swiftly, and that all precautions are taken to the fullest extent possible to avoid any harm to the public.

It’s also imperative that proper precautions are in place throughout the production process to minimise the risk of such an issue arising in the first place. The best way to do this is via a rigorous and continuous staff training programme that ensures food safety culture is built into the foundations of the company. No matter what role you’re in, food safety matters and is everyone’s responsibility, with those at the helm leading by example.

The usual suspects

So what’s generally the underlying reason for recalls? Well, it varies by hazard group.

According to Alec Kyriakides, independent food safety consultant, food production and labelling errors are the main cause of allergen recalls (e.g. use of the wrong pack labels, mispacking a food or omitting an allergen from the ingredient list). Meanwhile, microbiological contamination can often be linked back to raw materials introducing bacteria or chemicals for example, cross contamination in processing, or, indeed, under processing.

“Understanding the root cause of the issue is key to future prevention with examples including poor training of line operatives, inadequate line checking procedures and insufficiently detailed processes for cleaning and disinfection to name a few,” the former technical head for Sainsbury’s said.

Mark Hughes, technical services director at Food Forensics Limited also spotlights the increasingly global nature of food manufacturing as a key driver for the rising number of recalls affecting major brands: “The globalisation of food sourcing makes traceability difficult and introduces inconsistent quality standards across different suppliers.

“Differences in regulatory standards between countries mean that products compliant in one market may be recalled in another (e.g. specific pesticides or additives banned in the EU but used elsewhere).”

Hughes adds that prioritising profit over rigorous safety standards can also be to blame: “Cost-cutting measures, such as smaller technical teams, fewer in-house tests, reliance on cheaper suppliers etc., can additionally compromise quality control or limit risk assessment. As well as limitations in technology and the sensitive nature of certain contaminants.”

Echoing Kyriakides, Hughes also points to the inevitable mistakes that will come from human error and inadequate training.

A weak link in a very long chain

Large-scale food production requires a myriad of moving parts. But bringing together a whole host of ingredients into a coherent whole – at times on a global scale - is no mean feat.

Maintaining ironclad risk and safety protocols is paramount of course – but no matter how rigorous those procedures might be, a chink in the armour can always be found – and it might not even be your fault.

This is very much the case with the biggest recall story we have seen over the past few months: Nestlé’s international baby formula recall over fears certain batches may have been contaminated with a the cereulide toxin.

The issue has been traced to a single Chinese supplier of ARA (arachidonic acid) oil, a vital ingredient in premium infant formulas.

What’s more, French dairy giants Lactalis and Danone use the same supplier, and have now been forced to issue a similar recall for their own baby formulas.

Although there have been no confirmed cases linked to the outbreak so far, French authorities are now examining whether the contamination could be connected to the death of a newborn.

Analysing the potential financial impact of what Nestlé has called its biggest-ever preventative recall, Hughes told Food Manufacture: “Analysts at Jefferies and Barclays estimate the sales risk could range from $1.3 billion to 1.5% of group sales, due to consumers switching brands out of concern for safety.

“Nestlé’s share price fell by over 4% in the days following the expanded recall announcement. Nestlé did not have a standalone product recall insurance policy for this incident, meaning it may be self-insured or use its capital for potential losses. The company’s full-year 2025 results, scheduled for release in February 2026, are expected to provide clearer insight into the actual financial toll of the recall.”

School of hard knocks

Technological advancements have the potential to really shift the dial when it comes to food safety. Think of the potential artificial intelligence has here, with speedier risk assessments set to be a game changer in the coming years.

Kyriakides says there is no doubt that a “systematic approach to food safety management with hazard analysis and critical control point (HACCP)” embedded within, remains the “most effective way to deliver safe food”, but he sees the advantages AI could offer in the future.

There are already examples of companies using AI to help improve food safety and promising research is on-going as well. For example, an international research team led by the University of South Australia is investigating how AI could be used to identify mycotoxins in food.

In Nestlé’s case, the toxin was picked up during internal testing at a factory in the Netherlands – shining a clear spotlight on the importance of regular testing and attention to detail.

Focusing on the need to ensure that the entire chain is as tightly controlled as possible – especially those items sourced via third parties - Hughes says there’s a “critical need for tougher testing and control measures for all ingredients, especially those sourced externally”.

He continued: “Manufacturers cannot rely solely on supplier assurances and must implement rigorous testing protocols for raw materials.

“The recall highlighted the danger of heat-stable toxins like cereulide, which are not destroyed by standard consumer preparation methods. This necessitates a focus on preventing contamination at the source rather than relying on later preparation steps to ensure safety.”

Hughes also points to the need for constant and timely communication throughout: “While Nestlé initiated a recall as a precaution and later issued a CEO apology, the initial communication was perceived as slow and opaque by some advocacy groups and investors, potentially damaging consumer and investor confidence. Prompt, clear, and globally coordinated communication is essential.”

Taking stock

Whilst the investigation in this scenario has linked the recall to one supplier; as is often the way with recalls, we may never find out the root cause (i.e. beyond the what and where and into the weeds of the how and why). Regardless, these incidents represent an crucial inflection point, a moment to take stock and look at our own operations.

Ask yourself: How meticulous is your eye for detail, how rigorous is your supply chain management, how often are you testing and monitoring ingredients, and are you recording your near misses and practising recall scenarios?

Of course, technology like AI will undoubtedly change the landscape of food safety, but for now - nor perhaps ever - can we become complacent.

Fancy diving back further? Read our food recall lessons from 2024.