The European Commission has voted in favour of repealing specific marketing standards for 26 types of fruit and vegetables, in a bid to reduce waste and cut down on red tape within the industry.
A set of 10 specific marketing standards will still apply to apples, citrus, kiwifruit, lettuce, peaches and nectarines, pears, strawberries, peppers, table grapes and tomatoes. But the lines to be hit by the change, set to come into force in July, include a wide range of fruit and vegetables, from cauliflower, carrots, asparagus and mushrooms to apricots, plums and watermelon.
European Commission spokeswoman Greta Hopkins maintains that ugly, wonky or misshapen fresh produce will be popular among consumers, especially now that the economic downturn is encouraging thrift. “It is good for producers as they can make more money selling product to supermarkets than they can sending it for processing, and it is good for the consumer as well, for example if they are making soups,” she says. “There will always be a market for the better-looking vegetables, for people who are making a meat-and-two-veg meal, but people will want something for cheaper, as long as the quality is still there.”
Chris Hutchinson, chairman of the New Spitalfields Tenants’ Association, is enthusiastic about the repealed standards. “It is definitely positive,” he says. “It is ridiculous to throw away perfectly good produce when it costs so much to grow and supply, just because it doesn’t quite conform.”
He is confident that the repealed standards will be embraced both by wholesalers and consumers. “It will make a huge difference to wholesalers, who will now be allowed to sell fruit that did not previously meet the standard,” he says. “People who buy on street markets understand good produce much better than a lot of people who buy from supermarkets.”
But supermarket shoppers may also be convinced to buy the misshapen produce if the price is right.
Colin Galbraith, director of Freshworld, says this could appeal to some of the major multiples. “If there is a notable price difference between the good and the ugly then, of course, in certain multiples this will work,” he says. “Consumer attitudes towards environmental issues and waste have probably taken a bit of a back seat at the moment in this time of economic pressure, so if it is cheap but misshapen and good, many will buy it.”
Sainsbury’s is planning to stock misshapen fruit and vegetables as part of its Basics range. A spokesman for the retailer says: “The misshapen fruit and vegetables will be sold at a lower price than that of the more uniform vegetables. There can be no doubt that in the current economic climate, cheaper fruit and vegetables will help millions of families across the UK. If you add this to concerns over food waste, we feel that misshapen fruit and vegetables are a very attractive proposition for shoppers.”
The supermarket chain is convinced there is demand for ugly, yet tasty, lines. “TNS data shows that most vegetables we cook at home are used in a chopped or sliced form in things such as pies, soups, stews and casseroles,” the spokesman continues. “Our shoppers know that even if the produce is not perfect-looking, it will still have as great a taste and nutritional value as ever. The new fruit and vegetables might also encourage shoppers to try a more diverse range of produce than ever before - something that can only be a good thing.”
Martin Evans, chairman of the British Carrot Growers’ Association, agrees that the size and shape of the raw product does not always make it to the dinner plate and therefore there may be a consumer appetite for misshapen vegetables. “Common sense is refreshing,” he says. “Most large carrots are used for batons anyway.”
But fruit and vegetables are no longer as ‘ugly’ as they were before EU standards were introduced. A lot of shape defects, such as fanging in carrots, have been engineered out by mechanical methods.
Evans points out that the industry must make it clear to consumers that standards have not dropped. “Over the last 30 years, customers have grown to expect what a carrot will look and smell like and it is important not to devalue those expectations,” he says. “We still shop with our eyes.”
To protect from lowering consumer expectations, supermarkets will choose to develop new lines to accommodate misshapen produce. “Multiples are not likely to allow quality standards to fall across the board and allow, for example, bendy cucumbers to be on the shelf alongside Class I straight ones - they are more likely to introduce special, low-price ‘credit crunching’ lines as a separate point of sale,” Galbraith explains. “Whether there is any practical change depends on whether the multiples decide to launch these value lines.”
And there are strong practical reasons for adopting such an approach. “If you allow product that at the moment is outside the parameters of the regulations to be placed on the shelves loose alongside good produce, then all that will happen is that the lower-quality product will be left,” says Galbraith. “Wastage levels will increase and no benefit can, or will, be derived through the chain; in fact, it becomes a negative.”
Consumers may be happy to purchase cheaper, ugly vegetables if they are only to be used for chopping, but the popularity of misshapen fruit and vegetables will differ from product to product, Galbraith continues. “Selling an onion with less than perfect skin, which is seen as an ingredient and not a consumable, may be a great deal easier than selling a multi-coloured cauliflower, a misshapen watermelon or cherries that vary in appearance and shape.”
However, even if there is a market for misshapen vegetables, whether the change in the laws will directly benefit growers will depend on the retailers. “So long as the stores are willing to allow margin to the suppliers for the supply of increased value lines, then it will be of value to the industry overall,” Galbraith says. “Hopefully, they will allow the producer, packer or category manager to gain benefit and allow increased margin into all of the chain.”
July 1 is a good time for the repealed standards to come into force, on a practical level, but the impact will depend on the retailers.
“It is a date and time that allows naturally for a break in home-based supply,” says Galbraith. “From the point of view of the grower or packer, he will be already grading material to meet present specs; now it is whether there is an opportunity to send the material to retail.”
But retailers will ultimately control the effect that the repealed standards will have on the industry. “Retailers have much tighter standards,” Evans warns. “Quality is driven by market forces and for every multiple, there is a spec.”
The buying process relies on common-sense negotiations between the buyer and seller. Galbraith claims the problem before the standards were repealed was that “you had both the buyer and seller satisfied with a product delivered, but then were being told by the inspectorate that it was not fit for purpose”.
But this did make specifications simpler and erased confusion, he adds. “When specifications were exchanged between parties, they were often based on the basic EU classification, with adjustments on top for particular requirements,” says Galbraith. “I am pleased that the ‘nannying’ has been reduced, but on the other hand it does mean that clarity on purchase requirements and acceptance levels by customers will have to be far more detailed and explicit.”
Nigel Jenney, chief executive of the Fresh Produce Consortium (FPC), says there may be other implications for the industry. “It is not just the case that the 26 standards have been repealed, but also that general standards will now apply to all produce,” he explains. “The difficulty is that the legislation is due to come into force on the July 1, and there has been no consultation process with the industry as yet. The devil is always in the small print and it actually may lead to an increase in bureaucracy, subject to DEFRA clarification.”
The FPC is pursuing industry consultation over the coming months. “What we want to achieve is an interpretation of the legislation, which is satisfactory to DEFRA and to the industry,” Jenney says.
But he is hopeful that, if interpreted in the right way, the legislation will have a positive impact on the industry. “In principle it is a good thing,” says Jenney. “The FPC welcomes simplification and the opportunity for the industry to market more of its produce.”
If consumer demand for cheaper produce encourages the major retailers to introduce value lines and review their individual specifications, then the repealed standards could be part of a cultural change.
“It is all about consumer choice and there is a case for a common sense campaign,” says Evans. “If people are going back to basics at the moment, it might be a good time to re-educate people.
“We are always looking for innovations. There could be smaller apples for children, or onions used as gravy onions.
“Iceberg lettuce is a standard 450-500g head, which is great for a four-person family, but what about for just two people? The same goes for broccoli.”
It may be unclear how much the change in the standards will affect what produce goes to retail, but if the move is truly embraced by the market, it could open up a number of new opportunities.
No comments yet