Traceability adoption, awareness gaps and tech limits in anti-counterfeiting

A panel discussion at TAF Connect 2026 brought together stakeholders across pharma, agriculture, standards bodies and industrial manufacturing to examine the adoption of authentication and traceability in supply chains, with a clear emphasis on moving from discussion to implementation.

Opening the session, moderator Naresh Khanna, editor, Packaging South Asia, set the tone. “This could be a landmark conference… but only if we turn the talk into walk,” he said, urging the industry to translate data and reports into actionable steps. “The important question is how do we turn these insights into action.”

Framing the discussion, Khanna pointed to the need to connect sectors. “Whether it is pharma, agriculture, food supply chain or industrial products, how do we explore traceability and authentication technologies in light of the sectors that we come from,” he said, while also noting a shift. “Brand owners are now starting to speak out… they are not hiding the fact that this theft is possible.”

Praveen Gour of Crystal Crop Protection highlighted the scale of risk in agriculture. “When we talk counterfeit in agriculture, it is not about brands. It is about food safety, environmental safety and health hazards,” he said. He described multiple forms of counterfeiting, from lookalike packaging to genuine containers filled with inferior materials. “If the wrong chemicals go into the fields, there will be a negative impact,” he said.

Gour outlined early-stage interventions. “We are working on a four-layer programme — product safety, authentication, traceability and channel monitoring,” he said, adding that farmers can scan and verify products. He pointed to fragmentation in the agri supply chain. “Many retailers, many channel partners… it is very important to trace that product,” he said, estimating that tackling counterfeits could improve productivity. “At least 5 to 10% production can be increased.”

He extended the argument to food traceability. “A consumer should be able to trace where the product comes from… which farm,” he said, citing global examples where such visibility already exists.

From an industrial and brand owner perspective, Soumyanath Mishra of Mankind Pharma stressed packaging as the first line of defence. “Making a hologram or QR code today is a matter of seconds… anybody can copy it,” he said. “The packaging should be such that the customer can identify it.” He shared a case where redesigning packaging with a complex cap improved performance. “My sales increased by 30%,” he said.

He also questioned reliance on digital tools alone. “Less than 1% of QR codes are scanned and the customer does not want to scan,” he said, stressing the need for awareness and training at the last mile. “We educated village to village… every chemist, every user,” he added, calling for closer alignment. “Consumer and brand owner should work very closely together.”

Diwaker Bharadwaj of Polycab India echoed the limits of technology in isolation. “QR codes can be duplicated, even advanced solutions can be copied,” he said, recounting instances where RFID-enabled systems were also counterfeited. “Thieves are not ordinary, they are quite clever.”

He argued for a layered approach. “There are a lot of combinations of technologies… blockchain, AI, printed electronics,” he said. “But the solution is in educating the customer.” Bharadwaj described on-ground interventions, including market outreach and enforcement. “We conduct five to six raids per week,” he said, adding that action has a measurable impact. “My sales have increased… the consumer is getting the right product.”

Bijoy Peter of GS1 India brought in the standards perspective. “Adoption is happening, but not at full potential,” he said, noting that most use cases in India remain limited to inventory and point-of-sale functions. “The deeper adoption… connecting the supply chain from source to end point is yet to happen.”

He pointed to fragmentation as a core issue. “If a counterfeit product enters the supply chain, somewhere someone has to compromise,” he said, calling for tighter collaboration between manufacturers, distributors and retailers. On the role of standards, he said, “GS1 provides the foundational layer,” while highlighting evolving shifts. “One-dimensional barcodes are moving to two-dimensional codes… carrying more data including batch, expiry and serialisation.”

Peter added that adoption is often driven externally. “Retailers, marketplaces and regulators are the drivers,” he said, referencing initiatives such as e-commerce-led traceability systems.

Ankit Gupta of ASPA framed the issue as a three-sided equation. “Brand owners must see this as an investment, not a cost… consumers need incentive… and government needs regulation,” he said. He pointed to a key behavioural gap. “Even when QR codes are there, people don’t scan,” he said, calling for stronger engagement strategies.

The discussion repeatedly returned to awareness as a bottleneck. “The root cause is demand for cheaper products,” Bharadwaj said, adding that addressing this requires outreach beyond technology. Panelists highlighted the complexity of India’s dual markets. “The solution for urban India will be different from rural India,” Mishra said, noting that in many cases, purchase decisions are still driven by visual cues such as colour and shape.

The session closed with a broader call to action. Khanna said, “We need to be part of a movement which creates demand for authenticity for quality products.” Panelists echoed the sentiment, positioning authentication and traceability not just as compliance tools but as part of a larger shift. “Eventually all of us are working for the consumer’s rights,” Gupta said.