Effects of processing parameters on

Effects of processing parameters on immersion vacuum cooling time and physico-chemical properties of pork hams

2. Literature
2.1. Pork supply chain
The typical European pork production chain comprises the stages: supplying markets (e.g. feed production), breeding and multiplying, piglet production and rearing, finishing, slaughtering, processing, retailing, and consuming markets (e.g. private consumers) connected by intermediate traders/carriers. These production stages can be found in every pork supply chain, however, the organisational structures can differ between countries. The transport of pigs for example from producers to fatteners and further to slaughtering and retailing can take place within one country, but more often takes place from one country to another, and then possibly to a third. This applies in particular as regional specialisation on certain production stages of pig rearing has evolved, with piglet production mostly in the Netherlands and Denmark whilst in Northwestern Germany predominantly pig fattening takes place (Haxsen, 2010). This convenient regional distribution results in an active trade of pigs beyond national borders where Northwestern Germany plays an important role as a pig importer and where trade in Denmark and in the Netherlands concentrates on the export of piglets (BMELV, 2010 and FAO, 2011).

2.2. Netchain coordinators
Many activities in health management can only be realised through the support of third parties. Inter-enterprise coordination in complex production chains is beneficial to the smooth functioning of the integrated processes (Brinkmann, Lang, Petersen, Wognum, & Trienekens, 2011). In pork supply chains, due to their structure, coordination tasks are often performed by so-called netchain coordinators (Petersen et al., 2010). Potential netchain coordinators in the pork supply chain include farmers' cooperatives and slaughterhouses performing the tasks of selection, control and development of suppliers and customers (Ellebrecht, 2008).

Schütz (2009) suggests that the scope of duties of netchain coordinators varies and concentrates mainly on servicing four key areas: supply management, audit, process and crisis management. Within the key areas, support of the individual farmers for inter-enterprise animal health and hygiene management is provided. Specifically, consulting, auditing and monitoring activities, assistance for data processing, issuing of certificates, and inter-enterprise information exchange are offered, which encompass basic offers for the customer groups, piglet producers and fatteners. Potential netchain coordinators are livestock traders in their position as mediators in the pork supply chain (Schütz, 2009).

In accordance with the tasks of service organisation, netchain coordinators can be defined as ‘organisations with bundling functions and offering services which reduce interfaces for the farmers by coordinating and supporting product and information flows’.

Brinkmann et al. (2011) have allocated the responsibility for coordination tasks in pork supply chains on three levels: normative, strategic and operational, with the respective chain actors ‘chain quality broker’, ‘netchain coordinator’, and ‘quality broker’. Organisations assuming coordination tasks for pork supply chain actors in connection with quality management position themselves within these three levels and adjust their services accordingly. These can be livestock traders, livestock marketing corporations, farming cooperatives, meat companies and/or retailers and producers' associations assuming diverse services in the meat supply chain (Brinkmann & Petersen, 2010). Wohlgemuth (2002) stresses that netchain coordinators may be partners from within the netchain as well as external institutions which professionally offer the adoption of coordination services. Enterprises acting as netchain coordinators require contextual knowledge and a good organisational overview of the mechanisms of the existing network.

A current example of the offer of coordination services relates to health status certificates for piglet-producing enterprises. Piglet health certificates are issued as a means to increase transparency regarding piglet health to the customer (Nathues et al., 2011). The health status of piglets is an important purchasing criterion for fatteners (Petersen et al., 2010). This is emphasised by the end-customer, that is, the consumer who increasingly demands high animal health and welfare (Moynagh, 2000).

2.3. Services, service providers, customers
A service can be defined as a function performed/offered by a service provider and utilised by a customer, to benefit that customer. The provision of a service can be connected to a real material product or not (Böhle, 2010 and Kotler et al., 2011). However, almost every company comprises a service component. Product offers without an accompanying service component, or service components without an associated product, are rare (Kotler et al., 2011).

To realise the integral elements of inter-enterprise health management repeatable activities have to be performed. Coordinators monitor the degree of implementation of measures concerning animal health and help to work on suggestions for improvement and help to facilitate the realisation of defined optimisation protocols. The following service activities are frequently offered in combination by netchain coordinators to service users to achieve high product and process quality:

–
organisation of an inter-enterprise information exchange,
–
organisation and realisation of monitoring activities,
–
organisation and realisation of audits and consultations,
–
support with data processing,
–
issuing of health status and company compliant certificates.
The present means of issuing ‘health certificates’ is a complex coordination service consisting of local farm audits and monitoring activities comprising laboratory investigations on pathogens, and, based on the results, status classification and communication (Petersen et al., 2010). This health status certification process includes different criteria depending on the certificate-issuing service provider. However, the analysis of health status including auditing has to be based on nationally and/or internationally standardised analytical methods, cut-off points or management practices. The service provider will judge a company's performance in meeting the predefined criteria and will subsequently assign a health status certificate to that piglet producing company. For the certification, a systematic sampling for performing the laboratory investigations is a necessary precondition in the producer's company.

There are numerous service providers capable of issuing health certificates. The certificates include different criteria since universally accepted methods and values are lacking. The different criteria make it difficult for a fattener company and piglet trader to compare the health status that the different certificates assign to the livestock. This lack in comparability aggravates the compilation of homogenous fattener groups regarding animal health.

2.4. The AMOR-approach
AMOR stands for ‘Alliances for the Mutual Organisation of Risk oriented inspection strategies’ and is a novel concept to mutually organise inspection strategies between several supply chain actors in a risk oriented manner. With this, AMOR aims at achieving a mutual benefit in a win–win situation for all participating alliance partners. Risk orientation means that there is no uniform inspection for all product batches, but an adaption of the degree of inspection intensity according to the risk to consumer health or quality. The concept has two main dimensions: the collaboration between two or more chain actors for mutual benefit and the risk orientation of the jointly organised inspections. With this approach resources can be allocated to areas of greatest risk. Furthermore, information exchange and communication between the involved supply chain actors, which often is limited, could be facilitated through the joint organisation of inspections. Motivation and structures are given so that information flows in both directions ( Lang and Petersen, 2012a and Lang and Petersen, 2012b).

Against the background of the aforementioned international trade with pigs and supplier–buyer relationships across borders, the AMOR concept includes national as well as international cross-border cooperation.

In general, the requirements for an AMOR inspection can be divided into four aspects identified by Lang and Petersen (2012a):

1)
inspection design
2)
tasks and responsibilities
3)
information and communication structures
4)
cost distribution and benefits to all parties.