Discover your next big idea at PACK EXPO Las Vegas this September
Experience a breakthrough in packaging & processing and transform your business with solutions from 2,300 suppliers spanning all industries.
REGISTER NOW & SAVE

Hey, do eat that, you know where it's been

The United States imports a lot of the food you eat, and now more of it will be labeled with its country of origin.

Whether you think this new labeling is worth the resulting costs depends on what you think of the reasons for the new law, and those turn out to be varied.

Beginning at the end of September, a new law went into effect requiring “Country of Origin Labeling” (“COOL”) on a lot of individual foods. Products packaged or produced after September 30, 2008 will need to be labeled with their country of origin.

Covered products are of the U.S. Department of Agriculture variety, lots of meats and items of produce, but not processed foods or foods with combined ingredients. Included are cuts of beef, lamb, chicken, goat, and pork as well as their ground forms; perishable agricultural commodities; both fresh and frozen fruits and vegetables; peanuts; pecans; macadamia nuts; and ginseng. Fish and shellfish are also included, but have had to feature country of origin labeling since April 2005.

The label requirement falls upon licensed retailers. Small establishments and food service establishments, such as restaurants and cafeterias, are exempt from having to provide the label statement.

Why does one care where food comes from? Well, for one thing, this measure could be seen as catch-up, since most imported products consumers encounter are already required to be labeled with the country of their origin, including processed and packaged foods.

USDA says of the new law, “The intent of this law is to provide consumers with additional information on which to base their purchasing decisions. COOL is a retail labeling program and as such does not provide a basis for addressing food safety.”

Well, kind of. Hey, information for its own sake has its charms, but you still have to wonder why Congress thought giving consumers this additional information would help them. Seems to me some form of fear is part of the equation here—the average consumer might want to avoid food from specific foreign countries which they think have sub-standard safety and pesticide controls. Also, this new COOL requirement grows out of a law passed in 2002, although its implementation was delayed a couple of times. The year 2002 is notable for coming right after 2001, when concerns with potential terrorist interference with the food supply were fresh in mind.

In the meantime, in the years since 2002, some high-profile food illness outbreaks have helped push forward the idea that consumers might prefer U.S. or even local meat and produce if the imported stuff is suspect in terms of safety (though, clearly, some outbreaks appear to have been fully domestic).

So consumers who are inspired to buy American products, or to buy locally with environmental concerns in mind, will have an easier time when the imported products are labeled as such. This could be seen as another purpose behind the new requirement.

List: Digitalization Companies From PACK EXPO
Looking for CPG-focused digital transformation solutions? Download our editor-curated list from PACK EXPO featuring top companies offering warehouse management, ERP, digital twin, and MES software with supply chain visibility and analytics capabilities—all tailored specifically for CPG operations.
Download Now
List: Digitalization Companies From PACK EXPO
Annual Outlook Report: Workforce
Hiring remains a major challenge in packaging, with 78% struggling to fill unskilled roles and 84% lacking experienced workers. As automation grows, companies must rethink hiring and training. Download the full report for key insights.
Download Now
Annual Outlook Report: Workforce