SUBSCRIBE

Breaking News on Food & Beverage Development - North AmericaEU edition | APAC edition

News > Manufacturers

Read more breaking news

 

 

How far do consumers want Non-GMO claims to go in the dairy case? Right back to the farm, says Dannon

1 comment

By Elaine Watson+

27-Jul-2017
Last updated on 01-Aug-2017 at 00:51 GMT2017-08-01T00:51:24Z

Will the extra cost of sourcing milk from cows fed non-GMO feed be offset by increased sales?
Will the extra cost of sourcing milk from cows fed non-GMO feed be offset by increased sales?

How deep into the supply chain do consumers expect food manufacturers to delve when it comes to label claims about genetic engineering (or its absence), and do they realize that not all non-GMO claims mean the same thing?

In the yogurt aisles, for example, Chobani is making non-GMO claims based on the fact that its yogurts do not contain ingredients derived from GE crops, and feature claims such as ‘only natural, non GMO ingredients.'

Dannon, in turn, is going one step further for some of its brands, by adhering to the stricter standards of the Non-GMO Project verified standard, under which dairy products bearing its logo must also source milk from cows fed non-GM feed. 

But do busy shoppers know or care about the difference between these two non-GMO claims, and if not, will Dannon be able to deliver a return on the significant investment it is making into milk sourcing (a key component of its April 2016 pledge  on clean labels, sustainability and animal welfare)?

We’re providing a new type of offering in the marketplace that’s never been available before

While it's far too early to tell right now – Dannon is only just starting to roll out its first Non-GMO Project verified Dannon-branded products, and will follow up with Oikos and Danimals branded products in 2018 – senior director, external communications Michael Neuwirth is confident the move will pay off.

“We expect the growth we will experience will help offset any cost increases we have incurred... We’re providing a new type of offering in the marketplace that’s never been available before: a non-organic product in the marketplace from a leading brand that is Non GMO Project verified,” he told FoodNavigator-USA.

“Clearly this is a groundbreaking initiative that others may choose to follow if they are able to develop and enjoy as productive relationships with dairy farmers as we have. We’re the first non-organic yogurt company to provide this because of our unique partnerships with farmers that other yogurt makers don’t have.

“We’ve been working directly with dairy farmer partners for well over five years… and it’s enabled us to have an impact on the practices on farms.  There’s been an opportunity to source some non-GMO feed on the open market, but we’ve also worked with feed partners and our dairy farmer partners who are in some cases producing their own feed. Because of their commitment and ingenuity, they have found this [meeting Dannon’s pledge] less challenging than they originally thought.”

Although Dannon doesn’t know for a fact that shoppers know or care that non-GMO claims on products from the top two players in the yogurt aisle are underpinned by different standards, “a growing number of consumers are [specifically] looking for the Non GMO Project label,” claimed Vincent Crasnier, Dannon Pledge Program Lead.

“There is a need for us as a brand to educate consumers on why going all the way to the feed is important.”

As part of Dannon’s April 2016 pledge , animal welfare practices at its farmer partners’ operations must adhere to the standards laid out in the Validus Certification  system.

It is also working with its farmer partners to improve soil health and water quality, and reduce carbon emissions, said senior director, external communications, Michael Neuwirth: “It’s something that we’re really proud of… there’s training for workers, which is a huge part of it. There’s space parameters for animals to ensure comfort, there are provisions for things like de-horning to be done in the most careful and painless ways.”  

Is there a consumer benefit?

While he could not point to any nutritional, environmental or other consumer benefit to sourcing milk from cows fed non-GM feed, Neuwirth said the move was about meeting consumer demand, adding: “We believe there is increasing consumer preference for products that are Non-GMO Project verified.”

He would not comment on a lawsuit which Dannon is currently defending in which its own attorneys argued that consumers are not in fact interested in drilling all the way down to the level of animal feed when it comes to ‘natural’ claims on its yogurts.

In a letter to Dannon penned in October 2016, farming groups including the National Corn Growers Association, National Milk Producers Federation and American Sugarbeet Growers Association said Dannon's milk sourcing strategy provided no nutritional or environmental benefits and would force farmers to take a "step backward in truly sustainable food production."

Randy Mooney, chairman of the National Milk Producers Federation, noted that there is no difference in the composition of the milk from cows fed GM animal feed and that from cows fed a non-GMO diet, and added: "This is just marketing puffery, not any true innovation that improves the actual product offered to consumers."

As part of Dannon’s April 2016 pledge , it will remove artificial sweeteners, modified food starch and some other ingredients from Dannon, Oikos and Danimals products by the end of 2018, says Vincent Crasnier, Dannon Pledge Program Lead.

“It’s a work in progress. We’re introducing new versions of Light and Fit products with no artificial sweeteners [replacing sucralose with stevia]. We’re also replacing modified food starch with a non-GMO verified corn starch. We’ve also removed carrageenan from some products.”

GMO labeling hasn’t dented sales

But what about Dannon products that do use ingredients from GM crops?  As one of the first companies to start labeling them as such as part of a commitment to transparency, has Dannon seen any impact on sales after introducing wording such as ‘partially produced with genetic engineering’ on selected products? Have consumers even noticed?

According to Neuwirth, the GMO labeling initiative does not appear to have dented sales: “We were the leading maker of yogurt into and throughout all of last year and our market share has continued to grow, so business is going well.”

Post a comment

Comment title *
Your comment *
Your name *
Your email *

We will not publish your email on the site

I agree to Terms and Conditions

These comments have not been moderated. You are encouraged to participate with comments that are relevant to our news stories. You should not post comments that are abusive, threatening, defamatory, misleading or invasive of privacy. For the full terms and conditions for commenting see clause 7 of our Terms and Conditions ‘Participating in Online Communities’. These terms may be updated from time to time, so please read them before posting a comment. Any comment that violates these terms may be removed in its entirety as we do not edit comments. If you wish to complain about a comment please use the "REPORT ABUSE" button or contact the editors.

1 comment

This will be interesting to watch.

So it is very clear the amount of non-GMO feed available to US milk producers is no where near what is required. Importation is the answer. But is it as it is becoming very clear the non-GMO labels that come with imported feed are not worth the paper they are printed on. this will be fun to watch.

Report abuse

Posted by Robert Wager
27 July 2017 | 17h142017-07-27T17:14:23Z

Key Industry Events