Yam, Kit L. (ed.). The Wiley encyclopedia of packaging technology

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

However, the business environment is also an important

factor; in fact, the development of smart package devices

(especially data carriers) and the information highway is

largely motivated by the desire to increase proﬁt and

operational efﬁciency. Currently, business data (such as

product identiﬁcation, quantity, and price) and business

models (rules for processing information to maximize

proﬁts) are incorporated into the system to facilitate

product checkout, inventory control, and product trace-

ability. It is interesting to note that just a decade ago, IP

was not an attractive concept because package devices and

computer networks were limited and expensive. Today,

more powerful and affordable information technology has

created a favorable environment for IP to ﬂourish.

A challenging question to the food packaging scientist

or technologist is whether more efﬁcient delivery of safe

and quality food products can also be achieved by super-

imposing an additional layer of food data and food models

(capitalized in Figure 3) on the information highway of the

food supply chain, which is the goal of IP. The food data

refer to data that are indicative of food quality and safety

(such as time-temperature history, microbial count, pH,

and water activity), and the food models refer to scientiﬁc

principles or heuristic rules for processing the food data to

enable sound decision making. The answer to this ques-

tion is likely positive, although signiﬁcant research and

development is needed before the potential of IP for

enhancing food quality and safety could be fully realized.

SMART PACKAGE DEVICES

Smart package devices are deﬁned here as small, inex-

pensive labels or tags that are attached onto primary

packaging (e.g., pouches, trays, or bottles), or more often

onto secondary packaging (e.g., shipping containers), to

facilitate communication throughout the supply chain so

that appropriate actions may be taken to achieve desired

beneﬁts in food quality and safety enhancement. Two

basic types of smart package devices are data carriers

(such as barcode labels and RFID tags) that are used to

store and transmit data and package indicators (such as

time-temperature indicators, gas indicators, biosensors)

that are used to monitor the external environment and,

whenever appropriate, issue warnings. As shown in Fig-

ure 3, these devices provide a communication channel

between the external environment and other components

in the system. These devices differ from each other not

only in ‘‘hardware’’ (physical makeup) but also in the

amount and type of data that can be carried and how

the data are captured and distributed. In a typical IP

system, multiple smart package devices are employed at

several strategic locations throughout the supply chain.

Barcodes. Barcodes are the least expensive and most

popular form of data carriers. The Universal Product Code

(UPC) barcode was introduced in the 1970s and has since

become ubiquitous in the grocery store for facilitating

inventory control, stock reordering, and checkout (19).

To enable barcodes to communicate with scanners and

printers, many standards have been developed over the

years into commonly accepted languages known as

‘‘symbologies,’’ although less than 20 of them are used

today (20). The UPC barcode is a linear symbology that

consists of a pattern of bars and spaces to represent 12

digits of data. Its meager storage capacity allows the

containment of only limited information such as manu-

facturer identiﬁcation number and item number, which

leaves no room for encoding additional information.

To address the growing demand for encoding more data

in a smaller space, a new family of barcode symbologies

called the Reduced Space Symbology (RSS) is recently

being introduced (21). Some of those family members are

particularly well suited for product identiﬁcation at point-

of-sell and for product traceability in the grocery industry

(Figure 4). The RSS-14 Stacked omnidirectional barcode

encodes the full 14-digit Global Trade Item Number

Decision

Making

External Environment

Package

indicators

Data

carriers

Package Devices

Data Layers

FOOD

DATA

Business

data

Data Processing

FOOD

MODELS

Business

models

Information highway in food supply chain

Action

Decision support system

Figure 3. Information ﬂow in the intelli-

gent packaging system.

608 INTELLIGENT PACKAGING

(GTIN), and it may be used for loose produce items such as

apples or oranges where space limitation requires a

narrow symbol. The RSS Expanded Barcode (also avail-

able in stacked format) encodes up to 74 alphanumeric

characters, and it may be used for variable measure

products (e.g., meat and seafood that are sold by weight)

where larger data capacity is required to encode addi-

tional information such as packed date, batch/lot number,

and package weight.

As scanners are becoming more powerful and afford-

able, two-dimensional (2-D) barcodes (Figure 4) are also

gaining popularity. The PDF 417 (where PDF stands for

Portable Data File) is a 2-D symbol that carries up to

1.1 kb of data in a space of a UPC barcode (22). It allows

the encoding of additional information not possible with

linear barcodes, such as nutritional information, cooking

instructions, website address of food manufacturer, and

even graphics. The advantage of portable data is that they

are available immediately, without having to access an

external database. To provide more versatility, the Uni-

form Code Council has also introduced a new symbology

called Composite Symbology (Figure 4) by combining a

2-D barcode such as PDF 417 with a linear barcode such

as UPC (23).

With the advent of wireless handheld barcode scan-

ners, barcode scanning is ﬁnding new and innovative

applications. In the hospital, barcodes may be used to

ensure that the right medication is given to the right

patient at the right time and dosage (24). Immediately

prior to administrating, the medication barcode and pa-

tient’s identiﬁcation tags are scanned, and the informa-

tion is sent over a wireless Local Area Network (LAN) to

check for accuracy.

Radio Frequency Identiﬁcation (RFID) Tags. The RFID

tag is an advanced form of data carrier for automatic

product identiﬁcation and traceability. Although RFID

has been available for many years for tracking expensive

items and livestock (25), its broad application in packa-

ging has only begun in recent years. In a typical RFID

system, a reader (or interrogator) emits radio waves to

capture data from a RFID tag, and the data are then

passed onto a host computer (which may be connected to a

local network or to the Internet) for analysis and decision

making (26). Inside the RFID tag is a minuscule microchip

connected to a tiny antenna. RFID tags may be classiﬁed

into the following two types: passive tags that have no

battery and are powered by the energy supplied by the

reader and active tags that have their own battery for

powering the microchip’s circuitry and broadcasting sig-

nals to the reader. The more expensive active tags have a

reading range of 100 ft. or more, whereas the less expen-

sive passive tags have a reading range of up to 15 ft. The

actual reading range depends on many factors including

the frequency of operation, the power of the reader, and

the possible interference from metal objects. At the time of

this writing, a passive tag costs between 50¢ and $1

depending on the quantity ordered, but the industry is

working to reduce it to 5¢ in the next few years (27). An

active tag costs as much as $75, but the cost is expected to

decrease rapidly (27).

