BRCGS food fraud and food defence: what is the difference?
Food fraud and food defence both involve deliberate action, but the motive and the risk differ. The BRCGS articles on food fraud and food defence explain these terms. The BRCGS overview places them alongside food safety, integrity, legality and quality. The BRCGS help and guidance remains the authority for Issue 9.
Food fraud is economically motivated deception, for example selling a cheaper raw material as a more expensive one. Food defence concerns protection against deliberate harm or contamination. Also read the BRCGS hub, the requirements guide and the explanation of FSSC additional requirements to see how the schemes differ.
A herb processor investigates the origin and the financial incentive around an expensive herb for food fraud. For food defence, the same company assesses access control to the mixing room. Both analyses need ownership and follow-up, but they do not need the same measure.
On this page
The cards give a workable structure for a first discussion. Use them to name, for each risk, the source, the impact, the measure and the verification. A template or example does not replace a suitable assessment of your product and process.
1. Food fraud
For food fraud, ask: where is there a financial incentive to falsify product, origin, quantity or a claim? Think of a scarce ingredient, a complex supply chain, price pressure or a supplier without transparent origin information.
A measure can consist of approved suppliers, risk-based verification, checks against specifications or a laboratory test. The right measure follows from your own vulnerability analysis. An expensive test for every ingredient is not automatically better than a targeted check with clear follow-up.
2. Food defence
For food defence, ask: where could someone deliberately cause harm or contamination? Look at access, visitors, raw materials, water, storage, process steps and information. Also assess what an employee must do when they see an unknown person or an unusual situation.
A herb blender can use access badges, visitor escorts, lockable raw material storage and a reporting route. Check that the shop floor understands the measures, and that changes to the building or staff trigger a new assessment.
3. Measures
Put both topics into a simple risk overview. Describe the threat, the vulnerability, the impact, the measure, the owner and the verification. Keep the two analyses clearly separate, so that an economic motive is not automatically treated as an access risk.
| Topic | Central question | Fictional example | Possible evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Food fraud | Who could gain financially through deception? | Cheap herb sold as a premium herb | Supplier assessment and verification |
| Food defence | Where could deliberate harm or contamination occur? | Unattended access to the mixing room | Access control, site walk-through and training |
4. Evidence and review
Keep the analysis, the decisions and the checks carried out. Discuss signals from complaints, suppliers, incidents, audits and changes. A new supplier, different storage or a public threat can be a reason to repeat the assessment.
Record who carries out the review and what happens to an open action. Link the outcome to management and culture and to the scope of your site. The certification body assesses whether your approach is suitable under the current Issue 9 interpretation.
TACCP, VACCP or an existing company format can help with the analysis, but no single model automatically meets the requirements for every site. Align terminology and evidence with your product, your process and the current BRCGS documents.
For the food defence side, you work out a threat assessment in a plan. The template and a worked example are on food defence plan BRCGS.
Frequently asked questions
Is food fraud the same as food defence?
No. Food fraud concerns economically motivated deception. Food defence concerns protection against deliberate harm or contamination.
Do I need two separate documents?
You must assess both risks in a recognisable way. This can happen in one management system or in two documents, as long as the motive, the analysis, the measures and the follow-up stay clear.
Is a supplier audit always necessary?
Not automatically. Choose controls based on vulnerability, product, supply chain and the information available. Record your choice and the verification.