Review

(2000) 13, 529}538 doi:10.1006/jfca.2000.0921 Available online at http://www.idealibrary.com on
JOURNAL OF FOOD COMPOSITION AND ANALYSIS

CRITICAL REVIEW Review of International Food Classification and Description
Jayne D. Ireland* and Anders M+ller*Informatics Centre for Food Quality (AFSSA-Ciqual), Maisons-Alfort, France; and -Danish Food Administration, S~borg, Denmark Received July 7,1999, and in revised form March 29, 2000

The preparation of reliable data on food requires precise nomenclature and detailed description of foods. Even data of good quality can be a source of error if they are derived from foods that are not clearly de"ned. Moreover, it is di$cult to exchange data on foods, or to understand and compare nutritional status for di!erent countries or individuals,without a coherent description of foods in databases. The present paper reviews the existing international methods of identifying foods in the computerized databases: Codex Alimentarius, CIAA Food Categorization systems, Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System, Procome, Eurocode-2, INFIC, LanguaL, INFOODS, IIS, COST Action 99 Recommendations. The paper describes and contrasts the varioussystems, to point out where the systems are complementary, where they are in con#ict, and whether they can be linked. 2000 Academic Press Key =ords: food classi"cation; food description; Codex Alimentarius; Eurocode-2; INFOODS; IIS; LanguaL.

INTRODUCTION There is a general agreement on the importance of food nomenclature and description. The preparation of reliable data on food requires preciseidenti"cation of foods. Even data of good quality can be a source of error if they are derived from foods that are not clearly de"ned (Polacchi, 1987). The simple food name can be inadequate or ambiguous to those who are not closely acquainted with the local language and culture (e.g., &&sweetbread''). A common name may be misleading when the same name is used for di!erent foods in di!erentregions or when it is used for foods having di!erent scienti"c names (e.g., &&cat"sh''). Likewise, one may not recognize some terms used by people in other parts of the world or maybe even within the same country. The situation is further confused by homonyms, synonyms, identical brand names for di!erent products, and culinary or technological terms. As most databases employ di!erent methods ofidentifying foods, it is di$cult to exchange data between countries, between organizations within the same country, or even between workers in the same institution. This paper reviews existing food identi"cation systems used in food composition and consumption databases with the

 To whom correspondence and reprint requests should be addressed. Fax: 33#1-49772650. E-mail: j.ireland@dg.afssa.fr0889}1575/00/040529#10 $35.00/0 2000 Academic Press

530

IRELAND AND M"LLER

view that an international understanding of standardized food identi"cation could solve many of the problems arising from the mis-identi"cation of foods. FOOD CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS In the past, there have been two separate and seemingly opposing methods to solve the problem of food identi"cation: classify foods in&&universal'' categories or add food description to foods in a database. In the "rst approach, a variety of food classi"cation systems has been developed. Some of these classi"cations have been formulated to describe food habits, while others ful"l requirements set by regulatory bodies. Classi"cation systems are often standardized, as they may be based on legal documents, the most standardized being&&vocabularies''. National and Regional Food Classi,cation Systems Most national and regional databases use country-speci"c food classi"cation systems, based on national criteria, and the food groups may be very speci"c. This is mainly due to legal aspects and traditions, besides the economic and cultural importance of foods. For example, there is a separate group for coconut products in the food...