reLAKSation 59.
Standardised standards: The UK Food Standards Agency has recently called
for a radical overhaul of all food assurance schemes if they are
to improve consumer confidence and deliver any real benefit to
the consumer.
The Food Standards
Agency reviewed 18 different schemes covering most areas of food
production, although not fish. These schemes are voluntary and
have been established by both the industry and retailers to cover
a range of production standards including food safety,
environmental protection and animal welfare. The FSA found that
many consumers were confused by these schemes, even though they
were present in most of the major supermarket stores. For
example, the British Farm Standard Red Tractor, which we have
mentioned in an earlier reLAKSation, is wrongly thought to
indicate a British product, when this is not necessarily the case.
The FSA were also unhappy about the widespread use of terminology
like ‘quality’ and ‘high standards’, which
were unquantified and ambiguous.
The Food Standards
Agency recommended that a more independent widely representative
regulatory body should administer these schemes so that control
is moved away from the current producer-led approach to running
these schemes. They also suggest that minimum core criteria be
established for individual schemes, including consumer
involvement. Finally, they recommend that there should be
improved cooperation between schemes so that manufacturers,
retailers and consumer representatives work together to increase
understanding of what assurance means and the consumer benefits
it can deliver.
However much the FSA’s
recommendations are aimed at improving consumer confidence, we,
at Callander McDowell, are not convinced that in the world of the
modern consumer, such assurance schemes are actually necessary.
This is because most consumers now rely on the assurance provided
by the supermarkets themselves when they place their name on a
product label.
Work has now begun in
Scotland on the commercial development of farmed haddock. We
would use this species as a hypothetical example, which might in
future be covered by a farmed marine fish assurance scheme. The
label of such haddock sold in Tesco, for example, might be
described as Tesco Farmed Scottish Haddock and the pack might
include a marine fish assurance mark. The key question is which
part of the label is the main driver to encourage the consumer to
buy this product?
The answer is clear.
It is the name Tesco, since the consumer would be standing in a
Tesco store if he or she were actually considering buying this
pack. The name Tesco is the main driver since the consumer has
already decided to buy from this store so has confidence in Tesco
to ensure that the products they sell satisfy the main consumer
concerns. The presence of either the word Scottish or the
assurance mark only provides added support, but most consumers
are likely to buy the product irrespective of what other
information or assurance it carries.
Food producers, where
it is of agricultural or aquacultural origin have a duty to
produce their product in a way, which meets consumer expectations.
The supermarkets are arbitrators as to whether any product meets
this expectation; it should therefore be unnecessary for the
consumer to have to decide whether the producer has provided
sufficient assurance. This is especially so as most consumers
clearly have little idea as to what these assurance schemes
really mean.
Freshly
frozen?: The Food Standards
Agency have also clamped down on labelling frozen salmon as fresh
with new advice that previously frozen fish should not be labeled
as fresh. This advice comes at the end of a consultation process,
which considered the use of terms like ‘Fresh’, ‘Pure’,
‘Natural’ etc.
Interviewed by
Intrafish, Brian Simpson of Scottish Quality salmon said that
they had campaigned strongly for this amendment to the labelling
advice to protect the quality image of Scottish salmon so that
imported salmon could not be passed of as the same product.
Mr Simpson also said
that the sooner EU legislation regarding methods of production
and country of origin is enacted the sooner that UK retailers
will be forced to put this information on packaging giving
consumers the ability to make a more informed choice.
However, whilst the
necessary legislation is not yet in force, it is our experience
that all British supermarkets have now changed the labelling on
their packaging to declare both method of production and country
of origin. British consumers are now able to identify whether the
salmon they buy comes from Scotland, Ireland Norway or Chile. As
yet, no British retailer is selling fresh salmon from the
Faeroes, although one is selling Faeroese frozen salmon and this
is declared on the packaging.
Some retailers are
selling fresh salmon identified as farmed in Norway, Scotland and
Ireland on the same shelf. Consumers are able to select the pack
they want, but as salmon from any particular country is not being
left on the shelf, most consumers appear unconcerned as to
whether the salmon they buy is Scottish, Norwegian or Irish.
Certainly, consumers are not being misled as to the origin of the
salmon they buy. It is just not an issue.
Equally, the use of the terminology fresh and previously frozen is also not a real issue. This is because not one retailer actually uses the word fresh on their packaging. This usually just states ‘salmon fillet’ or ‘salmon steak’. The consumer can see the salmon is actually fresh and does not need to be told so. Clearly, there would be an issue if the salmon had been previously frozen and consumers were unaware of this, especially, if they wanted to freeze the salmon themselves. Again in our experience, salmon, which has been previously frozen is usually declared as such, as the following label illustrates.
However, with the
continued availability of fresh salmon, it seems unlikely that
supermarkets would need to resort to selling previously frozen
product.
Although all British
supermarkets have now amended their labelling on packs of salmon,
they have yet to implement the changes on the fresh fish counter.
Yet, because some wild caught fish is frozen at sea, most fish
counters already are used to labelling any such product as
previously frozen. One example can be seen this week in
Morrisons, whose promotional material for discounts on Black
Halibut clearly state that it has been previously frozen.
Country brand:
We have already highlighted that
some of the Scottish industry view the need for clearer labelling
to ensure that consumers are not misled into believing that
imported salmon is not passed off as the same as that produced in
Scotland. Yet, producers of imported salmon are also keen to
ensure that consumers are not confused. According to Intrafish,
ProChile are hoping to position Chilean salmon as a ‘country
brand’, which would see Chilean salmon identified separately
in the market place.
This is a risky
strategy since all research seems to indicate that consumers are
not that interested in the origin of the salmon they buy.
Instead, they are more motivated by price and presentation. This
means that producers must provide the fish in a form consumers
actually want to buy, at a price they want to pay.
Yet, whilst many
consumers do not care where their salmon comes from, the idea of
promoting Chilean salmon may work simply because it may be
perceived as having a different image. However, whilst this may
work at first, most consumers will come to realise that the
salmon is the same as that produced in Europe, unless the salmon
is different.
The comparison can be
made with canned salmon, which, in the UK market, can originate
from Canada or Alaska. The Alaskan marketing machine would have
us believe that consumers actively choose their product, but the
reality is that most consumers buy whatever salmon the stores
choose to stock.
Rather than focus on
national identity, the Chilean industry would be better placed to
capitalise on their other strengths and focus on producing the
type of salmon the consumer actually wants.