From Early Signals to Systemic Resilience: Key Insights from the 2nd Joint Webinar

On 3 July 2026, ACT4FOOD joined EFF-CoP, SecureFood and DEFENSEFOOD for the second webinar in a joint series dedicated to food system security and resilience. Under the theme “Advancing Food System Security: From Early Signals to Systemic Resilience”, the session brought together four distinct perspectives on how the food industry can better anticipate and respond to emerging risks. 

Across the presentations, speakers explored food fraud, resilience management, digital food safety, cybersecurity, and early warning systems. The discussion showed that food system security cannot rely on one method or one discipline alone. It requires data, technology, operational knowledge, human expertise, and stronger collaboration across the supply chain. Interactive polls during the webinar also showed that participants see traceability, transparency, and cybersecurity as current blind spots.

Food fraud needs more than one tool

Petter Olsen, the first speaker and a Senior Scientist from NOFIMA (representing EFF-CoP), challenged the idea that laboratory testing can solve every food fraud problem. 

His talk, “When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail: why analytical methods only solve part of the food fraud problem and what other approaches are needed,” challenged the idea that analytical methods can solve every food fraud problem.

He explained that food fraud and food safety can overlap, but they are different issues and require different methods. Many food fraud types do not involve a biological component that can be tested in a laboratory. This makes analytical methods useful for some cases, such as adulteration, but less relevant for fraud linked to overrun, smuggling, counterfeiting, false origin claims, or misleading labels around sustainability, ethics, organic, halal, or kosher status.

Petter highlighted that food safety issues are often unintentional, while food fraud is intentional. He also noted that the main victim of food fraud is often the legitimate producer, whose products are undercut by fraudulent competition.

To combat this, Olsen suggested using data-driven checks like supply chain mapping, mass balance accounting, and secure digital records like blockchain to prevent data tampering. 

His key message was clear: to fight food fraud, we need to start with the problem, not with the method.

Building resilience before disruption happens

The second presentation was delivered by Anna Vetsou, Research Engineer at EMPRACTIS, representing SECUREFOOD. She presented the project’s Food System Resilience Management Framework, developed to help food systems move from reactive responses to more anticipatory planning.

Anna introduced SECUREFOOD as a 42-month Horizon Europe project bringing together 25 partner organizations to strengthen food system resilience and security through an integrated system approach. She explained that traditional reactive measures are no longer enough. Food system actors need ways to identify early signals, understand vulnerabilities, and prepare before disruptions escalate.

The framework supports action at two levels: national food system resilience plans and resilience plans for individual food actors. At the national level, it covers governance, policy measures, risk assessment, institutional coordination, cross-border cooperation, monitoring, and continuous improvement. For individual actors, the starting point is risk assessment: identifying what needs protection, which threats and vulnerabilities exist, and what impacts disruptions could have.

The proposed measures are grouped into organizational, technical, or operational actions. Organizational measures follow a management cycle of planning, implementation, monitoring, review, and improvement, while technical measures are tailored to different supply chains, including grain, fruit and vegetables, fish and aquaculture, meat and dairy.

This framework has been turned into a digital tool that helps operators assess their readiness. Vetsou invited stakeholders to join SECUREFOOD’s network to help test and improve these tools. 

Updating food safety for the digital age 

The third presentation was delivered by Alberto Garre, PhD, from the Polytechnic University of Cartagena, representing ACT4FOOD. His talk focused on food safety management for digital food industries, with a particular emphasis on updating HACCP and TACCP to address cyber-physical threats.

As food supply chains rely more on sensors, connected devices, and cloud computing, they face new cyber-physical risks. Alberto noted that traditional systems like HACCP (Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point) were designed for manual operations. This raises a new question: are traditional safety checks still enough when monitoring goes digital? 

ACT4FOOD’s approach starts from conventional HACCP and then examines how digitalization changes the risk landscape. The methodology asks what happens when analog sensors are replaced by digital sensors, how cloud services and connected systems affect monitoring, and how cyber threats can create new or altered critical control points.

The methodology is being developed through three case studies: aquaculture, dairy, and retail. The dairy and milk pasteurization case is the most advanced so far, with work underway to identify how digital monitoring and sensor vulnerabilities may affect food safety management.

His presentation showed how digitalization brings food safety, food defense and cybersecurity closer together, making it necessary to rethink risk assessment in connected food systems.

From early signals to early warning

The final presentation was delivered by Ákos Bernard Jóźwiak, Head of Food and Nutrition Science at Syreon Research Institute, representing DEFENSEFOOD. His talk focused on how early signals can help anticipate emerging food safety and food defense threats.

He described food systems as complex systems, shaped by many interacting actors, products, trade flows, information flows, and feedback loops. These systems are also influenced by wider drivers such as climate change and changing consumer attitudes, which can create new and unexpected risks.

Ákos explained that horizon scanning can work across three timelines: short-term early warning for incidents already happening, medium-term emerging risk identification, and long-term foresight looking 10 to 20 years ahead. While these categories are artificial, they help structure how we detect and prepare for threats.

He also referred to previous research on emerging risk identification in the food chain, highlighting the need for structured screening and data-supported preparedness.

Key Takeaways 

• Reactive approaches are no longer enough.
  Across all presentations, speakers highlighted the need to move from responding after incidents happen to anticipating risks earlier.
• Food fraud, food safety, and food defense are connected, but not the same.
  Each area requires different methods, from analytical testing and supply chain mapping to cybersecurity, early warning and resilience planning.
• Digitalization creates new opportunities and new risks.
  Sensors, data systems, cloud services, and digital records can improve food system management, but they also introduce cyber and cyber-physical vulnerabilities.
• Data and technology need human expertise.
  Analytical methods, AI, network science, and digital tools can support better decisions, but expert interpretation remains essential.
• Collaboration is key to stronger food system resilience.
  The webinar showed the value of bringing together different projects, disciplines, and stakeholders to address complex risks across the food supply chain.

Want to join the next discussion? Follow ACT4FOOD for updates on upcoming webinars, project results, and practical insights on food cybersecurity, defense, and supply chain resilience.