Plant-based meat labelling stoush ramps up

Only 20 (eight per cent) of the 250 plant-based meat products on sale in Australia use a traditional animal meat term in their name, data commissioned by plant-based meat think tank Food Frontier reveals. Its analysis counters claims and research recently made by an animal protein industry alliance. 

Almost 90 per cent (89 per cent, 222 products) use no animal depictions on front-of-pack packaging, seven per cent (17 products) use animal depictions that take up less than 10 per cent of the front-of-pack label, and four per cent (10 products) used depictions on more than 10 per cent on front-of-pack.

Food Frontier found all plant-based products used one or more terms on front-of-pack to indicate they were meat-free, 85 per cent used two or more, and 56 per cent used three or more terms.

Two thirds (165 products) use no animal meat term in the product’s name, 26 per cent use a modified meat term – e.g. ‘beefy’, ‘chicken-less’, and eight per cent use an unmodified (traditional) animal meat term – e.g. beef, chicken.

Of those 20 products, they also have an average of 2.4 terms either in the product name or somewhere else on the front-of-pack label to indicate they are meat free.

Plant-based meat labelling analysis:

Analysis counters meat industry survey

In the survey commissioned by the meat industry alliance, 40 per cent - i.e. two - of the five plant-based products shown to respondents fell into the four percent overall that had an animal depiction on front-of-pack occupying more than 10 per cent – Sunfed Chicken Free Chicken Wild Meaty Chunks and Next! Bacon Style Strips. Both products had three other terms either in its product name or front-of-pack indicating they were meat-free.

A spokesperson for the alliance told Food & Drink Business, the items that were chosen as they were products available at major retailers.

Its research showed respondents five plant-based meat products and one animal meat product for three seconds, asked to choose which category they belonged to (plant based, mix of plant and animal, animal) and then asked a series of questions.

From survey responses to the five products, the group said an average of 25 per cent misattributed a plant-based product to having some or only animal meat. 

Food Frontier CEO Thomas King said it was critical to have comprehensive data when there was misinformation being circulated about plant-based meat labelling.

He said the analysis showed none of the products used “Australia” in their brand or product names, countering claims plant-based products were appropriating the Australian meat brand. 

King said: “We strongly support clear food labelling, but this data shows most products use clear and commonsense labelling, with just a very small number using the kind of labelling being called into question – these are not representative of the hundreds of products in the market.

“We agree it’s important for the conversation to be had to ensure clarity for consumers, but the conversation must be based on evidence, not anecdotes or skewed surveys.”

ACCC: plant-based products “unlikely to mislead an ordinary consumer”

The Australian Competition & Consumer Commission (ACCC) told the senate committee it has “from time-to-time” considered the issue of animal product related descriptors used on the labelling of plant-based meats.

In its submission, the ACCC said in the 18 months from January 2020 to June 2021, it received only 11 reports out of around 564,000 total contacts relating to plant-based meat labelling.

“The ACCC has received very few reports about consumers being misled by the labelling used for plant-based substitute products. The few we do receive are reports from consumers and industry stakeholders in sectors that produce meat or dairy products raising concern that plant-based substitute products use animal product related descriptors (e.g. ‘meat’; ‘burger’; ‘milk’), or pictures of animals on their labelling.

“However in general, the information provided by these contacts demonstrated that they had not been misled by the labelling of the products, as they were fully aware of what the relevant product was made of when viewing it for sale,” the ACCC said.

Instead, it found most enquiries were about whether the products were allowed to use animal product related descriptors or animal pictures on their labelling.

In its review of the 11 reports, the ACCC said it considered a court would view the overall impression conveyed by the labelling of these products as unlikely to mislead an ordinary consumer.

Australian Consumer Law (ACL) prohibits businesses from engaging in conduct that is misleading or deceptive or likely to mislead or deceive, or from making a representation that is false or misleading about the quality, quantity, composition, or origin of products, including food products. The ACCC said while its role was the enforce the ACL, only a court can determine if it’s been contravened.

“The ACCC has not received information that demonstrates that the labelling of plant-based substitute products is an issue causing consumer detriment,” it said.

FSANZ: All foods sold in Australia are regulated  

The senate inquiry’s terms of reference also want to examine “The health implications of consuming heavily manufactured protein products which are currently being retailed with red meat descriptors or livestock images, including: consideration of unnatural additives used in the manufacturing process; and consideration of chemicals used in the production of these manufactured protein products.”

In its submission, Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) said all food sold in Australia must comply with state and territory laws, and all foods are regulated in the same way under the Australia and New Zealand Food Standards Code. Those laws “expressly prohibit misleading and deceptive conduct in relation to the advertising, packaging or labelling of food intended for sale,” it said.

“Meat analogue foods are subject to the same Code requirements that apply to all foods for sale in Australia and New Zealand.

“The Code includes standards that regulate the use of ingredients, processing aids, colourings, additives, nutritive substances, vitamins and minerals and novel foods as well as the composition of some foods, such as dairy foods, meat and beverages.

“The Code also covers labelling requirements for packaged and unpackaged food, including the naming of food, nutrition information, the statement of ingredients, allergen declarations and specific mandatory warnings or advisory statements,” FSANZ said.

Regarding the naming and representation of food, including plant-based meat, FSANZ said the name stated on the label must be “sufficient to indicate the true nature of the food unless the Code requires a prescribed name to be used instead”. Currently, there are no prescribed names in the Code for meat analogues.

Submissions close on 16 August.