Meat processing and animal by-products 139
high requirements on the labelling of, for example, functional food products.
In practice, this means that, in order to make use of health claims on new
products, the claim has to be proven by clinical trials similar to the pharmaceutical industry, which is assessed to be too costly in time and resources for
companies in the food industry.
Trade with ABP and food products is highly regulated. Traditionally, food
products have been included in trade barriers and sanctions supported by
arguments of health or environmental reasons. Trade barriers are also often
politically motivated as a consequence of bilateral, diplomatic crises, and turn
out to have huge consequences for the market opportunities of the meat and
ABP industry.
An example is the geo- political crisis between Russia and EU that resulted
in, on August 6, 2014, a Russian decree prohibiting, for one year, imports
into the territory of the Russian Federation of certain agricultural products,
raw materials and foodstuffs originating from EU countries, Norway, USA,
Canada and Australia (European Commission, 2017). The embargo was later
extended until August 5, 2016, and then further prolonged until December
31, 2017 (European Commission, 2017).
This important event led to price fluctuations on the international raw
materials market, and significantly impacted the industry on its rest raw
materials base. Products on the banned list included meat of bovine animals;
pork, poultry meat and edible offal in all forms (fresh, chilled or frozen); sausages and similar products of meat; meat offal or blood; and the final food
products based thereon (European Commission, 2017). For example, while
Nortura used to export large quantities of ABPs to Russia, after the ban it was
forced to find other solutions, and to search for valorisation alternatives.
7.6 Change in innovative behaviour
This section analyses how companies navigate the highly regulated space we
have outlined above. The question is how companies approach market
opportunities and different market segments based on the institutional settings
which regulate the type and volume of input and not least the market
options. Figure 7.3 illustrates part of the regulative space which sets the
overall framework of the meat processing and ABP industry.
For slaughterhouses, the introduction of the TSE regulation and the categorisation of ABP types led to increased attention being paid to the processing and collection of ABP. In the first period after the new regulation was
introduced, the main activities aimed to optimise slaughtering processes and
reduce losses at the slaughterhouses to increase the overall value of ABP. As a
result, a significant amount of CAT1 material was upgraded to CAT3 with a
much higher value. In Denmark, the Technological Institute assisted the
Danish industry in optimising, sorting and collecting ABP, so the different
categories of ABP materials were kept apart. If any CAT3 or CAT2 materials
were in contact with CAT1 material, this would devalue the material to
high requirements on the labelling of, for example, functional food products.
In practice, this means that, in order to make use of health claims on new
products, the claim has to be proven by clinical trials similar to the pharmaceutical industry, which is assessed to be too costly in time and resources for
companies in the food industry.
Trade with ABP and food products is highly regulated. Traditionally, food
products have been included in trade barriers and sanctions supported by
arguments of health or environmental reasons. Trade barriers are also often
politically motivated as a consequence of bilateral, diplomatic crises, and turn
out to have huge consequences for the market opportunities of the meat and
ABP industry.
An example is the geo- political crisis between Russia and EU that resulted
in, on August 6, 2014, a Russian decree prohibiting, for one year, imports
into the territory of the Russian Federation of certain agricultural products,
raw materials and foodstuffs originating from EU countries, Norway, USA,
Canada and Australia (European Commission, 2017). The embargo was later
extended until August 5, 2016, and then further prolonged until December
31, 2017 (European Commission, 2017).
This important event led to price fluctuations on the international raw
materials market, and significantly impacted the industry on its rest raw
materials base. Products on the banned list included meat of bovine animals;
pork, poultry meat and edible offal in all forms (fresh, chilled or frozen); sausages and similar products of meat; meat offal or blood; and the final food
products based thereon (European Commission, 2017). For example, while
Nortura used to export large quantities of ABPs to Russia, after the ban it was
forced to find other solutions, and to search for valorisation alternatives.
7.6 Change in innovative behaviour
This section analyses how companies navigate the highly regulated space we
have outlined above. The question is how companies approach market
opportunities and different market segments based on the institutional settings
which regulate the type and volume of input and not least the market
options. Figure 7.3 illustrates part of the regulative space which sets the
overall framework of the meat processing and ABP industry.
For slaughterhouses, the introduction of the TSE regulation and the categorisation of ABP types led to increased attention being paid to the processing and collection of ABP. In the first period after the new regulation was
introduced, the main activities aimed to optimise slaughtering processes and
reduce losses at the slaughterhouses to increase the overall value of ABP. As a
result, a significant amount of CAT1 material was upgraded to CAT3 with a
much higher value. In Denmark, the Technological Institute assisted the
Danish industry in optimising, sorting and collecting ABP, so the different
categories of ABP materials were kept apart. If any CAT3 or CAT2 materials
were in contact with CAT1 material, this would devalue the material to