The Label Conversation
7 November 2015, Roma Explorer’s Inn
Function Centre
The Label Conversation Snapshot
By Sherrill Stivano
and Liz Todd
The opportunity to gather and talk about a single label for
Australian primary produce was a concept well supported with over 60 people
attending The Label Conversation in Roma on Saturday 7 November.
Sherrill Stivano is not just a farmer, wife and mum, but
someone with vision and foresight for Australian agriculture. The Label Conversation saw the culmination of
12 months of work for Sherrill and her project, for which she was awarded the
2015 RIRDC Rural Women’s Award for Queensland.
The event was made possible with support from Liz Todd, a dedicated
committee, the Maranoa-Balonne Catchment Management Association and sponsorship
from industry, government and businesses.
Sherrill opened the conversation by challenging forum
participants to think beyond Country of Origin Labelling and look to how
Australian agricultural producers can gain tangible benefits from effective
labelling of food and fibre produce. Domestic
and international consumers would ultimately benefit from a single label,
backed by credible standards, which could be a unifying step for Australian
agriculture. Sherrill stressed it must be a grass roots movement, with farmers
contributing to the foundation of the label.
Participants hailed from across the country, and globe, to
join in the conversation.
Representatives were present from industry bodies including Meat and Livestock
Australia, AgForce, Growcom, Australian Lot Feeders Association, and The
Council for Sustainable Egg Farming and pork industry; along with government
departments, researchers, community groups, businesses, farmers, consumers,
council and politicians.
Member for Warrego Ann Leahy congratulated Sherrill Stivano
for her initiative on an important issue.
Ann emphasised that if Australia doesn’t provide good practices, someone
else in the world will do it for us, taking away market access and farm gate
profitability. This initiative is an
opportunity for the region to set goals and direction, and for the rest of the
country to see the progress that would better define our food on a local,
regional and national level.
The RIRDC project funds supported the attendance of Andrew
Blenkiron who is Vice Chair of the Red Tractor Assured Food Standards in the
United Kingdom. Andrew is also a farmer,
responsible for Euston Estate that generates 60,000 tonne of produce on an
annual basis. It was clear from Andrew’s
first hand account that a single assurance and label system has delivered
direct benefits to farmers through streamlined assurance standards and
auditing, consumer confidence in products, marketing opportunities and a
positive image. This achievement has
been the result of 20 years of hard work across the whole supply chain to
restore the tarnished reputation of the industry stemmed from major health and
safety concerns in the 1990s.
Andrew’s advice to Australia if building a brand or label,
is to start at the beginning and demonstrate significant tangible benefits to
producers. The UK was forced to start
the other way by demonstrating producer standards to consumers. He advised using the label as a one stop
marketing tool, with the focus on one brand that is easily recognised on the supermarket
shelf, as multiple and even competing industry branding is confusing to
consumers.
Specialising in consumer perceptions of agriculture is researcher
Dr Heather Bray, from the University of Adelaide, who brought to the
conversation insight into the issues of ethics and price surrounding consumer
choices. Driving consumer’s choice is taste, price,
nutrition, freshness and safety. Heather
shared that beliefs don’t necessarily equal behaviour. There is lots of literature about our choices
for moral or “better” choices, which is competing with other messages producers
are getting about cheap and fast food.
Consumers are making moral choices quickly as the complexity of types of
information being asked to consider at time of purchase is too much. They need to think about what the cow was
eating, antibiotics, how the food was grown…; when they just want a steak. They go to the brands they trust because they
can’t process all of the information. A
new label won’t raise awareness of food production, but it can encourage purchase
of products with the label over others due to high levels of trust in
Australian farmers.
Greg Mills, Managing Director of Food Integrity Solutions
weighed in on the conversation about building trust in our modern food
systems. He explained that trust equates
to a social licence to operate or privilege of operating with minimal
formalised restrictions, such as legislation or market requirements. Losing a social licence means increased licensing,
penalties and regulation by governments and supermarkets, which costs money, as
demonstrated in the United Kingdom. Trust
in farmers is high, but agriculture’s response to values and ethical production
questions is based on science and economics.
Consumers are looking for producers that share their values and indicate
that trust, but are not necessarily finding it.
It is not about changing agriculture, but how we are talking about it.