Compared with the barcode, the RFID tag has several

unique characteristics. Line of sight is usually not re-

quired: That is, the RFID tag does not need to be oriented

toward the reader for data transfer to occur because radio

waves travel through a wide array of nonmetallic materi-

als. A signiﬁcantly larger data storage capacity is avail-

able (up to 1 MB for high-end RFID tags), which may be

used to store information such as temperature and rela-

tive humidity data, nutritional information, and cooking

instructions. Read-write operations are supported by some

RFID tags, which are useful in providing real-time in-

formation updates as the tagged items move through the

supply chain. Multiple RFID tags may be read simulta-

neously at a rapid rate. Nevertheless, the RFID tag is

generally not considered as a replacement for the barcode.

Because both data carriers have advantages and disad-

vantages, they will continue to be used either alone or in

combination, depending on the situation. A RFID tag may

also be integrated with a time-temperature indicator or a

biosensor to carry time-temperature history and micro-

biological data (28, 29).

In recent years, there has been an overwhelming

interest from major retailers, companies, government

agencies, and researchers in using RFID tags for various

applications, such as supply chain management, asset

tracking, security control, and feed pattern of live stocks

(30–33). An impetus for this technology is that several

major retailers, including Wal-Mart Stores and Metro

Group, have issued mandates requiring their leading

suppliers to use RFID tags on shipping crates and pallets.

Such mandates are accelerating the adoption of the tech-

nology and future development of the RFID information

highway.

A large amount of information on RFID is scattered in

online journals (more notably, the Smart Packaging Jour-

nal and the RFID Journal), white papers published by

technology companies (34–36), and the Internet. On the

contrary, limited information on RFID was found in peer-

reviewed scientiﬁc journals, particularly those relating to

food science. This fact does not imply that food science

RSS-14 Stacked

Omni-directional

RSS Expanded

Composite

Symbology

PDF 417

Figure 4. Examples of barcode symbologies.

INTELLIGENT PACKAGING 609

knowledge is not important. It simply reﬂects that this

technology is still at its early stages of implementation,

and currently, the focus is on simple tasks such as product

identiﬁcation and tracking, and not on complicated mat-

ters that involve the application of scientiﬁc food princi-

ples. When the RFID technology will become more

established, the integration of food science knowledge

will be required to develop the necessary decision support

system for enhancing food safety and quality.

Time-Temperature Indicators. Temperature is usually

the most important environmental factor inﬂuencing the

kinetics of physical and chemical deteriorations, as well as

microbial growth in food products. Time-temperature in-

dicators (TTIs) are typically small self-adhesive labels

attached onto shipping containers or individual consumer

packages. These labels provide visual indications of tem-

perature history during distribution and storage, which is

particularly useful for warning of temperature abuse for

chilled or frozen food products. They are also used as

‘‘freshness indicators’’ for estimating the remaining shelf

life of perishable products. The responses of these labels

are usually some visually distinct changes that are tem-

perature dependent, such as an increase in color intensity

and diffusion of a dye along a straight path. Three basic

types of commercially available TTIs are critical tempera-

ture indicators, partial history indicators, and full history

indicators (37). Their operating principles and perfor-

mance have been reviewed extensively in the literature

(38–43).

In the early 1990s, Lifelines Technologies (Morris

Plains, New Jersey) demonstrated a concept of using a

laser optical wand to scan a TTI/barcode label to obtain

product information and temperature history simulta-

neously (39). The concept was unfortunately not embraced

by the industry at that time, because scanners were

expensive and the information highway in the supply

chain was not ready to support this innovation. Today,

powerful and affordable scanner and wireless technologies

have provided a more favorable environment for compa-

nies to develop advanced TTI systems for tracking and

controlling the quality of perishable food products (44).

For example, Bioett (Lund, Sweden) has developed a TTI/

barcode system in which data may be read by a handheld

scanner, displayed on a computer monitor, and down-

loaded into a database for analysis (45). KSW Microtec

(Dresden, Germany) has developed a battery-powered

TTI/RFID tag using a technology in which thin-ﬁlm

batteries are printed onto a ﬂexible substrate (46, 47).

Infratab (Oxnard, California) is also developing a battery-

powered TTI/RFID tag (2003). Unlike the traditional TTI

that is based on diffusion or a biochemical reaction, the

TTI/RFID tag uses a microchip to sense and integrate

temperature over time to determine the shelf life of a

product.

Gas Indicators. The gas composition in the package

headspace often changes as a result of the activity of the

food product, the nature of the package, or the environ-

mental conditions. For example, respiration of fresh pro-

duce, gas generation by spoilage microorganisms, or gas

transmission through the packaging material or package

leaks may cause the gas composition inside the package to

change. Gas indicators in the form of a package label or

printed on packaging ﬁlms can monitor changes in the gas

composition, thereby providing a means of monitoring the

quality and safety of food products.

Oxygen indicators are the most common gas indicator

for food packaging applications, because oxygen in air can

cause oxidative rancidity, color change, and microbial

spoilage. Several oxygen indicators are designed to show

color changes caused by leaking or tampered packages (48,

49). Ahvenainen et al. (50) and Smiddy et al. (51) used

oxygen indicators to detect improper sealing and quality

deterioration of modiﬁed atmosphere packages containing

pizza or cooked beef. Gas indicators for water vapor,

carbon dioxide, ethanol, hydrogen sulﬁde, and other gases

are also useful. For example, Hong and Park (52) used a

carbon dioxide indicator that consisted of a carbon dioxide

absorbent and a chemical dye in a polymeric ﬁlm to

measure the degree of fermentation in kimchi products

during storage and distribution.

It is expected that the future integration of gas indica-

tors into barcode labels or RFID tags will enable gas

indicator signals to be transmitted not only visually but

also electronically. Advances in smart ink and printing

technology will also allow gas indicators to be read auto-

matically using optical systems from a distance.

Biosensors. The broad spectrum of foodborne infections

is changing constantly over time as most known patho-

gens are controlled and new ones have emerged. Rapid,

accurate, on-line sensing is needed for in situ analysis of

pollutants, detection and identiﬁcation of pathogens, and

monitoring of postprocessing food quality parameters.

