AOC. AOP. IGP. STG. Label Rouge. Meat from France. Pavilion France. Guaranteed Origin France. Elected product of the year. Flavor of the year. Bleu Blanc Cœur. Gluten Free. Fair Trade Max Havelaar. Sustainable Fishing MSC. AB. European Organic. Made in France. Company of France. General Agricultural Competition Medals. Eco-responsible orchards. Nutriscore. “Without”… palm oil, artificial flavors, GMOs, antibiotics, etc.

Today, labels and other claims intended to inform the consumer and guide them in their purchasing decisions proliferate on the packaging of food products. In this “jungle” of external signs of quality, what readability is there for the buyer? By piling up and adding these recognition elements, have we not created more complexity than increased reassurance? Do these landmarks still nourish the trust capital of brands? Do they still correspond to consumer expectations? Does this really drive purchases?

From a protectionist approach to consumer reassurance.

There are official labels, guarantees of origin, quality, and/or tradition, recognized by public authorities and controlled by certified independent organizations, and subject to specifications, a certificate of conformity, and approval. Then, there are those of sustainable development and fair trade, the “without” stamps and other private and commercial mentions… A look back at their installation on the shelves.

Historically, the first labels emerged to combat fraud (the creation of AOP at the beginning of the 20th century to protect the wine and spirits market in France) and defend a traditional know-how, a hallmark of quality, threatened by the industrialization of agriculture (creation of the Label Rouge in the 1960s), the genesis of subsequent labels was driven by a context of mass consumption and increased competition. A protectionist logic was succeeded by a differentiation approach and the creation of preference, to win over consumers.

Thus, the boom of private labels from the 1980s, some of which borrowed the codes of labeling in the very structuring of their identity (Marque Repère, Nos Régions ont du Talent), pressured big brands to develop their own recognition elements, expressions of their added value. Flavor of the year (1997), product of the year (1987)… Marketing promises created from scratch to encourage impulse buying. But without any guarantee of quality, benefits, or superior “more product” attributes.

Subsequently, the succession of crises and other health scandals that marked the 2000s and 2010s (mad cow, Belgian dioxin chicken, avian flu, GMOs…) resulted in a deterioration of the image of the agri-food industry and the strong idea of a correlation between food and health. Associated with the rise of a collective “green” consciousness (sustainable development, the question of animal welfare…), major brands had to show their good intentions to reassure a consumer who had become wary and more discerning about their purchases, committing to improving their production practices. Boosting organic agriculture, French sourcing or in a more equitable approach, medication of animals, removal of certain ingredients in product composition… All responses to new consumer expectations in favor of “better eating” and “better consumption,” which marked the rise and proliferation of more “responsible” and “healthy” labels: AB, Max Havelaar, Bleu blanc Cœur, Gluten Free, Guaranteed Origin France, Nutriscore, etc.

In the face of this profusion of initials, what about the consumer?

Making sense in a new system of values.

If labels continue to play their role as reference points, guarantees of compliance with certain “regulated” good practices, and are generally well understood by consumers, they are not enough to sway the purchasing act. For example, according to the Kantar Worldpanel study on “the French and food labels,” while the AB and Label Rouge symbols flirt with 95% awareness and are among the best decoded, they are not necessarily the ones that most encourage purchases. Because while organic “sells and is part of the niches that are multiplying and driving the growth of consumer goods, at the same time, it is becoming democratized, consumer demands are becoming stronger” (Emily Mayer, strategic business director at IRI. Source: LSA magazine). In this context, new markers of trust are emerging to make a difference in the aisle: thus, local (at the top of the list of logos most encouraging buying – 85.5%: Guaranteed Origin France, Meats from France, Made in France) and “without” (without palm oil, without artificial flavors, without nitrites, without antibiotics…) are making their mark.

And for good reason: to meet their concerns of “better eating” and “better consuming,” consumers have hardened and broadened their expectations towards brands, thus forging a new system of values, articulated around a representation of quality that is “augmented” and multifaceted. A representation that “makes sense” and integrates new criteria of appreciation: fair remuneration of producers, short supply chains, breeding conditions and respect for animal welfare, provided nutritional contributions, local sourcing, choice of ingredients, expertise, respect for the environment, carbon footprint, social considerations, etc. Insights that add up and redefine the drivers of food behaviors. It is up to brands to respond, at the risk of seeing their sustainability and health at stake.

