Changing rules of food labelling name game

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 30/03/2024 (892 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Knowing where our food comes from was easy back in the days when just about everyone lived on a farm and mostly grew or raised their own.

The food selection at grocery stores today is sourced from a global village. Those who care about where it originated, what it contains or how it was made must rely on labels.

Labelling practices have become so convoluted by the marketing game they risk being meaningless.

Food aisles are loaded with packaging that offers labels that are technically correct, but misleading.

Bought any gluten-free water lately? True, the product contains no gluten, but neither do the unlabelled bottles next to it (unless they’ve been filled from last night’s pasta pot).

It’s a conundrum for governments tasked with coming up with labelling laws that ensure consumers get what they think they are buying.

Nowhere does it get more complicated — or political — than country-of-origin labelling — especially when food processors source ingredients from around the world and when governments are simultaneously looking for creative ways to support domestic producers without running afoul of international fair-trade rules.

The U.S. government scored a home run on that front recently, when it announced updated rules for labelling meat products sold as “Product of USA.”

As of 2026, meat sold under that label must be born, raised and slaughtered in the U.S.

The previous rule allowed the label to be used on products processed in the U.S., which worked out well for Canadian producers supplying animals into the highly integrated North American livestock market.

It’s not unusual for cattle born in the U.S. to be shipped into Canadian feedlots before going south again for processing. Manitoba hog producers annually ship around four million weanlings to feeders in the south.

What makes this new rule so insidious — and infuriating for the Canadian livestock sector — is its voluntary status.

In 2006, the U.S. tried making country-of-origin labelling for meat products mandatory and Canada complained to the World Trade Organization. It took years and millions of dollars in legal fees, but Canada won and the rule was rescinded.

However, in this case, food companies aren’t required to use the label, although one survey found consumers are willing to pay more if they do.

The Canadian government lobbied against the change and expressed its “disappointment” when the updated rule was announced a few weeks ago. Yet, Canada has had similar rules in place since 2009 for how food processors can use the “Product of Canada” and “Made in Canada” labels.

The main difference in those regulations is meat from cattle that come into Canada at least 60 days before slaughter is still eligible to be sold as a “Product of Canada.”

From the consumer’s viewpoint, it’s hard to argue against clarity in labelling.

However, Canada depends more on export markets than most of its biggest trading partners, including the U.S., which is what makes it so vulnerable to these tactics in the commodity trading business.

Uncertainty in the supply chain as processors consider their next moves equates with more risk, which tends to either reduce demand or the price they are willing to pay for animals that have spent part of their lives somewhere else.

Segregated marketing streams also come at a cost, but they are an option the Canadian sector might consider.

There are examples, such as in the wheat industry, where Canadian-origin grains are considered a premium ingredient because of processing quality and consistency.

Barley-fed Canadian pork, although increasingly rare because of the availability of lower-priced corn, is still considered to have superior eating quality in some Asian markets.

Canadian beef boasts a much lower greenhouse gas emissions profile than the global average — a characteristic that is gaining traction as consumers look for “greener” food options.

There’s no question developing these types of Canadian-branded marketing and supply chains takes time and significant investment. However, a strategy of standing out rather than fighting to blend in may be the industry’s best defence over time.

Laura Rance is executive editor, production content lead for Glacier FarmMedia. She can be reached at lrance@farmmedia.com.