Meat and Livestock Australia (MLA) shared their journey in the
red meat industry and development of the “True Aussie” brand. MLA is producer owned and a not-for-profit
organisation. They provide services to
the red meat industry by gaining market access, supporting trade and technical
access, and business development and brand building. Lisa Sharp, General Manager Central Marketing
Industry Insights, said consumers are asking for more as they become more
sophisticated and seeking food experiences.
Looking broadly at markets and consumers, there are megatrends around
sustainability and ethics as well as health and wellness. As a result, the True Aussie brand was
developed on sustainability, fearless food and feel good food. Understanding consumer attitudes and behaviour
i.e. ‘consumer insight’ informs all strategy development and marketing programs
at MLA with a “think global” approach, customised for local markets. Consumers do seek peace of mind, they want
confidence in the product they are buying, and are concerned about
sustainability and wellbeing.
Dr Ian Plowman facilitated several discussion questions with
panellists Dr Heather Bray (Adelaide University), Greg Mills (Food Integrity
Solutions), Richard Norton (Meat and Livestock Australia), Lisa Sharp (Meat and
Livestock Australia), Georgie Somerset (AgForce), Dougal Gordon (Australian Lot
Feeders Association), Rachel Mackenzie (Growcom), and Richard Routley (Southern
Region Department of Agriculture and Fisheries).
What are the labelling systems we currently have and what are
the strengths and weaknesses?
Some key points were that the horticulture industry is lacking in compliance and consistent labelling that provides benefits to those producers doing the right thing. There are currently areas of high risk relating to food safety, however all farmers are enjoying the premise that Australian grown means clean and green. The meat industries are well regulated, with various brands and quality assurance programs currently in place including Australian Pork Industry Quality Assurance Program, Aus-Meat and National Feedlot Accreditation Scheme.
Some key points were that the horticulture industry is lacking in compliance and consistent labelling that provides benefits to those producers doing the right thing. There are currently areas of high risk relating to food safety, however all farmers are enjoying the premise that Australian grown means clean and green. The meat industries are well regulated, with various brands and quality assurance programs currently in place including Australian Pork Industry Quality Assurance Program, Aus-Meat and National Feedlot Accreditation Scheme.
Consumers take three seconds to make a decision. They are confused with so many types of
labelling systems and are overwhelmed. They
are cautious about product statements and claims, and sceptical about
traceability through distribution facilities.
Consumers are let down, they want to make a choice about products they
buy. The systems are in place but
consumers are not provided with the information or a label that underpins the
understanding of the systems, so they go to farmers markets where there is no
accountability. Collectively the fresh
produce sector is letting agriculture down, but it is also not accessing
markets opportunities.
For some industries, “it is those not part of the brand that
is bringing the brand down”. Small
producers are difficult to engage, non-conformers are tarnishing reputations
and provoking activists, and each producer creating their own brand makes it
hard to have a collective industry identity to market internationally.
Gaining retailers support for consumer and producer benefits
needs to be win, win, win. Coles and
Woolworths each have their own systems in place with tight controls over food
safety and quality. They need a point of
difference and their branding is very valuable. There would be a better chance
of adoption of a national label by new entrants. With Costco and other global players coming
to Australia, it would be an ideal situation to provide them with an ultimate
peace of mind.
What is the ultimate benefit to the consumer?
When Australians buy beef or lamb, we know with certainty they are making decisions by 1. Price, 2. Nutrition, 3. Versatility and 4. Taste. So if a label is about the integrity of the product it will not fundamentally drive demand. We can ensure we have consumer and community support for agriculture, and a label might be one way to do that, but domestically price is the major driving force. The same applies to eggs, for all of the media hype around caged egg, sales have fallen by .5% and may be increasing. There has been anti-marketing regarding the product and branding, but consumers are still demanding caged eggs. We often think what the market wants is what the loudest consumer wants.
When Australians buy beef or lamb, we know with certainty they are making decisions by 1. Price, 2. Nutrition, 3. Versatility and 4. Taste. So if a label is about the integrity of the product it will not fundamentally drive demand. We can ensure we have consumer and community support for agriculture, and a label might be one way to do that, but domestically price is the major driving force. The same applies to eggs, for all of the media hype around caged egg, sales have fallen by .5% and may be increasing. There has been anti-marketing regarding the product and branding, but consumers are still demanding caged eggs. We often think what the market wants is what the loudest consumer wants.
