Amid all the doom and gloom surrounding the food and beverage industry, there are at least a few bright spots emerging on the horizon.
The decision by Coca-Cola at al to remove fizzy drinks from US schools deserves applause for two reasons. There is a proven link between obesity in children – 17% of whom are defined as obese in the US – and the growth in consumption of ‘junk’ food. Second, the voluntary agreement is arguably more effective than clumsy state or federal regulation. And as Briefing goes to press, Disney announces that it will not renew its Happy Meals partnership with McDonald’s.
These initiatives won’t cure obesity overnight – there is a strong case for further voluntary action: for instance McDonald’s recently put nutritional information on its burger wrappers and milkshakes and has withdrawn its Supersize offerings from its revamped menus. There is also an equally strong argument for consumers to look after themselves by exercising more, or at least for business and governments to promote and support healthier lifestyles.
Advertising has a big part to play too. “This is an industry that feeds, and feeds off, the young,” wrote Eric Schlosser in his much-publicised Fast Food Nation. Sensationalistic or not, the book is a very public indictment of an industry that hasn’t got to grips with its responsibilities.
There are real opportunities for food companies and their CSR managers (and advertising agencies too!) to lead. As Ofcom seeks consultation on its latest proposals for the regulation of food and drink advertising it clearly invites a broad range of stakeholders to “propose a workable and effective options” by June 6.
According to campaign group Sustain, food industry representatives met Ofcom a total of 29 times between May 2005 and March 2006, no doubt to seek to ensure any new rules are workable from its own perspective. In the same period, the media regulator met with health and food groups only four times. It’s probably worth asking how many times have food companies met with health groups to improve their own understanding?
While both the EIRIS and City University studies warrant attention, it is worrying that they only used publicly available information, which tells us how companies report these issues, not what they are actually doing. Some companies are doing a lot of work behind the scenes – whether not they should be reporting this is altogether another question. But in the end, as Ed Mayo points out in his guest editorial, companies need to fully embrace the consumer in their CSR strategies to become truly sustainable.
Consumer news roundup April/May
Slow on the uptake
The world’s 25 biggest food companies are failing to manage diet and health issues in a systematic way, suggests a report from London’s City University, published on April 4. Researchers based their analysis on information published in the annual reports, accounts and websites of the top 10 food manufacturers, top 10 food retailers and top five food service companies, rating the companies on how they were addressing the World Health Organisation’s health agenda. The Food Industry: Diet, Physical Activity and Health reveals that just six companies have a policy specifically on children – and less than half (10) have staff health programmes. Ten address the issue of salt content in their products and only Kraft and McDonald’s report on portion size. Only 11 companies have made public their positions on product labelling.
The survey indicates that fast food companies and food manufacturers – who have recently faced pressure from consumer groups and campaigners for selling foods high in fat, salt and sugar – are more likely to have policies and commitments on health issues than retailers. Three-fifths of manufacturers and four-fifths of foodservice had a policy commitment to healthier food ranges, as compared with only one in ten retailers. Researchers singled out Unilever for anticipating trends in health rather than reacting defensively to criticism.
Tim Lang, professor of food policy at City and researcher on the study, cautioned: “This suggests that the best way to get companies to take health seriously is to have critics outside giving them a hard time…the danger is that health criticism is focused only on certain high profile companies and not across entire sectors, which is what is needed”. Contact Cathy Spence, City University 020 7040 0219 www.city.ac.uk
A growing problem
A growing demand from socially responsible investors for food and beverage producers to
manage better the business risks posed by the increasing incidence of obesity is highlighted by a new report from Ethical Investment Research Services. Obesity concerns in the food and beverage industry, published on February 23, analyses the response of five companies to the issue – Cadbury Schweppes, Coca-Cola, Kraft, McDonald’s, PepsiCo and Unilever. EIRIS identified three main non-financial risks for the industry:
– changes in the regulatory environment (including rules on advertising to children and food labelling)
– litigation
– brand risk and consumer resistance.
