Power in the food system

1
Power in the food system
Katherine ODoherty Jensen IHE LMC Koj_at_kvl.dk
2
My suppositions

• Those who have power tend to have an interest in
  maintaining the status quo
• An interest in changing existing conditions is
  usually found among those who do not hold power

3
Power in the European food chain
Source J-P Grievink, 2003
4
Given the character of the power structure...

• I take it that
• Supermarket chains have a strong vested interest
  in maintaining the food chain in its present form
  
• Interest in changing existing conditions is
  greatest at both ends of the chain
• - among small primary producers who find it hard
  to get access to the chain as suppliers
• - among consumers/citizens who are dissatisfied
  with the goods supplied to them at present

5
Final suppositions

• 3. That the continued existence of any market is
  always dependent on sales, and in this sense a
  given market is always customer supported
• 4. The claim that the food market today is not
  producer-driven is correct. This does not mean
  that we should assume that the consumer is
  consumer-driven
• 5. That we should distinguish between
• - A mainstream desk-driven market, managed
  by the major supermarket chains (and attentive to
  some demands of their customers), and
• - An alternative parallel market, which is
  consumer-driven and which rests on alliances
  between consumers and small producers

6
I will take a look at

• Results of consumer research indicating
  dissatisfaction with food products and distrust
  of actors in the food chain
• A case study of organic foods, focussing on some
  of the dynamics behind the purchase and sale of
  these products on the parallel market in Denmark
• 3. Some of the barriers to the establishment of
  alliances between actors at each end of the food
  chain
• 4. Possible turning points with regard to changes
  in the character of the food chain in the future

7
How consumers feel about Eating
Shopping

• Among the everyday activities that are widely
  associated with negative feelings, doing the
  shopping is near the bottom of the list
• Shopping is associated with feelings of worry,
  confusion, powerlessness, uncertainty, personal
  deficiency and the need to make compromises

• Mealtimes are widely experienced as being the
  best times of the day
• 96.4 of Danes agree with the statement
• Good meals are an important part of the joys of
  life

SOURCES Csikszentmihalyi 1998 Gershunny
Halpin 1996 ODoherty 2001, 2006 Holm 1996, 1999
8
Consumer distrust

• Among 18 European countries surveyed, Denmark is
  one of the two countries with the lowest level of
  trust in food products (Berg 2000)
• The extent and level of scepticism about food
  products and the food industry among Danes is at
  level that should alarm this industry (Beckmann
  et al. 2002)
• Relatively few Danes trust information given by
  the food industry, farming organisations or
  supermarkets (Holm Halkier 2005 Korzen-Bohr
  ODoherty Jensen 2006)
• Consumers often claim that they cannot obtain the
  products they want and that they have to make do
  with compromise products organic and/or Danish
  products are seen to be the safest choices within
  several food groups (Holm 2003)

9
Consumer demand for organic foods

• Organic foods are purchased significantly more
  frequently by people who live in large cities and
  who have a relatively higher level of education
• Market shares for organic food rise in proportion
  to the percentage of products distributed through
  supermarkets
• More than 90 of Danes buy some organic products
  approximately 14 are heavy users of organic
  food
• Heavy users buy more than half of all organic
  products sold on the Danish market
• Heavy users use direct sales channels more
  often than other consumers they buy three
  quarters of all products sold through direct
  channels i Danmark
• SOURCES ODoherty Jensen et al. 2001 Wier et
  al. 2005

10
Case Why some organic farmers and growers
choose direct sales channels

• Farmers refer to the principles of organic
  production methods (including nearness,
  re-cycling of nutrients and mixed rather than
  specialised production) focussing on the need for
  local food markets
• Production costs make them unable to compete on
  price with farmers who have a specialised
  production
• Supermarkets contract prices are too low
• They are very dissatisfied with the treatment of
  their products during processing and distribution
• They want to meet the people who consume their
  products and who appreciate these products
• SOURCE Odgaard ODoherty Jensen 2003

11
The consumer side No marked differences between
direct and supermarket customers

• Regarding
• Their percption of conventional farmers/farming
• They tend to have a very negative picture...
• Shopping experiences they see as being good and
  bad
• As customers, they are always glad when they have
  the impresion that the seller is proud of his/her
  products and interested in the customers needs,
  while they dislike experiencing that sellers are
  indifferent to their products and customers.
• Stories about good shopping experiences are very
  seldom about experiences that have taken place in
  a supermarket

12
Marked differences between heavy users and
occasional users of organic foods

• Regard
• Choice of shopping venue. Heavy users more
  often shop in specialty stores and through direct
  channels. Some avoid shopping in supermarkets as
  far as possible.
• Conceptions of the products. Heavy users
  sharply distinguish organic products and all
  other products. They place very high demands on
  quality. They want food they consider decent,
  and not (as other customers do) foods that are
  merelya bit better.
• Conceptions of organic farmers. Heavy users are
  more familiar with the principles of organic
  production, and consider that organic farmers are
  in contact with and care about nature and the
  needs of people

13
Barriers on the consumer side

• 1. Ressources
• Time
• Educational level
• (Income is a less important barrier in Western
  markets)
• 2. Distrust of other stakeholders
• 3. Lack of knowledge about
• The relationship between food quality and costs
  of production
• The social and environmental consequences of food
  distribution

SOURCES ODoherty Jensen et. al 2001 Torjusen
et al. 2004 Holm Halkeir 2005
14
Barriers among small producers

• Farmers and growers have no training in the
  grocery trade as such or in marketing more
  generally
• Alternative small producers have little political
  support
• The social distance between them and consumers
  often presents itself as too great a challenge to
  be overcome
• (- Consumers are a foreign population)
• For direct distribution, the costs in time are
  very high

15
Possible turning points

• The rising level of education
• Demographic changes the growing proportion of
  older consumers with relatively many resources
• The political vacuum left by citizens distrust
  in the food system and negative experiences of
  shopping
• Media coverage of problematic production/distribu
  tion
• Increasing public awareness of global conditions
• Some changes in food culture The Belly
  Rebellion, Slow food, the 100-mile diet, Deli
  take-away, etc.
• The rapid growth of parallel markets in
  industrialised countries (immigrant-run
  speciality stores, market stalls, box schemes,
  farmers markets, CSAs, osv.)

16
Possible turning points Scenario 1 for
Supermarket chains

• Lowering costs (and prices) is maintained as the
  main means of competition, leading to
• A stronger competitive basis for the parallel
  market speciality shops and direct sales
  channels
• An increasing polarisation of the market and of
  consumers with many and those with few
  resources, with negative consequences for public
  health

17
Possible turning points Scenario 2 for
Supermarket chains

• Some chains might employ other means of
  competition (including a publically accessible
  policy regarding sourcing and suppliers, food
  quality, assortment, and provision of information
  to customers) that would
• Improve the opportunities on the domestic
  market for small producers to make a living
• Thereby strengthen biodiversity, cuisine,
  public health and food supply, locally and
  nationally
• Maintain those consumers with strong ressources
  within the mainstream system of distribution

18
Possible contributions from researchers and
educational institutions

• The establishment of interdisciplinary food
  studies regarding production, distribution og
  consumption, based on both natural and social
  sciences
• Exploration of similarities and differences
  between all stakeholders in the food chain
  regarding the quality criteria by which food
  groups are assessed
• Research regarding the externalities of global
  distribution of food, including consequences for
  
• biodiversity, landscapes, the environment, food
  safety and security, public health and quality of
  life, rural and urban development, and local,
  national, regional and global inequalities.