Blueberry firmness: why Italy needs a shared code of practice

The quality of a consignment of blueberries cannot be assessed simply by squeezing a few berries between one’s fingers. Yet in the Italian supply chain, products are still sometimes disputed upon arrival because they are generically judged to be “soft”, without an agreed specification, a minimum value to be met, an accepted tolerance or a measuring instrument.

The problem is not merely technical. In the absence of objective parameters, a quality assessment can easily turn into a commercial dispute, leaving growers, packers and customers without a shared basis for comparison.

“Soft” compared with which parameter?

Firmness, or more precisely fruit texture, is one of the main factors determining the commercial quality of blueberries. It affects resistance to handling, storability, remaining shelf life and, ultimately, the consumer experience.

However, describing a product as “soft” without specifying how the assessment was carried out has very limited meaning. For the judgement to be verifiable, at least the following must be established:

• the instrument used;
• its settings and calibration procedures;
• the sampling method;
• the number of berries and packages inspected;
• the position on the pallet from which the sample is taken;
• the product temperature at the time of testing;
• the unit of measurement;
• the required minimum value;
• the tolerance and the lot acceptance criteria.

Without these elements, there is no genuine supply specification, but merely a subjective impression.

The limitations of manual inspection

A tactile assessment can be useful as an initial check, but it should not form the basis of a commercial claim. The pressure applied with the fingers varies from one operator to another and may be influenced by experience, expectations and even prior knowledge of the product’s origin or age.

Research published in HortTechnology, comparing tactile and instrumental assessments, found that the level of agreement between the two methods varies considerably depending on the firmness category. The study therefore confirms that manual assessment cannot replace standardised measurement, particularly when the outcome determines whether the goods are accepted, downgraded or rejected.

Instruments that subject the fruit to controlled compression and measure its response using repeatable parameters have been available for years. Devices such as FirmTech and other texture analysers are among those most widely used in research and commercial assessments.

The USDA also notes that FirmTech has been used for around thirty years and that many growers and packing facilities rely on instruments of this kind to measure firmness after harvest and during storage.

Europe has adapted to the requirements of Dutch importers

Across a significant part of the European trade, instrumental firmness measurement has already become standard operating practice, partly in response to the standards adopted by Dutch importers.

Checks are systematically carried out on pallets, with a measurable value assigned to each batch. This allows suppliers, importers, distributors and retailers to speak the same language throughout the subsequent stages of the supply chain.

The advantage is not limited to determining whether a lot complies with the specifications. The data also make it possible to:

• compare quality at departure and upon arrival;
• monitor how the product changes during transport;
• identify problems relating to harvesting, storage or cold-chain management;
• direct each batch to the most suitable market based on its remaining commercial life;
• document any claims transparently.

The measurement may be carried out by the supplier, the customer or an independent inspection agency. What matters is that all parties use the same protocol and obtain comparable results.

The grey area of commercial claims

When there is no contractual specification, the discussion inevitably moves into a grey area. The assessment of firmness then risks becoming intertwined, even implicitly, with other factors.

If the market is buoyant and demand is strong, a batch that is not particularly firm may be accepted without difficulty. However, if sales slow down, prices fall or warehouses are full, the same product may be judged too soft.

This does not mean that every claim is opportunistic. It does mean, however, that the absence of verifiable criteria exposes both parties to differing interpretations and conflicts. The supplier cannot unequivocally demonstrate that the product complies with the requirements, while the customer has no solid technical basis on which to document the defect.

A shared specification would instead separate the quality assessment from market conditions: the lot either meets the agreed requirements or it does not, regardless of the market situation at that particular time.

Purchasing an instrument is not enough

Introducing a measuring instrument alone does not solve the problem. Scientific literature shows that different instruments may produce results that are not directly comparable and that even operating settings can influence the final value.

A scientific review focusing on blueberry texture highlights the need to use predetermined and consistent settings, clearly stating the parameters adopted so that measurements can be compared over time and across different instruments.

An Italian standard should therefore define not only a threshold, but a complete protocol. This could include:

1. a reference instrument or a procedure for making different devices equivalent;
2. a common calibration method;
3. a minimum representative sample for each pallet or lot;
4. uniform temperature and sample preparation conditions;
5. differentiated thresholds, where necessary, according to variety, destination and the duration of the logistics programme;
6. a tolerance expressed as the maximum proportion of berries falling below specification;
7. the recording of results in a report accompanying the batch;
8. a retesting procedure in the event of a dispute.

Specifications may vary, but the method must be shared

Adopting a standard does not necessarily mean imposing the same minimum value on all blueberries. Requirements may vary depending on the variety, destination market, distance to be covered and required commercial life.

A product intended for local delivery may be commercially acceptable even if it has different characteristics from a batch that must withstand several days of transport and distribution. Similarly, different varieties may exhibit structural characteristics that are not perfectly comparable.

The threshold may therefore be agreed between the seller and the buyer; the method used to verify it, however, must be shared. The specification should be included in commercial programmes and supply agreements before the sale, rather than being defined only when the product reaches its destination.

Greater transparency to develop the market

Measuring firmness objectively should not be seen as an additional administrative burden. On the contrary, it can become a tool for enhancing product value.

Growers and packers capable of supplying blueberries with consistent characteristics would have data with which to document their quality. Customers could purchase the product best suited to their needs. Claims could be handled more quickly, while independent agencies could intervene on the basis of verifiable evidence.

In the medium term, the availability of comparable data would also make it possible to assess varieties, harvest periods, packing lines, storage conditions and logistics performance more effectively.

Selling and purchasing blueberries according to an agreed firmness specification means building commercial relationships on more solid foundations. For an Italian supply chain that is increasingly integrated into the European market, adopting a common language is no longer simply a desirable improvement: it is essential to increasing transparency, reliability and competitiveness.