What are the benefits and opportunities a single Australian
agricultural products labelling system might offer?
A single system would underpin the standards and
traceability, enabling producers to get on with being the story tellers by
talking about their products and marketing the experience.
A single labelling system needs to offer increased
profitability. If a single brand/label
offers market advantage, market access, and increased demand it will give that
label a price advantage. Potentially if one system or label covered all of the
existing assurance systems, it would improve adoption of practices at the farm
level, it would reduce the cost of multiple audits and ensures compliance,
which should result in a profit for the producer.
Outside of agriculture, all consumers see you as
farmers. A single label will bring
agriculture together to present a single face.
Industries that don’t learn don’t last.
Industries are repeating the same research with the same people, which
is a waste of time and money. It might
be time for agriculture to have a conversation internally, then engage the broader
public. Agriculture needs to talk to each
other and be seen as a collective industry, not competing against each other.
What consumers say they want and what they put in their trolleys
are different. Having a social licence
in the United Kingdom is providing an £80 benefit per livestock, with the continuing
ability to farm under great pressure from the environmental sector. Farming in the United Kingdom is under
scrutiny, but the system has the capability to demonstrate confidence. Programs are not Best Management Practice unless
it delivers a bottom line to the farmer.
Agriculture has left it up to others to tell our story. Major brands have a whipping hand unless agriculture
develops its own standards. Australia
has great attributes, but we don’t do great job of selling it compared to New
Zealand who does a great job of selling itself and brand awareness.
A national brand offers the opportunity address the
standards and certifications so we get a chance to talk about the things we do,
what we do, about the values and to tell the stories.
How would this be driven forward by producers?
Engage in a conversation not just about a label, but where we want agriculture to be in 20 years’ time, if it leads to a label that would be great. Producers need to get involved in industry and organisations that have a voice at national level and find a path that has national influence.
Engage in a conversation not just about a label, but where we want agriculture to be in 20 years’ time, if it leads to a label that would be great. Producers need to get involved in industry and organisations that have a voice at national level and find a path that has national influence.
In the United Kingdom, with quality assurance systems in
place, moving forward is about the tangible benefits of being better together
as an industry. The industry is better
with all working together and not about one sector against another. The industry doesn’t do well if one part of the
industry isn’t performing. Experience
shows it is easier to get discounters such as Aldi on board, as they leave
quality assurance checks to contractors and don’t have their own systems. Engaging consumers is putting pressure on
retailers by demanding Red Tractor products.
Georgie Somerset offered closing comments to the
conversation started by Sherrill Stivano, that one should “never doubt that a
small group of citizens can change the world”.
Georgie challenged participants to make a commitment of time, treasure
or talent to continue the conversation and support those who are stepping up to
challenge the norms and changing the face of agriculture.
Video Links for the Forum:
Presentation by Andrew Blenkiron Vice Chair of Red Tractor Assurance UK
Presentation by Dr Heather Bray Senior Research Associate The University of Adelaide
Presentation by Greg Mills of Food Integrity Solutions
Question Time for Dr Heather Bray and Greg Mills
Presentation by Richard Norton, Managing Director of Meat & Livestock Australia and Lisa Sharp, General Manager of Central Marketing and Industry Insights
Panel 1 Addressing: What are the labelling systems we currently have and what are the strengths and weaknesses?
Panel 2 Addressing: What are the benefits and opportunities a single Australian agricultural products labelling system might offer?
Panel 3 Addressing: How Might this conversation be driven forward by producers?
The wrap up
The event was sponsored by:
Member for
Warrego Ann Leahy
Performance
Feeds
Landmark
Roma
QRAA and Tony
Koch
Business
Excellence Program
Roma Chamber
of Commerce
Roma
Explorers Inn
Greg Mills
of Food Integrity Solutions
Dr Ian
Plowman
Maranoa-Balonne
Catchment Management Association
Bellevue
Feedlot
Liz Todd
Photos supplied by Georgie Somerset, Sherrill Stivano & Liz Todd
Videography by Mick Russell of Linchpion Studios
Photos supplied by Georgie Somerset, Sherrill Stivano & Liz Todd
Videography by Mick Russell of Linchpion Studios
