Transparency on the value chain is the key to reviving the fortunes of the agribusiness supply chain. The recently adopted EU Unfair Trade Practices (UTPs) Directive and the ongoing work of a dedicated European task force are moving in this direction.
Survival and sustainable development of our supply chains depend on the recognition of fair remuneration for all its players. The flourishing of private initiatives, such as ‘
Chain for Food
‘
e ‘
Who is the master? The consumer’s brand‘.
Safeguarding the European food supply chain, the UTPs directive
La
unfair trade practices directive
(UTPs,
Unfair Trading Practices
) was voted by the Strasbourg Assembly on 12.3.19. Following negotiations that-thanks to the determination of Hon. Paolo De Castro, its rapporteur in the European Parliament-have strengthened the protection of farmers and processors with far more effective measures than those assumed by the Commission in its original proposal 12.4.18.
Safeguarding the supply chain European agribusiness is therefore promoted, first and foremost, with the cogent measures provided by the UTPs directive. For the specific purpose of rebalancing the contractual imbalance, hitherto believed to be irreconcilable, between suppliers of agricultural commodities (including for uses other than ‘food & feed‘) and their buyers. With special attention to the abuses still being put in place and unpunished, not only by large-scale retail but also by global ecommerce giants. But it is not enough.
Transparency in the agribusiness supply chain, the requirements
ConsumAtors
have begun to understand
the need to safeguard production in the territories, for two essential needs:
– food safety and quality of foods, which, as Hippocrates always teaches us, are man’s first medicine. In the face of the recurrence of international crises and scandals ritually originating in countries (ex. USA
and Canada, Brazil
) where regulatory and control systems are completely incomparable to ours,
– economic survival of rural areas, productive districts and countries where food production still represents one of the primary sources of wealth and employment, both of which are in decline. As well as protection of ecosystems through sustainable agricultural practices.. The only ones that can mitigate ongoing climate change
, reduce waste
and protect biodiversity
.
Transparency in the supply chain, origin on the label
The indication of origin of products and the origin of their raw materials is essential to enable consumers to make informed purchasing choices (#IoVotocolPortfolio). Italian decrees requiring the location of the establishment as well as the origin of various ingredients (wheat and semolina in pasta, paddy rice in rice, milk in dairy products, tomatoes in related preserves) to be indicated on the label are worth waste paper. Because Paolo Gentiloni, Maurizio Martina and Carlo Calenda deliberately omitted prior notification of the relevant schemes, as prescribed in Europe since way back in 1983.
Serious work must be done:
– in Italy, to introduce mandatory indication of origin and/or provenance of food sold in bulk or pre-wrapped, as well as food served by communities. Such standards can be issued in compliance with EU rules, as they affect the only area not harmonized by the ‘Food Information Regulation‘. (1)
#OriginalCarnialRestaurant
e #Spremutaitalianalibera
are our first proposals, of no cost to the treasury and the supply chain, but sure benefits to Italian farmers and citrus growers,
– at the EU level
, the regulation needs to be enacted as soon as possible
#EatORIGINal! Unmask your food!. (2) This is precisely what the people of Europe are calling for, who have in fact proposed a popular initiative already registered on 19.9.18. The level of detail of information will need to be high, at least on a national scale. To avoid the repetition of ridiculous generalizations, such as those provided in the regulation ‘
Origin Planet Earth
‘
. (3)
Our productions
cannot sustain the price battle with commodities derived from the globalization of exploitation
of ecosystems and workers
. Higher production costs associated with meeting evolved rules are no longer absorbed by EU aid, due to the gradual dismantling of the CAP (Common Agricultural Policy). And the toxic treaties of the Juncker era exacerbate the situation by eliminating guarantees and duties.
Transparency in the value chain, the
task force
European
The ‘Agricultural Market Task Force‘ was established in 2016 to analyze the agribusiness market and suggest strategies for its strengthening.
Transparency on the value chain is in fact one of the crucial issues to be addressed, loudly urged by representatives of the social partners concerned (with the exclusion of the international retail giants) during consultations on the UTPs directive.
