reLAKSation 281. Callander McDowell
All or nothing: UK Retail sales figures for 2006 paint a complicated and at times contradictory picture of seafood consumption exposing a widening gulf between those who consume seafood regularly and those who increasingly avoid it altogether, according to a report in IntraFish. The difference is attributed to the rising cost of fish, meaning that there are people who can afford seafood now and people who can’t.
The market insight team at Seafish suggest that affluent consumers acting on the glut of information about health benefits are eating more seafood at a higher frequency. By comparison, people that can’t afford to buy seafood are not only buying fish less frequently but they are totally leaving the market for other options. This view is supported by Jonathan Banks of AC Nielsen who points out that seafood is relatively replaceable in the face of inflationary pressures whilst switching away from staples like bread may be much harder for consumers to swallow.
We, at Callander McDowell, are not so sure that the picture is so clear cut. Although seafood sales have increased, there has been an apparent divide between consumers and non-consumers for some years based on their age. The majority of consumers of fresh fish are aged 49 and over whilst many of those below this age never eat fresh fish at all.
The industry has previously explained this divide as relating to the amount of disposable income and time available to younger consumers when most are raising families. Apparently, these younger consumers are short of both and therefore do not buy fresh fish. By comparison, older consumers have more disposable income to spend on fresh fish and more time to prepare it. The key question is do younger consumers start to buy fresh when their families leave home when they have never done so before? We are not convinced they do.
Instead, we believe that older consumers grew up at a time before the rise of the supermarkets and were familiar to visiting fishmongers and eating fresh fish and they continue to do so. Meanwhile, younger consumers are more familiar with supermarkets and have become used to eating convenience foods. They never visit the fish counter and never consider buying fresh fish as it is outside their experience.
If these trends continue, then as older consumers pass on, the industry might find that they have a product that is totally alien to remaining consumers. However, as we mentioned, the trends are not clear cut as some younger consumers, mostly affluent, are buying fresh fish because of the health messages, but most are not.
In the past most attempts to expand the market with promotional campaigns have focused on the fish counter to try to persuade existing consumers to eat more. The campaigns have focused on this sector because it is easier to get an existing consumer to eat more fish than a non-consumer to start eating it. This approach is misguided since unless more young age groups can be persuaded to eat fish, we may find that we have no customers for our fish at all. The fact that cost is now deterring even more consumers must be of more concern.
Intrafish describe fish consumption in the UK as being all or nothing. If the industry is not careful it will just be nothing.
Asda to be!: It seems that we jumped the gun in the last issue of reLAKSation when we wrote about the posters displayed by Wal-Mart owned supermarket Asda. These claimed that their fish counters had been certified by the Marine Stewardship Council to sell fish from well managed sustainable fisheries. Although stores had been displaying these posters for at least a week, it was only after we had written about them that Asda finally issued a press statement announcing the certification of their fish counters.
Asda say that products bearing the distinctive blue MSC logo will now start appearing on their fish counters and that within three years they will only stock wild caught fish from MSC fisheries. Clearly, they have a long way to go.
At present, Asda say that their current best seller is Pacific cod (£10/kg) and this is not of any surprise as it is the only fish species on their fish counters that can carry the MSC logo. They have already been selling this fish for some months but we had not noticed on our previous store visits whether the label carried the MSC logo or not. When we looked this week, the label in one store certainly had the MSC logo but as it was at the bottom of the label it was half buried in the display ice. However, we have also noticed that the labels in other stores do not display a MSC logo.
Asda say that they have banned the sale of monkfish in response to concerns about the long term survival of the species. They say that this decision follows that taken last year to ban the sale of swordfish, shark, skate wings, ling, Huss and Dover sole and suspended the sale of North Sea cod. Asda also provide a list of the top five Asda stores for eco-friendly fish sales. Two of these just happen to be within spitting distance of Callander McDowell’s office. This week Asda’s top eco-friendly store at Trafford Park was selling unspecified ‘ray wings’ at £8.98/kg even though rays, along with skate, are on the Marine Conservation Society list of fish to avoid unless the specific species can be identified as one of spotted, cuckoo or starry ray.
IntraFish report that a number of other retailers such as Tesco and Waitrose also have MSC certified wet fish counters of their own, as have a handful of small fishmongers, but this chain of custody certification is not something that the MSC promotes. Instead, their website provides a list of products that are made from MSC approved fish and the stores that sell them. Unfortunately, this list is also well out of date. The list details only two chilled products made with MSC product and these contain Pacific salmon, but we know of at least one other chilled salmon product and others that are frozen. We have not even considered those made of other species. It’s a shame that given the huge number of staff working for the MSC that they cannot update their consumer interface at least once a week. How do they expect consumers to make informed choices if the information is no longer valid?
Trust in nature: One of the problems with the Marine Stewardship Council is that they appear to have a monopolistic position. This is why they can rest on their laurels and ignore the consumers. IntraFish reports this week that German certifier Naturland is to launch a wild fish certification scheme and eco label. This will be similar to that offered by the MSC programme but will focus on small and artesinal fisheries. They first considered this certification about eight years ago but delayed its introduction because they had expected that the MSC would include such fisheries in their programme. It is only now that Naturland have progressed this area that the MSC is to consider extending its certification process to cover smaller fisheries. Perhaps, they see their position as the leading certifier undermined.
Naturlands’ decision to certify fisheries raises a number of questions, the most obvious being whether the presence of more than one eco label in the marketplace will confuse consumers. Certainly, the presence of just one logo provides a clear message to consumers whereas two could have the potential to devalue the message if consumers fail to understand the meaning of each. However, at the same time one certification scheme could become too powerful and dictatorial as to what consumers should or should not eat.
We applaud Naturland’s decision but believe that they have actually missed a greater opportunity. Naturland have until now concentrated on certifying organic seafood. By its very nature, all organic seafood is farmed and farmed seafood is something that the MSC have resolutely refused to include in their certification process even though farming is the best management tool to safeguard wild caught fisheries. These fisheries can only be protected if fishing pressure on them is reduced but whilst demand for fish is high, fishing pressure remains as a threat. If demand on fish stocks can be reduced by sourcing alternative supplies from aquaculture then clearly, fishing pressure can be reduced and stocks be protected. Unfortunately, many fisheries managers have never learnt about the potential of aquaculture and have discounted it from the outset. So have the Marine Stewardship Council. Yet, there is no reason why aquaculture production cannot be deemed to be sustainable and certified as such. This would make a lot of sense since well over half the worlds’ supply of seafood now comes from farming.
Asda, for example, have said that in three years time, they plan to sell only fish from wild caught fisheries approved under the MSC scheme yet they fail to mention whether they will continue to sell farmed fish, although it will not be certified as sustainable. Surely, it would be better to have a sustainable certification scheme for aquaculture than ignore it?
As certifiers of farmed produce, albeit just organic, perhaps we can hope that Naturland will now recognise this potential when they finally launch their new certification process.