Brand to make most of NZ’s assets

BEING a foodie, I was intrigued watching Fair

Go’s expose on some New Zealand wine companies. Their gripe was that the wine companies’ brands celebrated their New Zealand source — think Shingle Peak, and White Cliffs — quintessential New Zealand scenes/logos on the label.

A consumer would assume what was inside the bottle was New Zealand wine when in fact the small print on the back of the bottle noted the wine was sourced from Australia.

Is this merely a case of buyer beware and ‘‘check the small print?’’ Maybe yes, legally speaking, but morally speaking, no.

In the food world, consumers rule. Food is different from clothing, where rightly or wrongly, we have got used to the idea that our fashion piece may have been designed here, but it certainly wasn’t made here.

As soon as we put something in our mouths, we have a different expectation of safety and provenance.

In the world of food scandals, a consumer’s desire to know and trust their producers is of increasing importance.

In my mind, food companies pulling out the line ‘‘check the small print’’ doesn’t cut it.

What does it mean to be a New Zealand food producer and exporter? When 1000 Shanghai consumers were interviewed (by Data Driven Marketing Asia), they believed buying food products from New Zealand meant clean, green, safe and trustworthy.

In fact, we were the No 1 country of choice for food products for those consumers. How fragile is their perception?

For some years, Ireland has invested in a branding programme based around quantitative evidence — ‘‘Origin Green’’ — to support its primary industry.

The programme is jointly driven by the private sector, industry and the Irish Government.

According to Aidan Cotter, the past chief executive of Bord Bia, the Irish Food Board, ‘‘we’ve a huge natural asset in the Irish food industry in terms of our climate, soil and farming methods. We know that we are perceived as being among the most sustainable food producers in the world. The purpose of Origin Green is to prove that by measuring it.’’

I have followed Origin Green for some time now and have been impressed by its progress. Under the programme, 90,000 farms have been audited and carbon footprinted, a world first. At manufacturing level, more than 470 food and drink manufacturers, which represent almost 95% of total food and drink exports, have registered to take part.

The New Zealand equivalent to Origin Green is The New Zealand Story, and a branding programme called FernMark. These are great initiatives but without teeth should any companies using them come under the spotlight.

They have few use requirements, other than being a ‘‘reputable’’ New Zealand company. The majority of our farmers and processors are regulated and audited on a common basis. Could we simply make some adjustments to existing quality assurance programmes to put some teeth and meaning behind BrandNZ?

The Heart Foundation Tick is a wonderful example of a meaningful brand standard for consumers locally. The

FernMark is a step in the right direction but it must mean something to consumers to be of value and there must be rigour about who is allowed to use it.

When Ireland came up with Origin Green, ironically, it looked first to New Zealand as a model for quality primary products.

On the provenance branding front, it has overtaken this country, but it’s a big world out there and surely room for two highend provenance brands.

Getting the wine industry on board would be a great start.