Consumers being duped by plant-based proteins, meat industry says

Australia’s seafood, meat, and poultry industries have bound together to call out what they believe is “misleading” marketing of plant-based proteins, saying consumers are being duped into believing they are buying animal products. On Friday, the group released research into the matter which found that 73 per cent of consumers believe clearer labelling standards need to be introduced.The national survey of 1000 Australians, commissioned by The Red Meat Advisory Council and undertaken by Pollinate, revealed six-in-10 consumers would be duped by the current packaging of plant-based protein, while close to 75 per cent believe these products should not be allowed to be described as meat.The group says vulnerable Australians are disproportionately impacted by the issue.“We know first-hand that consumers find this labelling confusing, particularly older Australians or those with English as a second language. I know people who have been duped by them, thinking they were buying seafood, chicken or beef and instead they’ve bought something else entirely,” Seafood Industry Australia (SIA) CEO Veronica Papacosta told Inside FMCG. “The packaging and labelling is designed to closely resemble established seafood products in the market. We’re aware of imitation prawns shown on beds of rice, fishless fingers, and canned products in spring water.” Senate inquiryThe release of such research is timely, with just a week left for individuals and organisations to make submissions to a Senate inquiry which is considering whether the terms “beef”, “fish”, “chicken”, “pork” etc should be used in the labelling and marketing of plant-based products. The review will also examine the ingredients and additives used in the products, any health implications, as well as the immediate and long-term social and economic impacts on the Australian meat industry. Submissions close on August 13, and the committee will present its report by on or before the end of February.The group is calling for clearer labelling standards an end to meat and seafood terms and imagery in the labelling and advertising of these products. “We suggest they are labelled, displayed and promoted as what they are, plant-based protein,” Papacosta said. “If they can’t rely on their own brand pillars they shouldn’t be trying to take ours.” Papacosta doesn’t believe that more consumer education is needed, saying it’s a supplier issue, not a shopper issue.“Consumers don’t need more education, they know the difference between an animal and a plant. These products need to be labelled as what they are, not what they’re not.”Traceability More than half a million Australians collectively work together across Australia’s meat, livestock and seafood industry supply chains. Australian seafood alone accounts for 10 per cent of national agricultural production, and contributes $3.5 billion in gross domestic product annually to the Australian economy.With consumers increasingly seeking out ethical and sustainable food choices and local produce, these industries are eager to ensure products are accurately represented through packaging. Last year, Simplot Australia was caught out by the ACCC for labelling imported fish as ‘Made in Australia’ when it was simply packaged here. “If we allow for compromise in the name and labelling of protein sources like seafood, this presents great implications for both traceability and origin verification,”  Papacosta said. “We know that mislabelled products can significantly devalue our exports. We need to place value in our seafood traceability and sustainability statements, which are key pillars that set Australian agricultural products apart from the rest and underpin confidence in brand-Australia produce.”The group claims plant based proteins are “heavily processed”, “primarily manufactured overseas or made from imported ingredients” and that this is putting the reputation of Australian meat and seafood at risk.“These products are highly processed and cannot compete with the health benefits of seafood. If you’re looking for Omega-3 fake salmon can’t help you,” Papacosta said. Lost opportunities Allen Zelden, founder of Intrinity Global and president of digital eco-conscious website Futurevvorld, is well versed on the plant-based protein market and attempts to restrict its marketing globally. “Outside of France passing an amendment to its Agriculture Bill in 2018 to enforce more rigorous labelling of plant-based meat and dairy foods, the European Union, as well as some states in the United States have tried, and failed, to legislate bills calling for a ban on plant-based foods to use the terms ‘meat’, ‘beef’, ‘pork’ or “chicken’ to describe their foods,” he told Inside FMCG. “Legislators in Texas (which also happens to be America’s largest cattle producing state), are the latest to propose a law, known as the Texas Meat & Imitation Food Act, to define ‘meat’ as being “any edible portion of a formerly live & whole cattle carcass, not derived by synthetic or artificial means” thereby excluding any “lab-grown, cell cultured, insect or plant-based food products”.Zelden believes more stringent labelling requirements for plant-based foods is likely to have adverse consequences, saying “removing familiar terminology can only lead to consumer turmoil, not transparency”.He points to research conducted by Colmar Brunton in 2019 and commissioned by Food Frontier and Life Health Foods, which reports that “91 per cent of Australians have never mistakenly purchased a plant-based product thinking it was its meat based counterpart, or vice versa. And of the 9 per cent who have mistakenly purchased the wrong product, they were more likely to be a vegetarian or vegan.”For language to be effective, it needs to evoke benefits and values, according to Zelden. “Banning the word ‘meat’ from plant-based foods can only translate to lost opportunities for the growing number of consumers actively seeking to reduce their meat-intake with products they may enjoy,” he said. “Given the explosive growth trajectory for the Australian plant-based food category, the meat, seafood and poultry sectors are undoubtedly motivated to stifle this growth so as to protect their commercial interests before that of the consumer.”He points to the growth of evolution of plant-based milks which moved from UHT long-life shelf packaging to the fridge among other dairy milks.“Sales surged. No consumer education was required, and shoppers easily distinguished the plant-based varieties from their conventional counterparts.“Clearly, adaptation drives success, and the meat, poultry and seafood sectors know that, particularly as plant-based food sales continue to skyrocket in Australia.”He believes integration starts with necessity and that collaboration is the way forward. “Rather than lead by industry unrest, I believe the best way forward is through greater collaboration between departments to align on strategy for placement, promotion and integration for plant-based foods based on consumer insights and data.”