‘
Improving market outcomes
, enhancing the position of farmers in the supply chain
‘ is the Working Group’s first report, dated 14.11.16. Curiously preceded by a biblical quotation of which only the final part is taken, ‘the country’s interest in everything is a king who takes care of the fields.‘ Leaving out theincipit, even more in keeping with the scenario under consideration and the possible role of the European Executive, ‘If you see in the province the poor oppressed and right and justice trampled upon, do not be surprised at this, for over one authority watches another higher and over them another still higher‘. (4)
Transparency is described as ‘the availability of relevant market information (e.g., concerning prices, weather, production, trade, consumption and stocks) for all market participants.’ And it represents a goal to be pursued, since the full scenario is today available only to some players. Correcting this asymmetry of information is therefore essential to rebalancing the powers among the various actors in the supply chain and encouraging the enhancement of local and sustainable production. As well as enabling the monitoring of price lists and thus mitigating the risks of price cartels, cartels and other anti-competitive practices.
Volatility and information asymmetry have negative repercussions on the first links in the supply chain (agriculture and processing), the real ‘shock absorbers’ of fluctuations in commodity costs. Remaining almost unchanged, however, are the margins of the many intermediaries (up to 10, from field to shelf) and the distributors themselves. Consumers in turn and for the same reasons hardly benefit from price reductions, when even upstream costs in the supply chain fall.
Supply chain transparency in Europe, latest news
In February 2018, a conference organized by the European Commission allowed representatives of the social partners concerned(stakeholders) to update their respective positions:
– to agriculture it is essential to know the costs and prices of products along the entire supply chain. With the support of a European observatory in the manner of the ‘
Observatoire de la formation des prix et des marges’
, established in France by the ministries of economy and agriculture, (5)
– to the transformation, there is also a need for a European system that organizes and coordinates the collection of data, in part to reduce the costs of monitoring and analysis that actually hinder access by microenterprises and SMEs,
– distribution in turn shares the needs expressed by the production chain. Indeed, exact cognition of the overall scenario of all supply chains can help reduce asymmetries in the remuneration of the various branches.
Therefore, the Commission proposed to strengthen theInformation System for Agricultural Market Management and Monitoring (ISAMM), established in 2005 as part of the CAP simplification process.
The strengthening of sentiment toward the agribusiness market will be evident.
Bucking the trend is theJoint Research Centre (J RC ), which also reports to the Commission. Transparency along the supply chain. ‘Scientists’ in the service of Brussels fear the risk of cartels and anti-competitive agreements (what instead occurs in the case of asymmetries, according to authoritative doctrines that have escaped them). They are also concerned about one aspect-the cost of the information to national and EU public budgets-that is completely outside their remit.
There is an enormous need for transparency. As much about markets and value chains as about the actions and loyalty to public interests of Brussels bureaucrats. (6)
#Égalité!
Dario Dongo and Marina De Nobili
Notes
(1) See reg. EU 1169/11, Article 44
(2) The value of mandatory information on the location of the establishment, which is crucial to distinguishing true ‘
Made in
‘ versus its implied counterfeits (e.g. ‘
Italian sounding
‘). See the article https://www.greatitalianfoodtrade.it/idee/sede-dello-stabilimento-in-etichetta-il-must-per-il-made-in-italy
(3) See reg. EU 2018/775. See the analysis on the winners and losers from that obscene measure, in https://www.greatitalianfoodtrade.it/etichette/origine-ingrediente-primario-vincitori-e-vinti
(4) Cf. https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/food-farming-fisheries/farming/documents/amtf-report-improving-markets-outcomes_en.pdf. Quote from Ecclesiastes 5-8
(5) Another example is that of the European Milk Price Observatory, ‘EU Milk Market Observatory‘
(6) Just yesterday we reaffirmed allegations of wrongdoing by officials of the European Commission, DG Grow (see the article
https://www.greatitalianfoodtrade.it/consum-attori/canapa-nei-cosmetici-la-commissione-fa-marcia-indietro-dopo-la-nostra-denuncia
). In this case, it is evident how JRC’s output on the public costs of monitoring
public
in the markets responds to the interest
private
of consulting firms, which are used to resell the same data to thousands of operators. Shame!
Dario Dongo, lawyer and journalist, PhD in international food law, founder of WIISE (FARE - GIFT - Food Times) and Égalité.
Graduated in law in Trento, she follows a master's degree in food law at Roma Tre. She is passionate about food and wine, she is between culture and tradition.