In general, a biosensor is a compact analytical device

that detects, records, and transmits information pertain-

ing to biochemical reactions. This smart device consists of

two primary components: a bioreceptor that recognizes a

target analyte and a transducer that converts biochemical

signals into a quantiﬁable electrical response. The bior-

eceptor is an organic or biological material such as an

enzyme, antigen, microbe, hormone, or nucleic acid. The

transducer can assume many forms (such as electroche-

mical, optical, or acoustic) depending on the parameters

being measured. Some important characteristics of a

biosensor are its speciﬁcity, sensitivity, reliability, port-

ability, and simplicity. Matrubutham and Sayler (53),

Simonian et al. (54), D’Souza et al. (55), and Velasco-

Garcia

and Mottram (56)

have reviewed the principles and

potential applications of biosensors. Alocilja and Radke

(57) have analyzed the pathogen detection industry and

concluded that biosensors are a growing market. This

article relates primarily to biosensors that can be placed

inside the food package or integrated into the packaging

material, although there are also handheld or desktop

biosensors.

Presently, commercial biosensors for intelligent pack-

aging are not available, although several prototypes are

being developed. For example, SIRA Technologies (Pasa-

dena, California) is developing a biosensor/barcode called

Food Sentinel System to detect pathogens in food

610 INTELLIGENT PACKAGING

packages (35, 58). In this system, a speciﬁc-pathogen

antibody is attached to a membrane forming part of the

barcode; the presence of contaminating bacteria will cause

the formation of a localized dark bar, which renders the

barcode unreadable during scanning. Toxin Alert (On-

tario, Canada) is also developing a diagnostic system

called Toxin Guard that incorporates antibodies into

plastic packaging ﬁlms to detect pathogens (59–61).

When the antibodies encounter a target pathogen, the

packaging material displays a clear visual signal to alert

the consumer, retailer, or inspector. This system is in-

tended for detecting gross contamination, because it is not

sensitive enough for detecting low levels of pathogens that

can cause disease.

APPLICATIONS OF INTELLIGENT PACKAGING

Enhancing Food Safety and Biosecurity. Intelligent

packaging, especially when integrating with science-based

principles, is a useful tool for tracking products and

monitoring their conditions, facilitating real-time data

access and exchange, and enabling rapid response and

timely decision making. These qualities are essential for

any food safety or biosecurity strategy. The applications of

IP in enhancing traceability systems and Hazard Analysis

Critical Control Points (HACCP) systems are discussed

below.

Traceability, tracking, and record keeping of product

ﬂow through the production process and supply chain is

generally considered key in enhancing food safety and

biosecurity (62–64). The existing traceability systems vary

in breadth, depth, and precision; these terms refer to what

data are recorded, how far backward or forward along the

supply chain are the data tracked, and how precisely is the

product location pinpointed, respectively (64). Because

tracing all information with high precision is virtually

impossible, only a limited set of variables is usually

traced. In tracing beef, for example, variables such as

global trade item number, batch/lot number, and country

of origin are recommended (65). However, these variables

do not provide technical information about the safety and

quality of the food product.

Intelligent packaging could be integrated into existing

traceability systems to create more effective communica-

tion links. Bar codes and RFID tags can enable electronic

recordkeeping and information sharing, especially when

interfaced with external instruments that can rapidly

measure quality attributes and monitor food safety. For

example, pH meters, water activity meters, rapid micro-

bial detection devices (66, 67), or nondestructive quality

measurement instruments (68, 69) may be placed at

strategic locations along the supply chain where they

exchange data with read/write bar codes or RFID tags.

Nevertheless, increasing the breath and depth of a trace-

ability system alone is not sufﬁcient to improve food

safety; science-based food models and user-friendly soft-

ware are also required to utilize fully the additional food-

related data layer available.

In recent years, HAACP has become an internationally

recognized system for managing the risk associated with

food safety. HAACP is a science-based system that consists

of the following seven principles: conduct hazard analysis,

determine critical control points, establish critical limits,

establish monitoring procedures, establish corrective ac-

tions, establish veriﬁcation procedures, and establish

record keeping and documentation procedures (70). The

implementation of these principles requires storing, shar-

ing, and processing information so that timely decision

and corrective actions could be made.

Figure 5 outlines a system based on the conceptual

framework of IP and HACCP principles for managing

information ﬂow and ensuring food safety. An important

point about this system is that information is shared

among multiple devices at multiple locations. Information

obtained from multiple devices and multiple locations,

especially when the devices are interconnected, is far

more useful than information obtained from a single

device and at a single location. It is generally recognized

that microbial detection alone is not a complete solution to

ensure food safety; however, when it is coupled with

physical and chemical measurements, timely detection

Decision

Making

External environment

at various locations

TTI labels

Bar codes

RFID tags

Package Devices Data Layers

Data that are

related to food

safety such as

limits of critical

control points,

microbial counts,

pH, and a

Data Processing

Science-based

software

based on

risk assessment

and predictive

microbiology

models

Compute networks in food supply chain

Corrective

Action

Sensing devices placed

along supply chain

Figure 5. An example of the intelligent

packaging and HACCP system.

INTELLIGENT PACKAGING 611

and correction of safety problems may be achieved more

readily. The multiple devices include smart package de-

vices coupled with sensing devices such as pH meters and

water activity meters that are placed along the supply

chain.

When applying the HACCP principles, special atten-

tion should be paid to designing the decision support

system. The hazard analysis should determine not only

the ﬂow of materials but also the ﬂow of information. The

critical control points, as well as the sensing devices

required at speciﬁc locations, should be identiﬁed. The

limits of critical control points (such as time and tempera-

ture) may be encoded in bar codes or RFID tags to enable

electronic data retrieval. Monitoring the critical control

points may be achieved by using TTI labels or other

sensing devices at strategic locations. Read/write RFID

tags and computer networks may facilitate record keeping

and documentation. Decision for corrective actions may be

facilitated using data processing software, which should

incorporate science-based knowledge such as risk assess-

ment and predictive microbiology models (71, 72). The

development of an IP-based HACCP system is in the early

stages, and signiﬁcant research work is needed for its

future development and implementation.

Enhancing Food Quality and Convenience. The current

application of IP has been focused mostly on using TTI

labels to monitor temperature, although many other

applications are also possible. For example, it may be

applied to cooking appliances such as the intelligent

microwave oven system shown in Figure 6 (73). The

uniqueness of this system is in its use of information

sharing to enhance food quality and convenience. The

PDF 417 barcode in the package carries data about the

food product, and the data processing system generates

the proper heating instructions for the microwave oven.