The findings of the report indicate that while companies are beginning to address the challenges presented, they are neither doing enough nor taking a sufficiently systematic approach to manage the issue across their businesses. For example, while McDonald’s and Unilever are the only companies of the six analysed to explicitly acknowledge their role in addressing childhood obesity, the two emerge as industry “laggards” when it comes to having systems in place to manage social, environmental and ethical risks in relation to obesity. Contact Scott McAusland, EIRIS 020 7840 5703 www.eiris.org
Compromising position
Health campaigners have accused the government of putting industry interests before those of consumers, following the publication of options for regulating television advertising of food and drink products for children by Ofcom.
The proposals, published for consultation on March 28, are part of broader efforts by government to promote healthy eating and reduce childhood obesity. Health and consumer groups are unhappy that Ofcom’s options exclude their preferred solution of banning the advertising of foods high in fat, sugar and salt before 9pm. But Ofcom says that it has based its proposals on an assessment of recent academic research and its own market impact analysis. The options it sets out are:
timing restrictions on specific food and drink products
timing restrictions on all food and drink advertising
volume based restrictions on all food and drink products
It has also extended an invitation to stakeholders to “propose a workable and effective option” but says that it will only consider proposals “which both command broad support across broadcasters, advertisers, retailers and manufacturers” and demonstrate “a realistic prospect of contributing positively and significantly” to the social policy aim of altering children’s preferences towards – and actual consumption of – products high in fat, sugar and salt. The consultation closes on June 6. Contact Ofcom 020 7981 3033 www.ofcom.org.uk
MEND over matter J Sainsbury announced on March 14 that is continuing a partnership with MEND, a UK-based obesity prevention and treatment programme, as part of the company’s efforts to address health issues through partnerships and its community investment programme. Sainsbury sponsored the research behind an initial pilot of Mind, Exercise, Nutrition and Diet, a programme for overweight and obese children aged between 7-12 and their families in 2002.
Support from the company will help extend the reach of the programme, which also includes visits to its supermarkets where children and their families can test their knowledge about healthy eating.
Meanwhile J Sainsbury has been awarded the title of London’s healthiest large employer by the BBC as part of its Big Challenge Health Works initiative. Sainsbury was commended for its health programmes, which include training sessions for employees exploring the basics of health and nutrition as well as cookery, given by in-store food advisors. The supermarket has also published a booklet for employees with simple tips for healthy living. Contact Pip Wood, J Sainsbury 020 7695 6127 www.sainsbury.co.uk
Emergency measures
Senators from the Republican and Democrat parties are cooperating with each other to tackle the problem of childhood obesity in the US. They have joined forces to put forward the country’s first ever bipartisan bill, which aims to improve nutritional standards in schools and stop the sale of unhealthy snacks and drinks from vending machines in schools.
The Child Nutrition Promotion and School Lunch Protection Act would update 30-year-old regulations, which do not address levels of calories, saturated fat or added sugars present in food. It would also extend the jurisdiction of the agriculture secretary over the application of such standards to the entire school campus, not just cafeterias.
Meanwhile, the world’s three largest soft drinks companies, Coca-Cola, PepsiCo and Cadbury Schweppes agreed on May 4 to ban most fizzy drink sales in US public schools and distribute only lower-calorie and nutritious beverages in an effort to tackle soaring rates of childhood obesity. The voluntary guidelines adopted by the three drinks firms and the American Beverage Association limit beverages to 100 calories, except for certain milks and juices, according to the Alliance for a Healthier Generation. The agreement will cover almost 90% of American schools and some 35 million children. It goes much further than the industry’s initial proposals, last year, that full-fat fizzy drinks be capped at 50% of vending machine products. Contact Allison Dobson, Office of Senator Tom Harkin 00 1 202 224 3254 harkin.senate.gov; American Beverage Association 00 1 202 463 6732 www.ameribev.org
Salt out
The Food Standards Agency announced a new set of voluntary salt reduction targets for food manufacturers and retailers for a range of processed foods on March 21. The Agency says the targets have been set at “challenging levels that will have a real impact on consumers’ intakes, while also taking into account food safety and technical issues”. While UK food industry has welcomed the targets as “more realistic than the 2005 proposals”, health campaigners say more stringent measures are needed. Contact Food Standards Agency 020 7276 8829 www.food.gov.uk
COMMENTS