Fake meat confusing consumers
Wendy Askew wants tougher packaging, marketing guidelines on plant-based meat
WITH Coles supermarkets cutting in-store butchers in favour of selling prepacked meat, it is more important than ever that rules around packaging and marketing of plant-based meat alternatives are tightened.
Meat producers have called on producers of plantbased meat alternatives to stop using animal imagery and wording, such as “beef”, “bacon”, “chicken”, “mince” and “sausages”, on packaging or in marketing because it leads to confusion.
The Oxford Dictionary defines meat as “the flesh of an animal, typically a mammal or bird, as food”; bacon as “cured meat from the back or sides of a pig”; and chicken as “a domestic fowl kept for its eggs or meat”. Plants are not mentioned is any definition.
The Senate Standing Committee on Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport is inquiring into the definitions of meat and other animal products to examine whether meat branding has been impaired by “the appropriation of product labelling by manufactured plant-based or synthetic protein brands” and the social and economic impacts on businesses, livestock producers and individuals in rural, regional and remote Australia, as well as other implications.
Greenham Tasmania produces premium meat products, including Cape Grim Beef, Bass Strait Beef and Robbins Island wagyu. HW Greenham & Sons’ submission to the standing committee said consumers had reported being confused by non-meat products and that “labelling these products with meat descriptors could further cause confusion around nutrition, especially for those with poor food and nutrition knowledge”.
The Tasmanian Farmers and Graziers Association pointed out “there should be no need for plant-based meat free products to piggyback off the meat industry, especially when ‘meat free’ is at the absolute core of their product proposition”.
The TFGA dairy council pointed to members’ concern about manufactured plantbased substitutes like “soy milk” and “meat-free bacon”. Using the milk example, the council’s submission explained “milk can only be labelled as milk while it fits within the nutritional profile of milk … If the parameters are even slightly changed during processing … the product cannot be labelled as milk, as it falls outside the specifications of the natural product”.
As these Tasmanian submissions show, this issue comes down to our choice, and consumers do not choose confusion. A healthy diet contains a variety of foods. Each of us should be able to choose which foods we consume based on our personal preferences, health requirements and beliefs, without that choice involving confusion.
Pollinate surveyed 1000 Australian consumers in July for its Attitudes to PlantBased Meat research report. The research agency’s report found 61 per cent of those surveyed “mistook at least one plant-based meat product as containing animal meat”. Additionally, half “find packaging for the products tested in the survey to be confusing”, citing “animal imagery”, “small or hard to read font for ‘plantbased’ references” and “use of meat descriptors” as the big causes of this confusion.
Another source of confusion was where plantbased products were positioned by supermarket chains, in store and online. Almost half of respondents had a hard time figuring out whether a product was made from plant or animal when looking at products in store.
Categorisation of plantbased meat alternatives confused 42 per cent of online shoppers. Pollinate reported strong community support for clearer packaging for plant-based meat.
A former managing director of Queensland butchery chain Super Butcher, committee chair Senator Susan McDonald knows the consumer market when it comes to meat. She says consumers need a clear definition for what they are buying, or being served in cafes and restaurants, so they can make an informed decision. And I agree.
Tasmania is home to beef, lamb, chicken, fish, fruit, vegetable, dairy, nut and pulse producers. This state’s agriculture is one of our key contributors. We’re known for high-quality produce. I’m sure those responsible for Tasmanian meat and plant products want them celebrated for being fresh and flavoursome, not being so cleverly marketed that consumers do not know what they are eating.