Trust has to be earned, and that is not easy. Consumers are confronted with enormous amounts of information every day and are therefore forced to be selective. In the case of food alone, there are a multitude of often complex messages from a wide variety of sources. How can we help consumers to look beyond the trees and see the wood?

The Dutch government and the food industry are working on (communication) projects aimed at putting food issues on the consumer agenda. This is already proving to be a difficult task. Surveys of effectiveness show SIRE spots and TV commercials from the Netherlands Nutrition Centre are not reaching consumers to a sufficient extent, and are having even less of an impact on their dietary habits.

I should reveal here that I am a member of a consumer panel. A few weeks ago I was asked to take part in a group discussion about food and sustainability – a survey on behalf of the government and the food industry. My interest was aroused, not just as a consumer but also professionally.

Together with six other participants we discussed topics associated with food and sustainability: health, safety, the environment, waste, child labour, animal welfare, product labelling, the countryside, legislation, production processes.

A parade of hobbyhorses passed by. ‘Sorting waste? Yes, but when the glass container is emptied, green, white and brown glass are all mixed up together again.’ ‘Free-range eggs? Yes, how do I know that they are? A quality mark is fine and good, but it only indicates that the chickens laid their eggs on sand rather than concrete.’ ‘Where do strawberries come from in winter? No idea, but if they are in the shop I buy them.’ ‘If I see GMO on a label, I don’t buy, because GMO is bad.’ And so on.

What are these statements based on?
Is it not the case that if you want to believe something, you will, and if you don’t want to believe it, you won’t? The media play a contributory role here. News about fowl pest is reported on at length. It is, after all, more spectacular than ‘2 portions of vegetables and 2 portions of fruit’. And apparently we are more receptive to ‘what is bad for us and what is done to us’ than ‘what is good for us and what we can do for ourselves’.

Perhaps government, the food sector and special interest groups in the fields of food and health should reconsider how we can help consumers with information instead of smothering them with it. At present, consumers are overwhelmed with often contradictory information from all directions.

Take cheese, for instance. For years this was one of the elements of a recommended healthy diet, the “pyramid of food”. Now no longer. Why not? Were we given the wrong advice for all these years? How do we know that we are now being given the right advice?

This brings me back to my starting point. Can we achieve demonstrable results by working together as a food chain, especially in the field of communication? Cheese is nor healthy, nor unhealthy. It has nutritional value. A consumer who too frequently eats too much only needs to look in the mirror to see that he might be better off changing his eating habits. The question remains: Do we need to see first before we believe?

Rian Boons
Cosun Corporate Communication

<<< back
>>> more columns