Consumers’ buying decisions are changing with the rise of new generations. In addition to the traditional concerns of price, taste and convenience, countless surveys indicate that consumers also now want authenticity and sustainability when purchasing food.
While eggs have fared quite well as far as these traditional factors are concerned, one would think that they would do even better when judged against these new consumer criteria.
For consumers authenticity means food with the shortest list of natural and healthy ingredients. What is more natural and nutritious and made of a single ingredient than an egg? Eggs ought to face no competition at all in the minds of consumers when compared with new plant-based concoctions.
A review of some of these new, plant-based products reveals a list of no fewer than 15 ingredients, with gums, colorants and preservatives added to mimic mother nature. Have consumers not told us that they want foods with a simple and short list of ingredients?
These plant-based products come only in liquid or powder forms and do not offer the fantastic versatility of the real thing. So far, none of these products has replicated the visual appeal of a fried or poached egg. Is It not time to remind consumers that authenticity and versatility are found together in this, the most natural of products?
Sustainability
On the sustainability front, eggs should be the poster child for great nutrition with low impact on our planet. As in many other sectors of agriculture, egg producers have managed, over the past 50 years, to increase production by multiple factors (at the global level, five to be precise) while reducing their impact on the environment, including water usage, feed consumption and Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions per egg produced.
Today the egg sector has the lowest total emissions of greenhouse gases of all animal production sectors and the lowest emissions per kilogram of protein produced (about 30 kg CO2 equivalent per kg of protein). Does the consumer realize this?
Our farming practices are being challenged by a few, who often lack a clear understanding of the bigger picture. While cage-free and free-range production sound great, research has shown that these systems of production do not always equate to better welfare for the birds.
Diseases that disappeared in the 1960's are now back, and the egg sector is often left with fewer tools to deal with them. Better welfare you said? What about the environment? The emissions for eggs produced in cage-free systems are between 10% and 18% higher than in cage systems, mainly due to higher feed consumption, higher mortality and lower productivity.
Why are these few vocal groups advocating a switch to production methods that are less friendly to the environment? Have consumers not finally realized that it is time to take more action to curb levels of CO2 emissions for the sake of future generations?
Back to the basics
Perhaps we have not done the best job in explaining the necessary trade-offs required when dealing with such complex issues and it is probably time to go back to basics in our communication with consumers.
About 30 years ago, the egg sector was falsely attacked over the cholesterol content of eggs and, in response, producers invested time and effort in better communicating with the medical profession, dietitians and consumers. Let’s again invest in the future and teach school children and students where foods come from and what it takes to provide them, on a daily basis, with affordable and nutritious food. Now is the time to explain egg production and nutrition to our future consumers.
ASF offers major opportunities for poultry, egg producers
