Supply Chain & Due Diligence

Identity preserved

A chain-of-custody model in which material originates from one identifiable source, is kept physically separate and retains its specified characteristics through the supply chain.

Established · Version master-draft-2026-08-10

Expert review openNo editor-accepted expert review yet

Definition

A chain-of-custody model in which material originates from one identifiable source, is kept physically separate and retains its specified characteristics through the supply chain.

Overview

“Identity preserved tells you which source supplied the material. It does not tell you whether the source deserves trust. ”

Identity preserved is the most source-specific chain-of-custody model. The material or product originates from a single identifiable source and is physically separated so that its identity and specified characteristics remain connected throughout production, storage, transport and trade. The result can be traced back to that source rather than only to a pool of eligible suppliers.

ISO 22095:2020 defines the model around single-source input, physical separation and maintenance of characteristics. The source may be one farm, mine, factory, forest unit, recycling facility or another defined origin. The model's meaning depends on how precisely source is defined and whether each stage can preserve that definition.

Specialty coffee provides an intuitive example. A micro-lot may be harvested from a named farm, processed separately, stored in marked bags and roasted as a distinct lot. Buyers can connect sensory quality and production information to one origin. If the lot is mixed with coffee from another farm, the single-source identity has been lost even if both farms meet the same sustainability standard.

Physical separation requires operational controls. Containers, silos, transport, processing lines, cleaning, labels, batch codes and records must prevent substitution or unintended mixing. Where transformation changes quantity, conversion records should connect input lot to output lot. A paper trail without physical controls is traceability of a claim, not identity preservation.

The model can support detailed origin narratives and targeted due diligence. It may allow a buyer to investigate a grievance, monitor deforestation or maintain quality relationships with a specific producer. Yet source precision does not establish source performance. Material can be perfectly identity preserved from a farm with poor labour or environmental conditions.

The reverse is also true: an excellent producer may lose access to an identity-preserved channel because the logistics are too costly. Separate storage, small batches, testing and transport create expense and minimum-volume challenges. If the market requires identity preservation without paying its cost, producer organisations or small farms may absorb the burden.

Single source also creates concentration risk. Crop failure, quality problems or delayed shipment cannot be balanced through a wider eligible pool. Buyers may respond by holding more inventory or diversifying across separately preserved sources. The model increases specificity while reducing some forms of operational flexibility.

Claims should state the preserved characteristic. Single origin can refer to geography, legal entity, production unit or batch. 'From one country' and 'from one farm' are not equivalent. A product can be identity preserved for origin while another characteristic, such as certified status, is not controlled. The claim needs to name what the chain preserves.

Data integrity remains important. Duplicate source identifiers, changed farm boundaries, relabelled lots or reused transaction documents can create a false appearance of precision. Digital systems do not remove the need for reconciliation, access control, physical observation and investigation of implausible yields or volumes.

Identity preserved should not be described as inherently more sustainable than other models. It offers a stronger physical and source connection, which can support certain assurance and value propositions. Whether it is the appropriate model depends on the claim, risk, cost and need for item-level origin.

The discipline is to separate identity from merit. The model answers 'which source?' and 'was this material kept connected to it?' It does not answer whether the source met a meaningful standard, whether the claim is material to the buyer or whether the value created was shared fairly.

Practical application

Define the single source and specified characteristic precisely. Map every point where material can mix or be substituted, including transport, storage, processing, repacking and subcontracting. Use batch reconciliation, yield checks, tamper controls and periodic physical verification.

Confirm that marketing language matches the preserved level of origin. Cost separate handling and agree who pays. Investigate volume that exceeds plausible production and maintain a process for downgrading claims when separation or identity is lost.

Why it matters

Identity preservation provides the strongest connection between a physical product and a specific origin. That connection supports quality, risk investigation and transparent sourcing where source-level information is important. Its value is precision, not an automatic judgement about sustainability.

Common misconception

Identity preserved is often assumed to mean certified, sustainable or superior. It describes a custody model. A harmful product can be identity preserved, and a responsible product can move through another model. The underlying characteristic and standard need separate evidence.

Connections

Traceability follows the product's history; identity preserved adds single-source physical separation. Segregation permits eligible material from several sources to mix. Due diligence can use source specificity to target risk and remedy, while certification defines any requirements applied at origin.

A question worth asking

If the single source were revealed without its sustainability label, what independent evidence would show that the source meets the qualities your claim invites customers to infer?

Selected references

ISO 22095:2020. Chain of Custody - General Terminology and Models. Accountability Framework initiative. Identity Preserved definition. ISEAL Alliance. 2016. Effective Chain-of-custody and Traceability Models. Golan, E. et al. 2004. Traceability in the U. S. Food Supply: Economic Theory and Industry Studies. U. S. Department of Agriculture. Bosona, T. and Gebresenbet, G. 2013.

Food Traceability as an Integral Part of Logistics Management in Food and Agricultural Supply Chain. Food Control 33(1): 32-48.

Review

Public comments appear only after editor acceptance. Draft comments stay in the review queue.

0
How people contribute

Reviewers choose the definition or an overview paragraph, leave a comment or replacement, and attach evidence or a source link.

How comments are used

Editors compare reviewer cards side by side. AI may help find agreement, conflicts, unsupported claims and possible source issues.

What gets published

Only an editor-accepted synthesis changes the public page. Reviewer identities are shown only with consent and verification.

No verified experts yet

Submitted reviews stay private until accepted.

Loading verified endorsements… Endorsements are not votes and never determine publication.

Endorse this definition

Endorse the exact version shown here. This is not a vote, and publication remains an editorial decision.

vmaster-draft-2026-08-10

Sign-in supplies your email for verification and necessary follow-up; it is not displayed publicly. We do not ask you to enter it again.

Sign in with a passwordless email link before submitting.

Review board

Comment on a specific line. Each reviewer stays separate until an editor accepts a merged draft.

1Separate reviewer cards

Each person comments on the definition or overview in their own draft card, with role, evidence and suggested wording kept together.

2AI comparison

AI can compare comments against the current text, flag conflicting claims, surface missing evidence and identify where reviewers agree.

3Editor synthesis

An editor merges compatible suggestions into a draft change, checks sources, records disagreements and decides what can be published.

Text to reviewChoose the exact definition or overview paragraph.
Reviewer commentDraft only. Not public until editor accepted.
Definition
Reviewer identityYour signed-in account identifies the submission. We use its email only for verification and necessary follow-up, and never display it publicly.
Before you submit

This proposal follows the editorial and AI-assistance rules. The live definition will not change until an editor accepts it.

  • Add the proposed wording or note.
  • Explain why the change is needed.
  • Ready
  • Ready

Sign in with a passwordless email link before submitting.

You can still save a draft, but completing these items makes editorial review faster. Multiple reviewers can suggest changes on the same text. Editors compare, merge, accept or decline them before any public change.