M Y S AY New Zealand – A SAFE PAIR OF HANDS www.foodtechnology.co.nz 5 The true motivation which drove Jeremy Kerr to threaten the spiking of infant formulae with 1080 last year may never be known. Initially the blackmail was considered to be politically motivated, driven by a demand to stop using 1080. Then, during his trial and despite refuting motivation for financial gain, it became clear that this was a man experiencing severe financial problems who was the owner of a rival pesticide. Regardless of motivation, this was a criminal act designed to cause fear and a political outcome. By targeting infant formulae, Kerr was threatening children and their families, suggesting a serious problem in the security of New Zealand’s food supply chain, and posing a major threat to New Zealand’s trading relationships. Kerr’s blackmail attempt has left New Zealand with a bill for more than $37 million; but had the potential to cause a $7.5 billion reduction in GDP in the 2015 calendar year. A question that remains is, will this criminal act have continued and far reaching impact on the New Zealand brand? My suggestion is that yes, it will – but the impact will be positive, not negative. Whilst many of us think that our overseas trading partners define the New Zealand brand as ‘clean and green’, this is simply too simplistic. For many consumers purchasing New Zealand goods in countries such as China, the attribute they prize the most is safety, especially when the product is food. In China, the quest for food security means that imported products from countries trusted by the consumer attract premium prices - even for everyday items such as wine (a rapidly growing category) and rice. New Zealand is a highly trusted trading partner considered by the majority of consumers to have one of the strongest and most secure food safety systems in the world. This is a major reason for the popularity of New Zealand infant formulae, despite its premium price. New Zealand’s swift response to Kerr’s 1080 threat strengthens consumers’ confidence in the security of our food chains by clearly demonstrating that all threats are taken extremely seriously and actioned immediately. The police were instantly working the case, the Ministry for Primary Industries alerted our overseas markets and industry-related organisations straightaway, and this transparency – coupled with accrued trust in New Zealand – resulted in none of the 80 markets taking such products wanting to cancel orders. New Zealand’s world-class food safety system is predicated on protecting the health and wellbeing of consumers. Many New Zealand consumers take this for granted. But for some of our trading partners, such as China, where 72% of consumers last year reported worrying that the food they eat is harmful to their health because they do not have faith in their food chains, trust in a country’s food security system is very highly valued. In China, food and health products are two categories where most consumers perceive greater quality and hold greater trust in foreign products, and New Zealand products are regarded very highly indeed. So, rather than Kerr’s unconscionable act damaging the ‘New Zealand brand’, particularly for our overseas consumers it has allowed New Zealand to demonstrate its integrity and reinforce that the trust consumers have in the security of New Zealand’s food system is well placed and justified. "Kerr’s blackmail attempt has left New Zealand with a bill for more than $37 million; but had the potential to cause a $7.5 billion reduction in GDP in the 2015 calendar year”. Denise Conroy Dr Denise Conroy is a senior lecturer in marketing, specialising in health and consumer behaviour, at the University of Auckland Business School.
FT-Apr16-vol51-3
To see the actual publication please follow the link above