Globally, consumers are eating less fish and seafood and replacing these foods (and also red meats) with more poultry, fruit and vegetable products, according to the findings of a new industry survey spanning 14 key markets across America, Asia and Europe.
Conducted by market research agency The Conversation Studio on behalf of farmed seafood certifier the Aquaculture Stewardship Council (ASC), the bi-annual consumer survey determined that in the past year, on average, fish and seafood is being eaten 8% less, and red meat 16% less. Meanwhile, poultry consumption is up 7%, with fruit and vegetable eating rising 15% and 22%, respectively.
Sharing the analysis in the recent ASC Webinar: Seafood through a consumer lens, Joshua Siegel, Quantitative Insights Manager at The Conversation Studio, said the assumption is that higher priced categories like seafood have been negatively influenced by price inflation.
Compiled from the responses of some 15,000 consumers, the data also determined that seafood consumption is declining in almost all markets, with the biggest year-on-year decrease – 29% – found to be in France. The only upturns identified in the survey were in Denmark (2%) and the United States (9%).
Among the reasons given for the overall shift in eating behaviour, almost 50% said they changed their habits because of rising food prices. Health reasons were a distant second at 22%, followed by the desire to eat less meat generally (10%).
Siegel highlighted that only 2% of those surveyed said they wanted to make more sustainable food choices.
Despite the global downturn, the analysis learned that all markets felt that it’s important to include seafood in food shopping, said ASC’s Senior Director Markets and Communications Willem de Bruijn. Specifically, Spain had the highest percentage of consumers (92%) who thought this, while the Netherlands and Japan had the lowest percentage (81% each).
Moreover, less than 10% of all respondents in all countries said they saw seafood as “not important”.
The main reasons given for including seafood in food shopping were that those surveyed said they enjoyed eating it (26%), that they liked the taste (23%), and that they felt it was good for their health (22%).
Without prompting, and echoing the insights gained from retail food purchases in general, some 36% of those surveyed said price was the main consideration when shopping for seafood.
Explaining this response, de Bruijn said: “This research was done at the end of last year, [after] one-and-a-half years of high inflation levels in many countries. Purchasing power had decreased.”
He also pointed out that again, sustainability was only spontaneously mentioned by 2% of consumers as a contemplation when shopping for seafood.
When prompted with a list of purchasing considerations, the surveyed consumers again made price one of the three main drivers (54%), together with freshness (44%) and quality (38%).
Some 11% stated that sustainability was a top three relevant consideration (when prompted), with markets in northwestern Europe – such as the Netherlands, Germany, UK, Sweden and Denmark – particularly endorsing it as factor in seafood shopping.
“This is in line with other research that show in these markets, sustainability is a longer-term important topic in groceries and also seafood,” de Bruijn said. He also confirmed the importance of sustainability falls slightly in southern European markets like France, Spain and Italy and also in the North American markets of US and Canada. It then drops to very low single-digit levels in Asia.
Product preferences
ASC also found that across all countries surveyed, only 33% of people claimed to know the difference between wild-caught and farmed fish, with the highest knowledge rates found in the US, Italy and France. Moreover, when given the choice between the two production methods, 43% said they had no strong preference, while of the 44% of consumers who said they prefer to eat wild-caught over farmed seafood, 37% said they would still eat farmed products.
Unprompted, consumers said their overriding perception of wild-caught seafood is that it provides greater health benefits and also tastes better. The survey also found they associate it with less pollution and being fresher. On the negative side, they link wild-caught seafood to higher prices and overfishing.
For farmed seafood, and again unprompted, lower price was the most frequently mentioned positive consequence, while on the negative side perceptions like lower quality, antibiotics and chemicals, and pollution were all suggested by those surveyed.
On average, between 10 and 25% of consumers associate environmental, social and health risks with farmed seafood. By market, Asian consumers were found to see the lowest risks, while the French perceived the risks to be highest.
Returning to the topic of sustainability, de Bruijn said that in grocery in general, 67% of those surveyed globally claimed to purchase products that are less harmful to society and the environment, and also that 58% of consumers expressed interest in buying foods that contain sustainability claims on the label.
By country, Italy had the highest percentage of consumers who hold sustainability beliefs (82%), while Japan had the lowest (48%). Also, the interest in buying sustainability-labelled products was highest in Italy (73%), Sweden (67%) and Germany (65%).
With regards to seafood-specific sustainability statements, it was found that between 25 and 50% globally think the seafood industry is sustainable and responsible, and this belief is highest in North America, Asia and Australia, and lowest in Northwest Europe.
It was also ascertained that globally, 38% of consumers claim to look and ask for sustainably-sourced seafood when shopping. The survey further found that people are more interested in seafood that addresses environmental issues (33%) than social ones (22%).
While it’s identified that around two-thirds of people are interested in buying sustainable products, ASC also learned that just 2% of consumers think about sustainability when buying fish or seafood at the supermarket.
“People are interested in behaving sustainably but on the shop floor they forget,” de Bruijn said. “We need to give them easy reminders about their intentions [in store].”
Trusted sources
When it comes to purchasing sustainable seafood, the analysis found consumers across the 14 surveyed countries trusted independent certification schemes the most (21%), followed by environmental charities like WWF and Greenpeace (12%) and documentaries (11%). Supermarkets and seafood brands scored lower at 9%.
Among consumers, the highest awareness of certification logos was found to be in the Netherlands and Germany, while the lowest awareness was in Southern and Eastern Europe and Japan. Indeed, in Japan, only 19% of consumers are aware of logos and 7% find them to be unimportant.
The general perception of these logos is that they indicate higher-quality seafood, greater trustworthiness and safety and security. While few consumers stated negative aspects, some said they associate the logos with higher prices.
Of all the farmed seafood certification logos shown, ASC was the most recalled or remembered across the 14 countries surveyed. Siegel advised that in the survey this logo was most associated with sustainability, responsibility, quality and health comped with the others.
Asked by WF what ASC intends to do with the survey’s findings, de Bruijn said the expectation is the insights will drive the organisation’s strategy “in order to have the most positive impact in the world of seafood as we can”.
He said: “We think it’s super-important to understand all of our audiences – from the farmers, through the processors, retailers and brands and all the way to the consumers – what insights they have, how they look at food and sustainable seafood, and how they look at the ASC. Because in the end, market demand is pulling a lot of sustainable behaviour right at the origin – the farms. So, the more consumers are asking for sustainable products, the more farming becomes sustainable for those consumers.”
