One way or another, the industry’s most recognised and trusted farm assurance logo has been tested in recent years – from Sainsbury’s decision to gradually withdraw use of the logo from its own-label packs in 2012, to the need to reinforce the safety of British food during the German E. coli outbreak of 2011, and the unenviable task of restoring consumer confidence in the British food supply chain after the notorious horsemeat scandal of last year.
Assured Food Standards, the organisation that manages the Red Tractor scheme and logo, is currently inviting farmers, growers and the wider food industry to comment on its suite of technical standards to help to ensure that the scheme remains relevant, robust and fit for purpose.
Yet, while the standards undergo a routine health check, a wider question hangs over what the Red Tractor logo really stands for – with differing opinions between the farmers and growers licensed to use it, the retailers that demand it and the consumers looking out for it when they shop.
As we enter a new year, which will no doubt present a fresh set of challenges,FPJtakes a farm-to-fork look at the proposition of the Red Tractor ‘brand’ and asks: is it a mark of Britishness, an assurance of quality, a guarantee of traceability or all of the above?
For growers
Ask any grower what their main motivation is for joining the Red Tractor fresh produce assurance scheme and they’ll most likely tell you it’s to meet the demands of their customers. In fact, membership of Red Tractor Assurance is now widely regarded across all sectors of farming as being the gateway to the market.
Despite this, however, the logo has never been linked to any form of price premium for British produce – the only exception perhaps being the growing awareness of the Red Tractor in the UK’s wholesale markets where, according to traders, assured produce can command a higher price over imported, or non-assured, poorly presented alternatives.
Instead, growers are faced with an ever-ratcheting suite of retailer standards to comply with, in the form of Nurture, Leaf, Field to Fork and so on. The need to comply with multiple audit requirements is a longstanding gripe among growers who would prefer to see much greater harmonisation between Red Tractor Assurance standards and audits and those carried out by the grocery retailers to reduce time, cost and duplication.
Encouragingly, however, there is one area where Red Tractor audits may have a role to play in reducing the regulatory burden on growers by helping them to demonstrate ‘earned recognition’ (a phrase coined by the Macdonald Review, commissioned by the government in 2011, to denote where compliance with farm assurance standards could satisfy a red tape requirement elsewhere). To date though, with the exception of reduced hygiene inspections having been introduced in the dairy sector, progress has been slow and consequently few growers are able to cite concrete examples of how their membership of Red Tractor has yet earned them any brownie points elsewhere.
That said, notwithstanding some frustrations with the mechanics of the scheme, growers are unquestionably proud to be Red Tractor assured. The rigorous standards laid down by the scheme demonstrate the world-class integrity, quality and safety of British fresh produce.
In fact, with such a high level of buy-in among growers to the fundamental principles of the scheme, it begs the question: are growers an untapped resource for marketing the benefits of Red Tractor Assurance more widely? Through their own business communications and consumer interactions, growers can surely help increase the visibility and penetration of a logo that has a limited marketing budget.
For retailers
Sainsbury’s decision in 2012 to phase out its use of the Red Tractor logo on own-label packs was met with condemnation from the outside world – labelled as “disappointing” and “frustrating” by Red Tractor Assurance chief executive David Clarke and lambasted by unhappy shoppers and celebrity chefs alike. But, inside food industry circles it provided a metaphorical kick up the backside to the scheme, and prompted those in charge to ask themselves whether the scheme had sufficiently managed to keep up with the times.
Ask any retailer today what they think about Red Tractor and you’ll get a response that reinforces their commitment to upholding the standards and praises the scheme’s unique ability to provide whole-chain assurances on food safety and traceability. No arguments there.
However, while the Red Tractor may be the first line of defence that retailers get behind to demonstrate their due diligence in the face of any food scare or crises, there is clearly a perception among retailers that Red Tractor standards constitute little more than a regulatory baseline upon which they can stack their own ‘higher’ standards. On the one hand this might suggest that the Red Tractor has failed to keep pace with the demands of consumers, leaving retailers little choice but to ramp up the scheme in their own way. On the other, it may simply be symptomatic of the insatiable desire retailers have to achieve a point of difference in the eyes of consumers.
For consumers
Research commissioned by Red Tractor Assurance in September 2013 revealed that nearly half of UK shoppers (43.3 per cent) are more concerned now with food production standards and its origins than before the Horsegate scandal. Encouragingly, 65 per cent of consumers also recognised the Red Tractor logo – although given that the logo currently appears on over £12 billion worth of British food, it would perhaps be disappointing if this were not the case. Furthermore, what exactly consumers recognised the logo as standing for remains unclear.
Then there’s the matter of provenance. Walk down any supermarket aisle and it’s plain to see that “backing British farming” has never been more in vogue. Retailers are all vying to promote their sourcing credentials – be it with bold Union Jack merchandising in-store or featuring named growers on front of pack; all of which is great news for British produce, but maybe less so for Red Tractor’s proposition as a consumer marketing tool. With the Red Tractor logo often demoted to back of pack and barely visible (at no larger than a five pence piece) it’s clear that retailers’ own marketing strategies are going to be more effective at influencing consumer purchasing.
On top of this, let’s not overlook the growing numbers of consumers purchasing their weekly shop online, where the Red Tractor has a very limited profile and is unlikely to factor heavily, if at all, in people’s buying choices.
There is huge opportunity for Red Tractor to raise its profile and become more prominent if retailers show more willingness to actively promote the logo and its credentials to their customers (as some food processors have done impressively – such as Dairy Crest’s Country Life and McCain’s branding).
For the future
Following Owen Paterson’s remarks at the Oxford Farming Conference in January, urging shoppers to ditch imported products in a bid to get more British food on more British plates, the need for a well-recognised and trusted assurance mark is vital. Overall, it’s clear that the Red Tractor stands out as the most recognised and trusted consumer logo in the market – whether it’s regarded as a mark of Britishness, quality, reliability or safety.
The level of consumer trust and awareness built up in the Red Tractor logo is unrivalled and, although retailers may have developed their own bespoke schemes to sit above Red Tractor, no supermarket has sought to move away from the standards completely.
There will be an ongoing need for the scheme to embrace the issues that matter to consumers, become simpler for its farmer and grower members and to be clear on what the brand stands for, but the Red Tractor – by virtue of its independence and unparalleled rigorous standards – still makes a convincing proposition that the whole supply chain can celebrate and be proud of.
No comments yet