THE ARTISAN FOODS-MISUSE OF THE TERMINOLOGY BY ORGANIZED INDUSTRY

Marketing pundits have the ability to convert an innocuous word into a popular icon, recognizable easily and  attracting new consumers to the products promoted. If there were no regulations to control unsubstantiated claims about foods, consumers would have been deluged with such claims, thousands in number, making a choice in the super market isles a nightmare! Every word used on a label or promotional advertisement is chosen carefully by the industry to make a lasting impression in the minds of the consumer. Latest to arrive is the word "artisan" which creates a nostalgia about the good old days when every thing was made with hand involving no machine unlike to day's mass produced items. When potato wafers manufacturers found their business not growing as per expectations, they introduced the word "kettle fried" to remind the consumers that the eating quality of the chips will be equal to what old grandma used to make! There are many similar instances when such terms are revived for business promotion. Here is a take on this wide spread practice in the industry. 

"Dictionaries tell us that the word artisan relates to a person or company that makes a high-quality, distinctive product in small quantities, usually by hand and using traditional methods. But food manufacturers seem to have a different idea. Domino's, Tostitos and Starbucks are among the major bands using the word on packaging in order to convince consumers they are buying a better-quality product, and therefore spend more".

Is there any thing wrong if the word artisan is used on a food product to attract more consumers? Of course it is perfectly legal as long as there is no accepted definition of an artisan product in the statute books. But common sense tells that artisan is a skilled worker with lot of experience in making a particular product in a particular way and the artisan way of making a food product cannot be replicated easily under commercially conditions, the productivity becoming a casualty. At the same time if the product made commercially resembles and mimics the eating quality of real artisan made product, as perceived by the consumer, there should not be any serious objection to the use of the word on the label. However from ethical angle it would be more appropriate to qualify such claims with more clarity. Probably the phrase "artisan quality" may be more appropriate than using "artisan food".

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

THE POWER OF "LABELING"-MAKING THE CONSUMER A SUCKER?

The labeling provision under food legislation is supposed to make the contents of a sealed food pack more transparent in terms of ingredients and nutrition. But does it really serve the purpose for which is was designed? There are differing views on this issue but most despicable aspect of label declarations is inserting unproven or vague claims to attract the unsuspecting consumer with lot of promise but never delivered! Though many countries are making their labeling regulations more and more stringent, the wily industry invariably finds gaping loopholes for continuing with such deceitful clams. Here is the latest trend evident in some countries which reflects the mindset of the industry to make money at any cost. 

What's really behind all those new "artisan" labels consumers are seeing in their supermarkets? Loblaws has just announced its "artisan style" croutons. Metro stores boast an Artisan Deli Collection. And PepsiCo now offers artisan tortilla chips. It all raises a question: are shoppers being served up the real deal — a genuine individually produced product — or being duped by companies trying to tap consumer interest in homestyle products? Canada's labelling rules don't spell out any definition of "artisan," but they prohibit false and misleading representations on food products. That means an "artisan" food should be produced in a "traditional and rudimentary" way using basic equipment and a "significant portion of manual labour," according to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. Many small businesses do just that. At Ottawa's Art Is In Bakery, for instance, the breads and baked goods are all manufactured by hand at the small retail shop and wholesale bakery, which serves local stores and restaurants. In contrast, big brands, such as Pepperidge Farm and "Domino's have picked up on the word and are now making "artisan" products for the masses. In a recently published report, food industry expert Tom Vierhile found there were nearly 500 new product launches in 2009 and 2010 with the word "artisan" or "artisanal" in the brand or product name. Vierhile, the innovation insights director at Datamonitor, said the term "gourmet" has become commonplace, so the word "artisan" builds on terms such as "homestyle," "homemade" and "authentic." "The word 'gourmet' has become so overused, I just think it's become a throwaway term. That's even less illuminating than 'artisan.' At least (artisan) suggests that it may be possibly handmade," Vierhile told Postmedia News. "It has become popular and companies are using it to identify products that have more of a specialty component or is trying to distance itself from foods that are mass-produced." Vierhile said marketing a product as artisan "can be effective to convince consumers that the product is not the same old thing," but there is a risk in branding factory-made items as artisan and selling them for a premium price. "That's sort of the rub here: Can you be artisan and be mass-produced at the same time? That's part of the conundrum with these products. If you claim to be artisan, it can be a difficult thing to convince consumers that the product is truly artisan if it's a mass-market type of item."

Recent disapproval by the authorities, of hundreds of claims made in Europe by the food industry probably may be a beginning in cracking down on such "malpractices" and other countries need to tighten their rules to help consumers to protect themselves from such predatory practices. It is rather sad that consumers also fall easy prey to this strategy of the industry without realizing that they are being cheated. As long as the claims do not endanger the lives they can be considered as an economic fraud which must be punished through economic impositions. But if the claims lead to serious health problems, severe punishment including jailing the offenders must be considered. Consumer NGOs have a constructive role to play in this field.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

FARMERS' MARKET-ARE THE PRODUCE REALLY LOCAL?