Information exchange also occurs through the user inter-

face (such as a touch screen or voice recognition system)

and the Internet.

Because microwave ovens come in different sizes and

power outputs, the heating instructions printed on micro-

waveable food packages are obviously vague to accommo-

date the many different ovens in the market. Using these

vague instructions often does not allow for achievement of

good food quality. This problem may be overcome by

scanning the bar code to enable the decision support

system to match the microwave oven and the food pack-

age. To achieve a higher level of quality, temperature and

moisture sensors may be placed inside the microwave

oven to provide feedback for the data processing system.

Scanning the bar code eliminates the need for entering

the heating instructions. This technique is particularly

useful for microwave/convective ovens that use compli-

cated instructions. These combination ovens can provide

higher food quality than the conventional microwave

ovens, but their heating instructions involve multiple

steps because both microwave energy and convective

heat are employed. Scanning the bar code is also helpful

for people who are visually impaired or have difﬁculties in

understanding the language. The Internet connection

provides convenient access to information relating to the

packaged food such as the manufacturer’s website, re-

cipes, food allergen information, and product recall.

The development of the intelligent microwave oven

system requires the application of scientiﬁc knowledge to

design the data layers and the data processing system.

The data layers should contain information relating to the

food, package, and microwave oven. The architecture of

the data layers could be rather complicated because data

may enter the system in different ways. For example, the

food manufacturer may encode the food and packaging

information in the bar code, the oven manufacturer may

store the oven information in a database connected to the

information processing system, the consumer may enter

his or her preferences through the touch screen, and

information may be exchanged via the Internet. The

data processing system should include algorithms that

are based on heat transfer principles and heuristic rules

relating to food quality and safety to generate instructions

for controlling the magnetron and turntable (if available)

of the microwave oven. In addition, the algorithms may

have also other abilities such as obeying the requirement

or preferences of the consumer, warning the consumer

against food allergens, and tracking the dietary intake of

the consumer.

RESEARCH ROADMAP

Future research is needed to ensure the safe and smooth

adoption of intelligent packaging. In developing a re-

search agenda, the conceptual framework in Figure 3

may be used as a roadmap, and the role of IP in relation

to AP and traditional packaging in the model of packaging

functions (Figure 1) should be considered. Conducting the

research frequently requires a system approach involving

interactions between researchers in food packaging, food

engineering, biotechnology, microelectronics, software en-

gineering, nanotechnology, and other disciplines. Dis-

cussed below are some recommended future research

areas.

. Development of Decision Support System. In the

business world, decision support systems are now

available for analyzing data and facilitating decision

making. However, those decision support systems are

User interface

such as touch

screen

Microwave oven Meal

acka

Scanner

Data

processing

system

Internet

or local

network

PDF 417 barcode

Figure 6. Intelligent microwave oven system.

612 INTELLIGENT PACKAGING

not adequate for intelligent packaging applications—

what is lacking is the scientiﬁc knowledge necessary

for food quality and safety enhancement. Although a

vast amount of scientiﬁc knowledge is available in

journals such as the Journal of Food Science, more

research is still needed to transform it to a form that

can be incorporated into the data layer and food

models for the IP system. Traditionally, mathemati-

cal models (e.g., kinetic models for quality deteriora-

tion and microbial growth) have been useful for

quantitatively describing the existing knowledge of

food systems, but those models alone are often not

sufﬁcient to handle complex real-time data from

multiple package devices at multiple locations. To

compensate for this deﬁciency, artiﬁcial intelligence

(AI) tools such as knowledge-based expert systems,

fuzzy logic, inductive learning, and neural networks

may also be used (74). These AI tools are designed to

deal with complex real-life data and transfer expert

knowledge, in the form of rules-of-thumb, to quanti-

tative functions that can be processed by computers.

The utility of those tools have recently been demon-

strated for microbial growth modeling (75), food

processing (76), controlling cheese ripening (77),

and other food applications (78).

. Yam and Saba (79) has also described a decision

support system for modiﬁed atmosphere packaging

for fresh produce, with the goal of extending the shelf

life of product by creating and maintaining a desir-

able modiﬁed atmosphere inside the package. This

complicated system involves many variables and the

dynamic interactions among the respiring product,

package, and distribution environment. The product

parameters include the respiration rates for O

con-

sumption and CO

evolution, the product weight, and

the optimum modiﬁed atmosphere for the product;

the package parameters include the O

and CO

permeabilities, package thickness, and package sur-

face area; the distribution environment parameters

include temperature and relative humidity. A chal-

lenge is to deal with these many complex, constantly

changing variables. Figure 7 shows the block dia-

gram of a generic decision support system that may

be used for this and other food packaging applica-

tions. The data input consists of dynamic data and

data from the knowledge base. Examples of dynamic

data are the climatic conditions and respiring rates;

the quality of the produce can change daily and are

preferably monitored with sensing devices. Examples

of data stored in the knowledge base are the gas

permeabilities of packaging ﬁlms, package dimen-

sions, and regulations that are not likely to change

daily or weekly. However, the knowledge base will be

updated periodically, for example, when the regula-

tion has changed or when a new packaging material

is available. The data processing consists of mathe-

matical models and AI tools. The mathematical

models are those based on the scientiﬁc principles

describing the interactions among the respiration of

the produce, the O

and CO

permeabilities of the

package, and environment conditions (14). The AI

tools may include fuzzy logic sets containing rules or

algorithms for dealing with ambiguous and difﬁcult

situations that are not easily reduced to mathema-

tical models. The mathematical models and AI tools

work together to enable more rapid and reliable

decision making.

. Additional Development of Smart Package Devices.

Smaller, less expensive, and more powerful smart

package devices are needed to meet the market

needs. Many advanced smart package devices such

as biosensor and biosensor/RFID are still in the

prototype development stage. Most existing biosen-

sor prototypes have limitations such as slow response

time and short shelf life; however, exciting research

opportunities exist in combining biotechnology and

nanotechnology to develop biosensors to overcome

these and other limitations (80). The integration of

TTIs and gas indicators with barcodes and RFID tags

requires future research and development. Stan-

dards are also needed to enable the efﬁcient commu-

nication among smart package devices.

