QR codes are being viewed as a “technological shield” for the agricultural market, but behind these traceability stamps lies a heavy financial burden on cooperatives and the risk of sub-standard goods mixing with certified ones. When agricultural inputs remain loosely managed, pasting QR stamps often merely amounts to "dressing up" products that are not yet genuinely clean.

According to the dossier for the draft Law on Food Safety (amended) chaired by the Ministry of Health, a core focus is making traceability mandatory for foods circulating in the market.

The financial burden

Accordingly, the draft stipulates that traceability information must be displayed on packaging using barcodes, QR codes, DataMatrix, or other electronic formats so that citizens and regulatory bodies can verify product origins.

The Ministry of Health considers mandatory electronic traceability essential because current laws lack specific regulations for identifying and tracing food via electronic codes. This gap creates significant difficulties in controlling counterfeit goods, smuggled items, and food products sold online.

The goal of adopting QR codes or other electronic traceability tools aligns with the era of technological development and aims to ensure food safety. It is also an essential stage in the value chain from farm to fork.

However, for many agricultural cooperatives, this represents a major expense. A cooperative producing vegetables and fruits supplies millions of units to the market monthly. Pasting QR stamps onto every bunch of vegetables or bag of produce requires printing costs, labor, and software platform maintenance fees.

Mr. Pham Ngoc Thach, Director of the Sunfood Dalat General Agricultural Service Cooperative (Lam Dong), stated that for traceability to work, the core issue lies in the annual software maintenance costs. It does not stop at printing stamps; it includes account maintenance fees on traceability platforms. This is a hidden cost, making it difficult for many cooperatives to sustain long-term without State support.

According to estimates, the cost for each traceability stamp ranges from 200 to 500 VND. For a cooperative supplying 10,000 products a day, labeling costs alone reach 5 to 15 million VND per month. This is a substantial sum that directly impacts the profits of member households.

Management must start from the root

Practically, a QR code only records information that the producer stores in the system; it cannot verify the authenticity of the production process without independent supervision.

In theory, with a QR code, if an issue arises, it can be scanned to determine exactly which stage holds responsibility. The simplest example is at Chuc Son Cooperative (Hanoi): when a consumer buys a bunch of vegetables at a supermarket, they scan the QR code to see the cultivation area, and they can visit to verify if it is actually grown there, as well as the exact date and time of production, fertilization, and harvesting.

However, in today's commercial food market, commodity inspection and management remain loose. Coupled with a lack of production awareness, cases persist where products from sub-standard fields are packed under the QR codes of certified regions (VietGAP, GlobalGAP, etc.).

Ms. Nguyen Hai Ha (Hanoi) shared that even if consumers are conscious enough to check the QR code, and the scan displays the cultivation zone, production date, and harvest time, how can they know if the actual produce inside did not come from that area, and who bears responsibility if it did not? If scanning a code is merely to find out where a bunch of vegetables was produced, a QR code is not strictly necessary. This information can be clearly displayed on the packaging like a conventional product label.

Consequently, significant concerns exist that this traceability technology is being exploited to legitimize low-quality products into certified goods, thereby eroding consumer trust.

According to Mr. Hoang Van Tham, Director of Chuc Son Cooperative, using QR codes is necessary, but it is near the end stage of the value chain. QR codes can only be effective if the product quality is guaranteed, data is transparent, and producers operate ethically alongside strict regulatory oversight.

Instead of focusing solely on stamping, agricultural economists argue that a different management mindset is required to elevate the quality of agricultural commodities. Specifically, there must be tight control over agricultural inputs such as fertilizers, plant protection products, and seeds, starting right from border gates down to distribution agents. When inputs are verified and strict penalties are enforced, products will naturally become clean without relying too heavily on QR codes.

Distinguished Teacher Dr. Nguyen Trung Dong, from the School of Public Policy and Rural Development (Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development), noted that the buying and selling of pesticides, fertilizers, and seeds on the market currently occurs freely. The control of materials from border gates, manufacturing sites, and distribution channels is not yet stringent, leading to a proliferation of counterfeit and low-quality goods.

Although trading in plant protection products is a conditional business line that must meet strict regulations regarding professional qualifications, certificates, and business locations, enforcement in Vietnam remains loose.

Furthermore, for QR codes to deliver true value, synchronized changes are required. In today's technological era, applying self-destructing QR codes with unique hidden codes is beneficial for security and accountability, but it is financially prohibitive. Therefore, policies are needed to subsidize traceability software and support terminal equipment for cooperatives, rather than leaving them to navigate technology companies on their own as they currently do.

According to experts, QR codes are an inevitable trend of the digital economy, but they cannot resolve all food safety issues.

To avoid wasting cooperative resources, focus must be placed on the root of the problem: making the agricultural materials market transparent and enhancing producer responsibility, rather than focusing purely on the surface level of traceability. This prevents a scenario where management efforts only prune the branches, while the root continues to sprout even more problematic shoots.

Source: Vnbusiness