After the Nutri-score and the Planet-score, it’s the turn of Origin’info. This approach, supported by Bercy, in the wake of Olivia Grégoire, is one of the elements of the government response to the agricultural crisis: it aims to promote greater transparency on the origin of the main ingredients contained in the recipes of food manufacturers. the agri-food industry. See you “this summer” on the shelves to see this new logo flourish.
Reign of opacity
At the end of March, Que Choisir published a study criticizing the lack of transparency of the latter: The association scrutinized 243 “processed foods from major brands, commonly found on the shelves”. Assessment? “For 69% of the ingredients we examined, opacity reigns on their origin: 47% of them have no origin mentioned and 22% a purely generic origin with vague mentions such as “EU origin” or “ non-EU.”
This is what the new origin logo pushed by the government could look like.
The gradual deployment of the Origin’info logo, whose final form could still evolve, meets this need. The government estimates that 10,000 references could be hired by the end of the year. According to Bercy’s count, 67 brands have already joined the process, as well as 13 distribution brands. If Olivia Grégoire’s office indicates that it does not yet have data on the relationship between national brands and private label brands (MDD), it is the latter which could mainly push this new logo.
Same success as Nutriscore?
It remains to be seen what response this voluntary initiative will find. There is certainly the precedent of the Nutri-score. Launched in 2017, adopted voluntarily again by manufacturers, it now covers 69% of food references. Its impact on revenues is welcomed, as is its effect on sales for the highest rated products (A or B) on which manufacturers display it more readily. What will happen to the indication of origin? Unlike Nutriscore which involves the entire brand in the event of adoption, Origin’info could be confined to a category or a range, specifies Olivia Grégoire’s office.
In addition to the fact that it will be necessary to find space on the packaging to accommodate the new logo, we can wonder to what extent manufacturers will be ready to switch to French production, deemed more expensive, in a context of price war. The readability of this new logo remains to be demonstrated, particularly in the case of multiple origins: in this case, “the mention of countries of origin or geographical areas is made in alphabetical order with the mention”, specifies the government charter.
Reluctance of (very) big brands?
The attitude of the largest industrialists, and particularly multinationals, will be worth watching. If Nutriscore was able to convince Nestlé, other leading players such as Mondelez, Lactalis or Barilla remain absent. A spokesperson for a multinational also tells us that the Origin’info approach is easier to implement for minimally processed products and that the lack of harmonization on the subject at European level, while its factories produce for different markets, make it reluctant to move. In matters of origin, as with everything else, an iron law should prevail: he who says the least is the lowest bidder.