For their balance of power with the consumer has changed and shifted. With the advent of digital technology, consumer access to information has multiplied and their power to influence and act has widened. Today, they are more informed, less passive. For example: the creation of the bold brand “Who’s the boss?” or the explosion of the Yuka app (14.5 million users), “arrived at the right time when, following numerous scandals in the agri-food sector, consumers had a real need for transparency. Yuka allowed them to regain control of their purchases and their health by enabling them to understand what their products actually contain and make better choices for their health” (source: Julie Chapon, founder of the app). The phenomenal impact of Yuka on consumer behavior has unprecedented implications for producers and distributors, particularly in terms of product innovation: modification of the composition of certain products to improve their evaluation (Intermarché), creation of new products (Knorr), development of organic ranges (Heudebert).

When other brands even reference the app in their communication (Fleury Michon) or make the score obtained a key indicator of their performance (Bjorg). Not surprising given that 94% of app users report having “stopped buying certain poorly rated products” and 83% “buy less but of better quality” (source: La Croix, 26/01/2020).

From the label to the overall score. More than a reassurance element: an expression of the utility and concrete actions of the brand?

Thus, brands under the spotlight and subjected to the evaluation of their buyers are more than ever exposed and must demonstrate their commitment to “better eating,” to “better consuming”. A fundamental trend that has further intensified in a Covid context at the end of which 8 out of 10 brands plan to “change their communication style by prioritizing their utility in consumers’ daily lives and their societal and environmental commitments.” (source: Mind Media, 29/05/2020). And on-pack communication, the showcase of the brand on the shelf, fits into this approach of more prominently highlighting “clean and healthy” arguments. This is reflected in the emergence of recent signs taking into account different evaluation criteria and thus combining several benefits versus a niche promise, to highlight a more transversal commitment from the brand.

Because “Organic is no longer enough,” the new “Biological-French-Fair” logo, created by the National Federation of Organic Agriculture, answers “the growing demand for products combining organic and local production, fair exchanges for producers, fighting against climate change and loss of biodiversity” (source: Que choisir?, 7/03/2020).

The “Global Score”, formerly known as Ferme France, aims to “help consumers consume better and economic actors produce better,” by assigning and labeling a societal performance score to food products. This evaluation grid takes into account six issues (animal welfare, the environment, nutrition and human health, origin and contribution to the French economy, traceability and transparency, and finally corporate social responsibility), which are split into 40 objectives. In this system, each evaluated product receives an overall score out of 100 as well as 6 thematic scores (one per issue). The objective: “to allow the consumer to prioritize their choices based on their expectations.” (Source: LSA, February 2020).

Also note the “My Label” app, which offers to obtain a personalized and multicriteria evaluation of food products, operating on the principle that each consumer is different and does not assign the same importance to the various issues related to the planet, health, and society. A “clever” naming that may suggest that the notion of label has indeed been transversalized and integrated into the public sphere, which would somehow become a stakeholder in its constitution?

If the proliferation of food labels does not seem to have altered their “refuge value” for consumers, their unique existence, i.e., without being accompanied by other private or commercial mentions, appears, on the other hand, outdated. These guarantees are known, recognized, but not sufficient and not triggers of purchase. The brand's commitment, behind these external signs of quality, must be global, concrete, and real “within itself.” Ultimately, one could consider that this addition reflects the evolution of consumer expectations and their behaviors… A consumer who has become engaged, who today has the power to choose with other decision-making tools (especially digital) that they did not have until now. But also, and above all, the power to act that redraws the boundaries between distributors, commercial brands, consumers… and producers. And if tomorrow, a collective action truly became possible in favor of better overall consumption (upstream and downstream)?

#acttogether. This is indeed the project of the Global Score, which aims to bring together and make the actors of the production, distribution, and consumption chain work together. Utopia, a lever for rebalancing “power dynamics,” or the beginnings of an unprecedented fundamental movement?

This article is taken from the White Paper “ Agri-food: towards a new trust pact? ”