. Integration of IP into Total Packaging System. IP is

only one component in the total packaging system

(Figure 1), and thus it must be integrated smoothly

and efﬁciently with other system components. Excit-

ing research opportunities exist in combining IP and

AP; for example, an active/intelligent packaging

system may use a TTI/biosensor to sense the envi-

ronment, and whenever necessary, release an active

compound (such as antimicrobial or antioxidant) to

extend the shelf life of the food.

CONCLUSIONS

Intelligent packaging is emerging as a new branch of

packaging science and technology that offers exciting op-

portunities for enhancing food safety, quality, and conve-

nience. The advancement in this technology will require

researchers to continue think outside the box and use

nontraditional packaging approaches to meet new chal-

lenges. For the ﬁrst time, packaging science, food engineer-

ing, biotechnology, information technology, nanotechnology,

Dynamic data

Knowledge

base

Decisions

DATA INPUT

DATA PROCESSING

Mathematical models

AI tools such as expert

system and fuzzy logic

Figure 7. Block diagram for a decision support system.

INTELLIGENT PACKAGING 613

and other disciplines are coming together to develop a

breakthrough packaging technology. As this technology is

unfolding, issues such as those relating to legislation,

consumer acceptance (relating to privacy, for example),

and economics also need to be addressed.

REFERENCES

1. F. A. Paine, The Packaging User’s Handbook, Van Nostrand

Reinhold, New York, 1991.

2. G. L. Robertson, Food Packaging: Principles and Practice,

Marcel Dekker, New York, 1993.

3. T. S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientiﬁc Revolutions, University

of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, 1996.

4. J. Miltz, N. Passy, and C. H. Mannheim, ‘‘Trends and Applica-

tions of Active Packaging Systems,’’ in P. Ackerman, M.

Jagerstad, and M. Ohlsson, eds., Food and Packaging Materi-

als—Chemical Interaction, The Royal Society of Chemistry,

London, UK, 1995.

5. L. Vermeiren, F. Devlieghere, M. van Beest, N. de Kruijf, and

J. Debevere, ‘‘Developments in the Active Packaging of

Foods,’’ Trends Food Sci. Technol. 10, 77–86 (1999).

6. M. L. Rooney, Active Food Packaging, Blackie Academic &

Professional, New York, 1995.

7. A. L. Brody, E. R. Strupinsky, and L. R. Kline, Active Packag-

ing for Food Applications, Technomic Publishing, Lancaster,

PA, 2001.

8. J. P. Smith, J. Hoshino, and Y. Abe, ‘‘Interactive Packaging

Involving Sachet Technology,’’ in M. L. Rooney, ed., Active

Food Packaging, Blackie Academic and Professional, London,

UK, 1995.

9. P. Appendini and J. H. Hotchkiss, ‘‘Review of Antimicrobial

Food Packaging,’’ Inn. Food Sci. Emer. Technol. 3, 113–126

(2002).

10. P. Suppakul, J. Miltz, K. Sonneveld, and S. W. Bigger, ‘‘Active

Packaging Technologies with an Emphasis on Antimicrobial

Packaging and Its Applications,’’ J. Food Sci. 68, 408–420

(2003).

11. J. Miltz, P. Hoojjat, J. K. Han, J. R. Giacin, B. R. Harte, and

I. J. Gray, ‘‘Loss of Antioxidants from High-Density Polyethy-

lene: Its Effect on Oatmeal Cereal Oxidation,’’ in J. H.

Hotchkiss, ed., Food and Packaging Interactions, American

Chemical Society, Washington, DC, 1988.

12. C. Wessling, T. Nielsen, and J. R. Giacin, ‘‘Antioxidant Ability

of BHT- and a-Tocopherol Impregnated LDPE Film in Packag-

ing of Oatmeal,’’ J. Sci. Food Agr. 81, 194–201 (2000).

13. P. Suppakul, J. Miltz, K. Sonneveld, and S. W. Bigger, ‘‘Anti-

microbial Properties of Basil and Its Possible Application in

Food Packaging,’’ J. Agr. Food Chem. 51, 3197–207 (2003).

14. K. L. Yam and D. S. Lee, ‘‘Designing Modiﬁed Atmosphere

Packaging for Fresh Produce,’’ in M. L. Rooney, ed., Active

Packaging, Blackie Academic and Professional, New York,

1995.

15. H. Zuckerman and J. Miltz, ‘‘Temperature Proﬁles in Dough

Heated with a Susceptor in the Microwave Oven,’’ J. Food

Proc. Pres. 22, 53–65 (1998).

16. N. Waite, Active Packaging, Pira International, Surrey, UK,

2003.

17. R. Clarke, ‘‘Radio Frequency Identiﬁcation: Smart or Intelli-

gent Packaging?’’ J. Pack. Sci. Technol. 9, (2000).

18. R. Rijk, ‘‘Active and Intelligent Packaging Development,’’ in

Plastics and Polymers in Contact with Foodstuffs, Pira Inter-

national, Edinburgh, Scotland, 2002.

19. V. Manthou and M. Vlachopoulou, ‘‘Bar-Code Technology for

Inventory and Marketing Management Systems: A Model for

Its Development and Implementation,’’ Int. J. Prod. Econ. 71,

157–164 (2001).

20.

S. P

earce and R. D. Bushnell, The Bar Code Implementation

Guide: Using Bar Codes in Distribution, Quad II, Inc., Surf

City, NJ, 1997.

21. Uniform Code Council, ‘‘Small Symbologies (RSS and Compo-

site).’’ Accessed April 3, 2004. http://www.uc-council.org/ean_

ucc_system/stnds_and_tech/small_sym.html.

22. Anonymous, ‘‘PDF417: The New Symbol of Data Manage-

ment,’’ White paper, Symbol Technologies, Inc., Holtsville,

NY.

23. Anonymous, ‘‘Reduced Space Symbology (RSS), Composite

Symbology (CS) and Your Business,’’ White paper, Symbol

Technologies Inc., Holtsville, NY, 2002.

24. Anonymous. ‘‘The Wireless Hospital Extending the Reach of

Your Information System Directly to the Point of Activity,’’

White paper, Symbol Technologies Inc., Holtsville, NY, 2001.

25. Anonymous, ‘‘Increasing Proﬁts and Productivity: Accurate

Asset Tracking and Management with Bar Coding and

RFID,’’ White paper, Zebra Technologies, Vernon Hill, IL,

2003.

