Whilst
the salmon industry must take note of the anti-lobby, it is important to
recognise that they do not represent the consumer. Clearly, it is important to
also seek consumer attitudes about the farmed fish that they buy.
Following
on from their ISFA/Roche study of consumer attitudes to farmed salmon, the
French market research company GIRA have undertaken an investigation for the EU
on consumer attitudes to farmed fish and specifically trout and sea bream. Some
of the results were discussed at the AquaVision conference and have been
reported in the latest issue of Outlook, the company magazine for Trouw UK.
We,
at Callander McDowell, have previously commented on GIRA’s ISFA/Roche survey
in the reports section of our website. We would now like to respond to the
latest GIRA findings as reported by managing director, Mr Andrew Cookson, at
AquaVision.
Mr
Cookson believes that there has been a revolution in the attitude, consumers have to the food they buy, but we are not convinced that the
changes which he perceives in consumer attitude are real changes, rather than being
simply artefacts of the market research.
According
to Mr Cookson, consumers used to buy food by social imitation, that is they
bought products because they knew that ‘people like us’ buy them. However,
one wonders whether people just bought the food that was available. Naturally,
people in the same locality bought similar food, because that was the only
choice they had. This has changed because the arrival of the supermarket giants
has now widened this choice so that consumers can choose rather than accept just
what is available. Inevitably, this wider choice allows consumers to be much
more discriminating about the food they buy. Mr Cookson interprets this choice
as a new philosophy of ‘what I need is a product that is the best adapted to
my needs’.
This
difference in interpretation can be best explained by using Mr Cookson’s own
example. This is the differing consumer attitude to salmon fillets as compared
to whole salmon.
Mr
Cookson states that consumers distinguish between different types of food
depending on what they want the food for. He classifies such selection as being
one of two types. These are either neutral or valourised meal choices. A neutral
meal is one, which is simply intended to refuel the body so consumers seek a
centre plate protein. By comparison, valourised meals are expected to give
pleasure and have an emotional involvement for the consumer. Yet, we do not see
that even the simplest refuelling meal, such as a sandwich, should not give
pleasure. It is only necessary to see the huge range of fillings available in
the many sandwich shops to see that consumers see even this most basic meal
function as being more than refuelling. If it were, then consumers would be
expected to buy a simple nutritional pack without any taste at all.
Mr
Cookson illustrates these concepts by equating the salmon fillet as a neutral
refuelling product whilst he sees whole salmon as a valourised or pleasure
eating meal situation. This is because fillets or portions make a simple and
easy to prepare meal such as lunch or a quick dinner after a hard day at work,
whilst whole salmon is more likely to be served at a special occasion such as a
dinner party.
As
we have already suggested, we do not see why even the simplest of refuelling
meals cannot be pleasurable as well. We therefore think that Mr Cookson ascribes
a more complex explanation to consumer attitudes to salmon than it deserves.
Instead, we think that there is another way of understanding such consumer
choice.
We
do not see any real difference between the attitude of those consumers who
choose fillets and those who choose whole fish. The difference is simply about
which is the best form of salmon for the meal they wish to prepare. Consumers
who choose to eat a simple lunch alone are unlikely to buy a whole fish. This is
because it is much more costly and contains much more flesh than a single person
is likely to eat on his or her own. By comparison, those consumers who want to
make a special dinner party want to make a display of the effort they have gone
to and thus a whole fish is a much more attractive option. However, those making
a dinner party are equally likely to buy several fillets because they make ideal
similar sized portions, which are easy to serve.
Thus
the divide between these refuelling and pleasure meal situations is actually
very blurred. It is not a simple case of one or the other. This can be further
illustrated by Mr Cooksons’ findings of consumer attitudes on a national
basis. These can be illustrated as follows:
Neutral/ salmon fillets
Valourised/whole salmon
British
consumers
Habit
Healthy
French
consumers
Easy to prepare
Gift
German
consumers
Healthy
Everyone likes it
Out
of these different findings only two make any real sense. British and German
consumers perceive that some forms of salmon represent healthy eating, but why
British consumers should see whole salmon as healthy and fillets as not is
unclear. The same can be said of German consumers. Equally it is easy to see why
French consumers would perceive fillets as being easy to prepare. What is not so
clear is why British consumers buy fillets out of habit and why if everyone in
Germany likes salmon, consumption is not significantly higher?
One
reason for these discrepancies is that consumer oriented market can be extremely
hit and miss. Focus groups or individual questioning can often direct the
consumer to give unrepresentative answers. This is also apparent from other
market research circulated within the salmon industry.
It
can also be observed in other findings from the GIRA research. One aim of their
latest survey was to identify consumer attitudes to changes in the ingredients
used in the manufacture of fish feed, especially the change to more vegetarian
raw materials. According to Mr Cookson, 80% of British consumers are interested
and think about what the fish eats. We would disagree. We are not even convinced
that 80% of salmon consumers know that the fish they buy are farmed, let alone
that they are fed manufactured food. As we indicated at the start of this
viewsletter, most British consumers are not even interested in whether the fish
is farmed or not. They are certainly not interested in what the fish are fed,
that is unless there is a food scare. Then interest in such matters increases
dramatically during the period of the scare, until then, consumers are quite
happy to let the supermarkets be the arbitrators to ensure that the food they
buy is safe and fit to eat.
In
our view the main drivers of salmon consumption is that the fish represents real
‘value for money’ as well as being easy to prepare, convenient and tasty. In
other words, that the salmon industry has put it in a form that that the
consumer actually wants.