Cost counts for more than sustainability when it comes to purchasing fish, according to recent research, and taste is also a bigger influence in purchasing decisions, reports Andrew Martin.
This will be of no surprise, particularly the price aspect during these hard economic times.
However so-called environmental groups are working flat out to persuade retailers and caterers that they must only sell what they class as sustainably sourced fish and shellfish because this is what their customers will demand.
Two World Wildlife Foundation (WWF) spin-off organizations, the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) and the Aquaculture Stewardship Council (ASC), are particularly active in this regard. They even have their own logos which can be stuck on supermarket packs and say that customers will be looking out for them.
Supermarkets in particular seem to have been persuaded by these and other non-government organisations (NGOs) and have instructed their suppliers that this is what they want. These instructions are then passed right down the supply chain until fishermen or fish farmers have to put their hands in their pockets and pay perhaps thousands of dollars to have their operations certified.
Ignored
But do customers actually require an MSC or ASC logo on a pack? The research, carried out by Stormline of New Zealand, also showed that two thirds of people who eat fish at least twice a month don’t bother to read the label. So any message as to where the fish has come from or how it has been caught is ignored.
By the same token would they bother to look for an MSC or ASC logo and would they know what it meant if they did see one?
The Stormline survey also pointed out that 91% of those who did read the label on seafood packs said they found the information confusing and didn’t explain much about sustainability, origin or environmental impact.
This research reinforces the findings of a survey into ethical food in the UK by Mintel which were reported in the Daily Telegraph. The survey of 15,000 shoppers found that about half did not care where their food came from.
So much for ethical concerns, although no doubt if people were asked whether they wanted to buy ethical food, they would all say that they did. However, consumers do not want to pay more for ethical food and resent having to do so although they do expect higher prices.
“Cost remains a key barrier for many buying into ethical food and drink products,” said Richard Ford, a senior food analyst at Mintel. “They expect to be informed and reassured over why they’re paying extra and where the money is going.”
In a similar vein would customers willingly pay more for sustainably sourced seafood?
According to Professor Cathy Roheim of the University of Idaho, UK consumers are already paying premiums of up to 10-15% for MSC certified seafood, although this claim is refuted. Martin Jaffa of Callander McDowell said his company can find no evidence that UK consumers will pay more for sustainably certified seafood.
However, he agrees with Professor Roheim that many consumers have no idea what the term sustainability means so it cannot influence what they buy.