26. R. Want, ‘‘RFID: A Key to Automating Everything,’’ Sci. Am.

290, 56–65 (2004).

27. P. M. Goodrum and M. McLaren, ‘‘A Review of Smart Chip

Implementation and Pilot Project at University of Kentucky:

A Report to the Electrical Contracting Foundation,’’ Univer-

sity of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, 2003.

28. S. Nambi, S. Nyalamadugu, S. M. Wentworth, and B. A. Chin,

‘‘Radio Frequency Identiﬁcation Sensors,’’ 7th World Multi-

conference on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, Dubna,

Russia, July 30–August 2, 2003.

29. R. Want, ‘‘Enabling Ubiquitous Sensing with RFID,’’ Compu-

ter 37, 84–86 (2004).

30. K. S. Schwartzkopf-Genswein, C. Huisma, and T. A. McAllis-

ter, ‘‘Validation of a Radio Frequency Identiﬁcation System

for Monitoring the Feeding Patterns of Feedlot Cattle,’’ Livest.

Prod. Sci. 60, 27–31 (1999).

31. M. A. Falkman, ‘‘RFID Smart Labels Track Chilled Foods

Door to Door,’’ Pack. Dig. November, 82 (2000).

32. Anonymous, ‘‘Increasing Proﬁts and Productivity: Accurate

Asset Tracking and Management with Bar Coding and

RFID,’’ White paper, Zebra Technologies Inc., Vernon Hill,

IL, 2003.

33. Anonymous, Highlights of the Intelligent and Smart Packa-

ging Conference, Las Vegas, NV, January 27–28, 2004, Sm.

Pack. J. 18, 1–14 (2004).

34. Anonymous, ‘‘RFID: The Next Generation of AIDC,’’ White

paper, Zebra Technologies Inc., Vernon Hill, IL, 2004.

35. Anonymous, ‘‘Zebra’s RFID Readiness Guide: Complying with

RFID Tagging Mandates,’’ White paper, Zebra Technologies

Inc., Vernon Hill, IL, 2004.

36. M. Linster, J. Liu, and V. Sundhar, ‘‘RFID in the Supply

Chain: Improving Performance Through Greater Visibility,’’

White paper, Avicon, Maynard, MA, 2004.

37. R. P. Singh, ‘‘Scientiﬁc Principles of Shelf-Life Evaluation,’’ in

D. Man and A. Jones, eds., Shelf-Life Evaluation of Food, 2nd

ed., Aspen Publishers, Gaithersburg, MD, 2000.

614 INTELLIGENT PACKAGING

38. R. P. Singh and J. H. Wells, ‘‘Use of Time-Temperature

Indicators to Monitor Quality of Frozen Hamburger,’’ Food

Technol. 39, 42–50 (1985).

39. P. S. Taoukis, B. Fu, and T. P. Labuza, ‘‘Time-Temperature

Indicators,’’ Food Technol. 45, 70–82 (1991).

40. J. D. Selman, ‘‘Time-Temperature Indicators,’’ in M. L. Roo-

ney, ed., Active Food Packaging, Blackie Academic & Profes-

sional, New York, 1995.

41. W. L. Claeys, A. M. Van Loey, and M. E. Hendrickx, ‘‘Intrinsic

Time Temperature Integrators for Heat Treatment of Milk,’’

Trends Food Sci. Tech. 13, 293–311 (2002).

42. P. S. Taoukis and T. P. Labuza, ‘‘Time-Temperature Indicators

(TTIs),’’ in R. Ahvenainen, ed., Novel Food Packaging Tech-

niques, Woodhead Publishing Limited, Cambridge, UK, 2003.

43. M. Smolander, H. -L.Alakomi, T. Ritvanen, J. Vainionpaa, and

R. Ahvenainen, ‘‘Monitoring of the Quality of Modiﬁed Atmo-

sphere Packaged Broiler Chicken Cuts Stored in Different

Temperature Conditions: Time-Temperature Indicators as

Quality-Indicating Tools,’’ Food Cont. 15, 217–229 (2004).

44. N. Bhushan and K. Gummaraju, ‘‘A Petri Net Based Simula-

tion Approach for Evaluating Beneﬁts of Time Temperature

Indicator and Wireless Technologies in Perishable Goods

Retail Management,’’ Infosys Technologies Limited, Bangla-

dore, India, 2004. Accessed April 29, 2004. http://www.infy.

com/knowledge_capital/thought-papers/ENG-17.pdf.

45. Anonymous, ‘‘Monitor Your Cold Chain,’’ Bioett. Accessed

May 18, 2004. http://www.bioett.com/pdf/bioett.pdf.

46. Z. Nitzan, ‘‘Flexible Thin Layer Open Electrochemical Cell

and Applications of Same,’’ U.S Patent 5,897,522 (1999).

47. J. Collins, ‘‘Active RFID Labels for the Masses,’’ RFID J (2003),

Accessed May 1, 2004. http://www.rﬁdjournal.com/article/

articleview/555/1/1/.

48. K. C. Krumhar and M. Karel, ‘‘Visual Indicator System,’’ U.S.

Patent 5,096,813 (1992).

49. Y. Inoue, H. Hatakeyama, and I. Yoshino, ‘‘Oxygen Indicator,’’

U.S. Patent 5,358,876 (1994).

50. R. Ahvenainen, M. Eilamo, and E. Hurme, ‘‘Detection of

Improper Sealing and Quality Deterioration of Modiﬁed-Atmo-

sphere-Packed Pizza by a Colour Indicator,’’ Food Cont.

8, 177–184 (1997).

51. M. Smiddy, M. Fitzgerald, J. P. Kerry, D. B. Papkovsky, C. K.

O’ Sullivan, and G. G. Guilbault, ‘‘Use of Oxygen Sensors to

Non-Destructively Measure the Oxygen Content in Modiﬁed

Atmosphere and Vacuum Packed Beef: Impact of Oxygen

Content on Lipid Oxidation,’’ Meat. Sci. 61, 285–290 (2002).

52. S. -I. Hong and W. -S. Park, ‘‘Use of Color Indicators as an

Active Packaging System for Evaluating Kimchi Fermenta-

tion,’’ J. Food Eng. 46, 67–72 (2000).

53. U. Matrubutham and G. S. Sayler, ‘‘Microbial Biosensors

Based on Optical Detection,’’ in A. Mulchandani, and K. R.