Economic fraud is as old as human civilization and only a very few can avoid the temptation for cheating to make a fast buck as long history of mankind has repeatedly demonstrated. If quality is compromised by the manufacturing industry time and again, it is only to safeguard or increase the margins of profit. There is no country on this blessed earth which is an exception to this ground reality. All checks and measures put in place from time to time can only check such practices but cannot eradicate the same. It is the general perception that such economic fraud is more deep rooted in developing countries compared to that, noticed in rich countries. Inadequate enforcement personnel, underdeveloped infrastructure for quality checking and wide scale corruption seem to be the major reasons for economic frauds that take place in many poor countries of the world. Look at a rich country like the US where consumers are defrauded in spite of the stringent enforcement system that seems to be unable to restrain fraudsters perpetuating their designs with impunity.

"In a way, California certified farmers markets are a victim of their own success, since their numbers have roughly doubled over the last decade, to more than 700, while the numbers of authentic farmers to meet this demand — and of agricultural inspectors to enforce market regulations — have not increased proportionally. Farmers market customers are willing to pay top dollar for produce they believe to be local, fresh, organic or not sprayed with pesticides. Industrially grown produce, raised with industrial efficiencies of scale, is comparatively cheap, tempting vendors to buy from neighbors, packinghouses and wholesale sources on the sly. This violates state farmers market rules, but allows them to obtain a profitable, more consistent supply. County and state inspectors (along with managers) are responsible for enforcing market rules against cheating, but they have limited personnel and resources. Some county agricultural authorities view peddling as a victimless violation and rarely fine or suspend from markets local farmers, with whom they may be friendly. But cheating is not a victimless violation. Customers are defrauded, duped into paying high prices for commercial-grade produce. Honest growers often can't compete with cheaters and withdraw from markets. The core attraction of farmers markets — real farmers selling directly to consumers — is in danger of slipping away. To retain public confidence, farmers and managers have proposed many ideas, including these, as the first, most urgent steps to address this concern"

How can one arrest this trend of crass greediness is a worrisome factor that concerns many countries. The above instance of passing on mass produced and industrially processed perishables as locally grown food is well proved but legally it will be difficult to take action due to practical reasons. Such instances are bound to increase in the coming years because of the current obsession for organic foods and locavore movement taking roots in many communities due to fear of unsafe foods from mass produced and centralized manufacturing facilities. Is punishment a severe deterrent against consumer frauds? Obviously the answer seems to be a resounding no if what has been happening in China is any indication. The Melamine adulteration of milk affecting the health of thousands of innocent children adversely, which captured world-wide attention last year, should not have happened considering the harsh retribution system prevalent there under the authoritarian regime that controls the destiny of that country. Even after executing a couple of executives for the crime in response to the scandal, manufacture of sub-quality and adulterated food continues unabated, the most recent incidence being antibiotic tainted honey.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

THE REAL ENERGY GUZZLERS, PLEASE STAND UP!

The "Locavores" movement started in the US for encouraging people to shun foods brought from far away places and in stead consume those that are grown locally seems to be based on unsubstantiated premise that the former is responsible for large consumption of fossil fuel energy. A recent study debunks this theory and in stead blames the house holds as the biggest culprit in this energy saga. Though one cannot accept the stand that people should consume more of energy efficient commercially produced industrial foods for cutting down energy waste, there is a point in that more needs to be done for cutting down on house hold energy consumption through more optimized kitchen operations and improved designs of kitchen appliances. While energy experts focus only on the narrow aspect of energy consumption, there are other issues like the impact of industrial foods on consumer health.

In his recent The New York Times op-ed, "Math Lessons for Locavores" -- debated at length in our"Food Fight" feature -- Stephen Budiansky shows that transportation and "modern" (i.e., highly mechanized and chemical-intensive) farming make up relatively small parts of industrial food's energy footprint. Consumers in their kitchens, in Budiansky's view, are the real energy guzzlers -- so locavores should stop worrying and learn to love industrial food.Those points are addressed broadly by a recent article in Amber Waves, the publication of the USDA's Economic Research service. On page 13 of this lucidly written report, we find that in 2002, U.S. households used nearly 4 quadrillion BTUs of energy in the kitchen, more than any other sector of the food system. By contrast, transportation -- think of the vast fleet of trucks that ferries the food we eat cross-country, to supermarket chains and eateries -- consumed about 0.6 quadrillion BTUs. And agriculture, with its gas-dependent combines and other machines and fossil fuel-sucking fertilizers and pesticides, used just 2.1 quadrillion BTUs.

The energy consumption by the agriculture sector in most developed countries is a matter of concern but very little can be done to reduce the consumption without affecting land productivity. Possibly some alleviation measures can be thought of which includes extraction of energy from farm wastes through anaerobic digestion or bio-fuel production so that the net energy utilization comes down significantly. Both these technologies are at a ripe stage for utilization in large farms provided necessary resources are made available to install large scale facilities in the coming years. .

V.H.POTTY

http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com