reLAKSation 449
Quality and provenance: Walking around the halls of the European Seafood Exposition, it is apparent that all the exhibitors convey one single common message – high quality products from a reliable and dependable origin. The provenance being further emphasised with many exhibitors being grouped together within national pavilions.
Whilst ESE is not a consumer show, the importance of quality and origin is often lost by the time the products reach the consumer. Many consumers expect the products they buy to be of a certain quality as a matter of right and not something for which they should pay extra. In addition, a number of surveys have shown that consumers are not that interested in the origin of the products they buy. The latest from Brahms Insight for SeaFish found that consumers had little emotional engagement with the fish they buy. Price and value overrides everything, even with products that have a perceived quality and origin. The researchers found this to be the case even with those Scottish consumers who buy salmon and this explains why salmon from other origins can be found on the shelves of various retailers in the heart of the Scottish salmon growing region.
Even though many consumers do not seem that motivated by quality and origin, the fish and seafood industry appear keen to push these issues. For example, the first report from the ‘Better Marketing and Improved Image Subgroup’ established as part of the renewed Strategic Framework for Scottish Aquaculture has focussed on the message ‘Scottish aquaculture production represents high quality and sound provenance’. This is the message they now want to communicate to consumers and they are currently looking at the best way to do this.
Salmon is still the dominant species farmed in Scotland and the quality and origin message is one which has formed the basis of much of the salmon marketing activity over the years. The focal point of this activity has been the Tartan Quality Mark, which guarantees that the salmon is genuinely Scottish and that it has been grown in accordance with the strict quality criteria of the industry’s quality assurance scheme. The TQM would seem an ideal vehicle to continue conveying the quality and provenance to consumers.
Unfortunately, this is unlikely to happen because the TQM scheme has collapsed. The image of the TQM has been removed from the main page of the SSPO website and the specific page devoted to the scheme simply states ‘The Tartan Quality Mark scheme is no longer operational.’
The TQM has never really been successful amongst consumers. This is because they are not that interested in the message it imparts. Surely the demise of the TQM must be a clear indication to the industry that whilst quality and origin are an important perception to the producer, they are not the message that consumers want to hear.
A Significant Contribution?: One of the other ubiquitous messages apparent at the Brussels show was that of sustainability. We have no doubt that every exhibitor claimed that their products were sustainable, whether they are certified or not. After all, no-one is likely to admit that their product is unsustainable. This year, the issue of sustainability never arose in even one conversation or meeting in which we were engaged. Sustainability simply was not an issue and this was reflected in the fact that we did not even hear one reference to the new Aquaculture Stewardship Council.
Yet, the ASC were present at the show and even had a stand. The ASC used the show to unveil their new ‘visual identity’ otherwise known as their logo. This was developed by the agency Ogilvy of Amsterdam who said that it represents exactly what the ASC stands for: transparency, responsibility, credibility, independence, linking demand with supply and effectiveness. The work on the logo was done ‘pro bono’ and this is not surprising since we can not believe that any agency would have the audacity to charge a fee to arrive at this image.
It is easy to see the idea of transparency but after that, the use of just the three letters of ASC conveys absolutely nothing at all. It is just agency gobbledegook. However more importantly, this logo will never develop into the credible consumer eco-label for responsible aquaculture as anticipated by the ASC. This is for one simple reason. Consumers have no idea what aquaculture is. The term is just not used in the consumer market. Clearly, no-one has bothered to even research the marketplace or even to look at the experience of the Marine Stewardship Council and other certifiers.
Most consumers are not interested in the issue of sustainability. It is therefore going to take a major effort to persuade them to buy into the scheme. The fact that the logo has absolutely no recognition as being related to fish or seafood, let alone that which is farmed – a word completely absent from the ASC’s identity, means that the ASC has absolutely no meaning in the consumer marketplace.
At least consumers could see what the Tartan Quality Mark meant even if they had no interest. As consumers will have no understanding of the ASC and even less interest, it is not difficult to predict the fate of this ASC logo.