Validity of method for analysing critical traceability points Kine Mari Karlsen * , Petter Olsen Norwegian Institute of Fisheries and Aquaculture Research (Nofima), PO box 6122, NO-9291 Tromsø, Norway article info Article history: Received 21 April 2010 Received in revised form 12 January 2011 Accepted 25 January 2011 Keywords: Chain traceability Critical traceability point Validity Information lost Seafood abstract The requirements for documenting food products are even increasing. Better documentation can be achieved by using traceability. Several studies mapping Critical Traceability Points (CTP) in food supply chains have been carried out. The purpose of this paper was to discuss the validity of qualitative methods for detecting CTPs in a seafood supply chain. Data from a single case study is interesting, because it provides real industry data, which can be used to develop knowledge of and theories on traceability to improve food process systems. The discussion of validity can in addition be used as input for studies aiming to identify the CTPs of other food supply chains. Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction The requirements for documenting food products are ever increasing. Extensive national and international legislation has been passed to ensure food safety, and both the industry and the consumers are also becoming more interested in additional knowl- edge about origin, processes and other properties of the product. Traceability is a tool to achieve better documentation of food. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) defines traceability as follows: ‘Ability to trace the history, application or location of an entity by means of recorded identifications’ (ISO, 1994). Applied to a product it may relate to the origin of mate- rials and parts, the product processing history and the distribution and location of the product after delivery. Traceability is not the product and process information itself, but it is a tool that makes it possible to find this information again at a later point. Several studies mapping Critical Traceability Points (CTPs) in food supply chains have been carried out (Donnelly & Karlsen, 2010; Donnelly, Karlsen, & Olsen, 2009; Karlsen, Donnelly, & Olsen, 2010; Olsen & Aschan, 2010). CTP are points at which information about a food item is systematically lost (Karlsen et al., 2010). This can happen when information about a product or process is not linked to a traceable unit or recorded systematically. No published articles discussing the validity of methods ana- lysing CTPs in food supply chains have been identified. When studying a phenomenon, it is important to choose the appropriate method for testing the research question (Näslund, 2002). Basic questions are how valid the study is, and whether we can reach reliable conclusions based on the data gathering methods from the study. According to Mentzer and Flint (1997), there are different types of validity: 1) Statistical conclusion validity addresses whether there is a variation between two things by using statis- tical methods; 2) Internal validity reveals possible causalities between different phenomena; 3) Construct validity addresses how best to ascertain that the theory of a phenomenon is precisely defined, and how to correctly measure this phenomenon in a study; 4) External validity is when the data from a study can be generalised to other settings. Several studies on materials management have used quantita- tive research methods (Ellram, 1996). These methods are not suited for obtaining in-depth data about a research question. Ellram (1996) recommends using qualitative methods to get more knowledge of a phenomenon. The aim of this paper is to discuss the validity of qualitative methods analysing CTPs in a seafood supply chain. The paper is organized in the following way; First, the qualita- tive methods used in one case study are described. Second, the identified CTPs in the case study are presented. Finally, the validity of the qualitative methods used to identify the CTPs is discussed. 2. Methodology The qualitative methods direct observation, structured interview, and document analysis (Eisenhardt, 1989; Ellram, 1996) were used * Corresponding author. Tel.: þ47 77 62 91 41; fax: þ47 77 62 91 00. E-mail address: kine.karlsen@nofima.no (K.M. Karlsen). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Food Control journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/foodcont 0956-7135/$ e see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2011.01.020 Food Control 22 (2011) 1209e1215