Rogers, eds., Enzyme and Microbial Biosensors: Techniques

and Protocols, Humana Press, Totowa, NJ, 1998.

54. A. L. Simonian, E. I. Rainina, and J. R. Wild, ‘‘Microbial

Biiosensors Based on Potentiometric Detection,’’ in A. Mul-

chandani and K. R. Rogers, eds., Enzyme and Microbial

Biosensors: Techniques and Protocols, Humana Press, To-

towa, NJ, 1998.

55. S. F. D’Souza, ‘‘Microbial Biosensors,’’ Biosens Bioelect 16,

337–353 (2001).

56. M. N. Velasco-Garcia and T. Mottram, ‘‘Biosensor Technology

Addressing Agricultural Problems,’’ Biosys. Eng. 84, 1–12

(2003).

57. E. C. Alocilja and S. M. Radke , ‘‘Market Analysis of Biosen-

sors for Food Safety,’’ Biosens. Bioelect. 18,

841–846 (2003).

58. C

. E. Ayala and D. L. Park, ‘‘New Bar Code Will Help Monitor

Food Safety,’’ The Magazine of the Louisiana Agricultural

Experiment Station 43, 8 (2000).

59. Anonymous, ‘‘Now you can see your ﬁsh isn’t foul without

opening the pack,’’ New Sci (2000). Accessed May 20, 2004.

http://www.toxinalert.com/news.php?p = 2,

60. W. T. Bodenhamer, ‘‘Method and Apparatus for Selective

Biological Material Detection,’’ U.S. Patent 6,376,204 (2002).

61. W. T. Bodenhamer, G. Jackowski, and E. Davies, ‘‘Surface

Binding of an Immunoglobulin to a Flexible Polymer Using a

Water Soluble Varnish Matrix,’’ U.S. Patent 6,692,973 (2004).

62. Anonymous, ‘‘Traceability in the Food Chain,’’ Food Stan-

dards Agency, London, UK, 2002.

63. Anonymous, ‘‘Traceability Management Tools for Agri-

culture, Food and Beverage Products,’’ EAN Int, (2004).

Accessed April 30, 2004. http://www.ean-int.org/data1/

Traceability%20DEF18_2_04.pdf.

64. E. Golan, B. Krissoff, F. Kuchler, L. Calvin, K. Nelson, and P.

Gregory, ‘‘Traceability in the U.S. Food Supply: Economic

Theory and Industry Studies,’’ U.S. Department of Agricul-

ture, Washington, DC, 2004.

65. Anonymous, ‘‘Traceability of Beef,’’ EAN Int, Brussels, Bel-

gium, 2002.

66. J. Guan and R. E. Levin, ‘‘Quantitative Detection of Escher-

ichia Coli O157:H7 in Ground Beef by the Polymerase Chain

Reaction,’’ Food Microbiol. 19, 159–165 (2002).

67. A. A. Bhagwat, ‘‘Rapid Detection of Salmonella from Vegeta-

ble Rinse-Water Using Real-Time PCR,’’ Food Microbiol. 21,

73–78 (2004).

68. R. Lu, ‘‘Multispectral Imaging for Predicting Firmness and

Soluble Solids Content of Apple Fruit,’’ Postharvest Biol.

Technol. 31, 147–157 (2004).

69. S. Saranwong, J. Sornsrivichai, and S. Kawano, ‘‘Prediction of

Ripe-Stage Eating Quality of Mango Fruit from Its Harvest

Quality Measured Nondestructively by Near Infrared Spec-

troscopy,’’ Postharvest Biol. Technol. 31, 137–145 (2004).

70. National Advisory Committee on Microbiological Criteria for

Foods, ‘‘Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point Principles

and Application Guidelines,’’ J. Food Protect. 61, 762–775

(1998).

71. T. A. McMeekin, J. Olley, D. A. Ratkowsky, and T. Ross,

‘‘Predictive Microbiology: Towards the Interface and Beyond,’’

Int. J. Food Microbiol. 73, 395–407 (2002).

72. Anonymous, ‘‘Pathogen Modeling Program (Version 7.0),’’ U.S.

Department of Agriculture. (2004). Accessed April 15, 2004.

www.arserrc.gov/mfs/pathogen.htm.

73. K. L. Yam, ‘‘Intelligent Packaging and the Future Smart

Kitchen,’’ Pack. Technol. Sci. 13, 83–85 (2000).

74. D. T. Pham and P. T. N. Pham, ‘‘Artiﬁcial Intelligence in

Engineering,’’ Int. J. Mach. Tool. Manufact. 39, 937–949

(1999).

75. S. Jeyamkondan, D. S. Jayas, and R. A. Holley, ‘‘Microbial

Growth Modelling with Artiﬁcial Neural Networks,’’ Int. J.

Food Microbiol. 64, 343–54 (2001).

76. J. S. Torrecilla, L. Otero, and P. D. Sanz, ‘‘A Neural Network

Approach for Thermal/Pressure Food Processing,’’ J. Food

Eng. 62,

89–95 (2004).

77. N.

Perrot, L. Agioux, I. Ioannou, G. Mauris, G. Corrieu, and

G. Trystram, ‘‘Decision Support System Design Using the

Operator Skill to Control Cheese Ripening—Application of

INTELLIGENT PACKAGING 615

the Fuzzy Symbolic Approach,’’ J. Food Eng. 64, 321–333

(2004).

78. S. Linko, ‘‘Expert Systems—What Can They Do for the Food

Industry?’’ Trends. Food Sci. Technol. 9, 3–12 (1998).

79. K. L. Yam and R. Saba, ‘‘Intelligent Product Delivery: A

Paradigm Shift in Packaging,’’ Pack. Technol. Eng. 7, 22–26

(1998).

80. N. Scott and H. Chen, Nanoscale Science and Engineering for

Agricultural and Food Systems, Cooperative State Research,

Education and Extension Service, USDA, 2003.

General References

G. M. Giaglis, I. Minis, A. Tatarakis, and V. Zeimpekis, ‘‘Real Time

Decision Support Systems in Urban Distribution: Opportu-

nities Afforded by Mobile and Wireless Technologies,’’ 2nd

International ECR Research Symposium, Athens, Greece,

September 11, 2003.

INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS

RICHARD C. RANDALL

International Business

Standards Association,

Littleton, Colorado

International standards are developed and adopted for

use by multiple countries. In contrast, a standard

developed speciﬁcally for use in only one country is

considered a National standard. A National standard is

controlled (revised and distributed) by an organization

(either government or non-government) within a single

nation. An International standard is controlled by an

organization (typically non-governmental) with partici-

pating members representing multiple nations. Interna-

tional standards are often distributed in multiple

languages.

WHAT ARE STANDARDS?

Quite simply, a standard is a technical speciﬁcation or

other document created for the purpose of promoting

consistency.

A standard may be ‘‘open’’ (available to the public—for

use by anyone) or ‘‘closed’’ (usually a technical speciﬁca-

tion—for use only by those who have obtained permission

from the standard’s owner or patent holder). Use of a

closed standard may involve payment in the form of a

royalty to the patent holder. A standard may be intended

to promote free-market competition (e.g., an open stan-

dard) or restrict competition (e.g., a closed standard).

Similarly, a standard may be designed to (a) pro-

mote free trade by removing barriers caused by differ-

ences in national practices or (b) restrict trade through

creating artiﬁcial, protectionist barriers to trade.

Standards may also be designed, by either government

or non-government entities, to promote speciﬁc social

agendas. Regulatory requirements often create standards,

directly or indirectly.

In short, standards may be designed to promote, or

restrict, communication, efﬁciency, quality, safety, health,

environmental protection, free trade, and so on.

Compliance with a ‘‘legal’’ standard (e.g., weights and

measures, labeling) is required by law. While compliance

with a ‘‘voluntary’’ standard is discretionary, a voluntary

standard can be incorporated into a contract or regulation

where its provisions become mandatory (1).

THE INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR

STANDARDIZATION (ISO)

The most widely recognized international standards are

developed and published by the International Organiza-

tion for Standardization (ISO). Established in 1947, the

ISO (pronounced ‘‘iso,’’ as in ‘‘isometric’’) is a network of

the national standards institutes representing 157 coun-

tries, on the basis of one member per country, formed ‘‘to

facilitate international coordination and uniﬁcation of

industrial standards.’’ A Central Secretariat in Geneva,

Switzerland, coordinates the system.

A member body of ISO is the national body ‘‘most

representative of standardization in its country.’’ Only

one such body for each country is accepted for membership

in ISO. Member bodies are entitled to participate and

exercise full voting rights on any technical committee and

policy committee of ISO. A correspondent member is

usually an organization in a country which does not yet

have a fully developed national standards activity. Corre-

spondent members do not take an active part in the

technical and policy development work, but are entitled

to be kept fully informed about the work of interest to them.

Subscriber membership has been established for countries

with very small economies. Subscriber members pay re-

duced membership fees that nevertheless allow them to

maintain contact with international standardization (2, 3).

A complete list of each member body and its country

may be found online at http://www.iso.org/iso/en/aboutiso/

isomembers/MemberCountryList.MemberCountryList.

The work of preparing ISO standards is normally

carried out through technical committees (TCs), their

subcommittees (SCs), and their working groups (WGs).

Each member body interested in a subject for which a

technical committee has been established is entitled

to be represented on that committee. International orga-

nizations, governmental and non-governmental, in

liaison with ISO, also take part in the work. Each TC

and SC has a secretariat assigned to a ISO member body.

Details of each TC, including its secretariat, organiza-

tional structure, and scope of responsibility (determined

by the ISO Council), are identiﬁed in the annual ISO

Memento (3).

The ISO technical committees directly concerned

with packaging and the distribution of goods are shown

in Table 1. It is important to note, however, that the

work of other TCs often relates to packaging; for exam-

ple, TC 6 ‘‘Paper, board and pulps,’’ and TC 61, ‘‘Plastics,’’

616 INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS

Table 1. ISO Technical Committees Concerned with Packaging

TC 51: Pallets for Unit Load Method of Materials Handling

Scope: Standardization of pallets in general use in the form of platforms or trays on which goods may be

packed to form unit loads for handling by mechanical devices

Secretariat: British Standards Institution (BSI)

389 Chiswick High Road

GB-London W4 4AL

Tel: +44 208 996 90 00

Fax: +44 208 996 74 00

Secretariat direct:

E-mail: bernard.shelley@bsi-global.com

TC 52: Light-Gauge Metal Containers

Scope: Standardization in the ﬁeld of light-gauge metal containers with a nominal material thickness of

r0.49 mm

Secretariat: Association franc- aise de normalisation (AFNOR)

11, rue Francis de Pressense

FR-93571 Saint-Denis La Plaine Cedex

Tel: +33 1 41 62 80 00

Fax: +33 1 49 17 90 00

Secretariat direct:

E-mail: annick.galpin@afnor.org

TC 63: Glass Containers

Scope: Standardization of glass containers made from molded glass used as a means of packaging.

Secretariat: British Standards Institution (BSI)

389 Chiswick High Road

GB-London W4 4AL

Tel: +44 208 996 90 00

Fax: +44 208 996 74 00

Secretariat direct:

Tel: +44 208 996 71 72

Fax: +44 208 996 77 99

E-mail: mick.maghar@bsi-global.com

TC 104: Freight Containers

Scope: Standardization of freight containers, having an external volume of Z1m

(Z35.3 ft

), with regard

to terminology, classiﬁcation, dimensions, speciﬁcations, test methods, and marking

Secretariat: American National Standards Institute (ANSI)

1819 L Street, NW

US-Washington, DC 20036

Tel: +1 212 642 49 00

Fax: +1 212 398 00 23

Secretariat direct:

Tel: +1 212 642 49 75

Fax: +1 212 730 13 46

E-mail: isot@ansi.org

TC 122: Packaging

Scope: Standardization in the ﬁeld of packaging with regard to terminology and deﬁnitions, packaging

dimensions, performance requirements, and tests; excludes matters falling within the scopes of

particular committees (e.g., TC 6, 52, 104)

Secretariat: Japan Packaging Institute (JISC)

4-1-1 Tsukij

JP-Tokyo, Chuo-ku 104-0045

Tel: +81 3 3543 1189

Fax: +81 3 3543 8970

Secretariat direct:

Tel: +81 3 3543 1189

Fax: +81 3 3543 8970

E-mail: iso-tc@jpi.or.jp

(Continued)

INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS 617