ASSOCIATION EUROPEENNE DU COMMERCE DE FRUIT ET LEGUMES, AISBL EUROPEAN FRUIT AND VEGETABLE TRADE ASSOCIATION, AISBL

Transcription

1 ASSOCIATION EUROPEENNE DU COMMERCE DE FRUIT ET LEGUMES, AISBL EUROPEAN FRUIT AND VEGETABLE TRADE ASSOCIATION, AISBL Brussels February 28, 2008 EUCOFEL S CONTRIBUTION TO THE EC CONSULTATION ON SCHOOL FRUIT PROGRAMME First Eucofel recognizes and supports the European Commission s initiative to establish a programme for the free distribution of fresh fruit and vegetables in schools at the European level. Considering that the main objective of a school fruit and vegetable programme is to promote and increase the consumption of fruit and vegetables in the European Union mainly between the children, Eucofel recognizes the difficulties to find the budget to finance this depth initiative. Consequently, Eucofel supports the initial option 4 Driving Initiatives with an appropriate disbursement of public funds (both national and EU). In June 2007 the answer of the Commission regarding the question raised by a Member of the European Parliament on the budget for free distribution of fruit and vegetables was that the Commission proposal contains an initiative for free distribution of fruit and vegetables in schools, hospitals and charitable organisations. It is expected that a sum of 8 million will be set aside for this purpose 1. Nevertheless, the Commission currently suggests a compulsory financing by the private sector up to 20%, this new Commission approach difficult the blueprint of a School Fruit Programme whilst it is desirable to be implemented as soon as possible. Secondly, the aim of the Eucofel s contribution is to transmit to the Commission some reflections in response to the European Commission consultation launched mid- January for an impact assessment of several options to implement an European Fruit School Programme. For this reason Eucofel has defined two schemes based in the following considerations: 1. Target products resulting from the grown-up consumption. According to a study commissioned by ZMP and CMA, Germans consume about kg of fruit and vegetables per capita each year 2. The study found that each 1 EP: WRITTEN QUESTION E-2960/07 by Christel Schaldemose (PSE) to the Commission. Subject: Fruit and vegetables for children //EP//NONSGML+WQ+E DOC+WORD+V0//EN&language=EN 2 Messe Berlin announced these figures at press conference marking the opening of FRUIT LOGISTICA 2008 which takes place 7-9 February Square Ambiorix, 7 B 1000 BRUSSELS Tel: (+32) Tel: (+32) Fax: (+32.2)

2 person purchased 86.0 kg (2006: 89.7 kg) of fresh fruit at an average price of EUR 1.49 per kg (2006: EUR 1.44/kg). In addition, 63.4 kg (2006: 63.2 kg) of fresh vegetables were purchased at an average EUR 1.91 per kg (2005 (EUR 1.86/kg). The study found that apples were the fresh fruit that landed most frequently in the shopping cart, with 20.7 kg per household, followed by bananas (16.9 kg), oranges (10.0 kg), mandarin oranges, clementines and similar products (6.1 kg), and dessert grapes (4.8 kg). Tomatoes (10.5 kg) were the most frequently purchased fresh vegetable per household, along with carrots (7.8 kg), cucumbers (6.7 kg), onions (6.5 kg) and sweet peppers (4.5 kg). Following the trend of consumption, which is valid for the German market, we propose to target the following products: apples, bananas, citrus easy-peelers, pears and kiwis. Tomatoes and carrots are chose for this proposes. A wider variety of fruits can be offered especially for vegetables. The selection depend on the distribution method (e.g., some foods are not suitable for vending machines) and the decisions of catering companies and schools had to make to operate within the nonfood cost guidelines (e.g., to buy more precut foods to save labor costs). It is the task of principals and teachers at a majority of schools to decide which fruits and vegetables could not be served. 2. Responsible of the programme considering the main food wholesalers and retailers. The distribution chain plays an important role in the distribution of F&V at schools. The approach to make responsible the main food retailers result from the food retail market share (63%) in the European countries. See table 1 below: Table 1: Retail market share. Source: info@eucofel.org Website:

3 3. New system of F&V distribution to the school: Who does what, and where? The system of fruits and vegetables free distribution at schools should be able to involve all stakeholder of the F&V distribution chain. Supermarkets and wholesaler companies should deliver fresh fruits and vegetables at net prices at school. In this first stage the direct beneficiaries will be the children of primary schools aged between 6 to 12 years old. We propose two schemes; in each one, the participant takes the role as a contributor. The scheme 1 of the new system can function as follows: 1 the producer through the operational programs whose budgetary participation is (UE 50%, MS 30% and producers 20%), could provide 50% of the value of the fruit and vegetables to be distributed free of profit. 2 the wholesaler could participate with let dropping it margin, which is today about 8% of the value of the gratis product and, 3 the supermarket could participate with offering the gratis fruit without at a taking a margin of about other 40% of the value of products. Note that the retailer margin on fresh produce varies between 20 and 120%. So, the distribution of fruit and vegetables to the schools will be gratuitous. Scheme 1 SCHOOL DISTRIBUTION CHAIN WHOLESALER PRODUCER PRODUCER PRODUCER - 3 -

4 The scheme 2 can function as follows: 1 the producer through the operational programs, whose budgetary participation is (UE 50%, MS 30% and producers 20%), could provide 50% of the value of the fruit and vegetables to be distributed free of profit. 2 the wholesaler could participate with 8% of the value of the gratis product and, 3 Vending companies could participate with other 40% of the value of products to distribute at minimum charge to the schools (e.g. at 20% of the prices of similar non healthy products. This income can cover the distribution cost. Although the stages of storing, packing, marketing and transporting fruit and vegetables (e.g. to the supermarkets regional distribution centres) do not vary, there is immense variation in how these tasks are arranged contractually and logistically. In the past producers have organised themselves into co-operatives (usually to own an asset such as a packhouse) and producer organisations (groups who commit to selling all of their output via that organisation) sell the products directly the consumers. Currently this approach has changed and in the distribution supermarkets are engaged to deliver the final product to the consumer. The cost of storing, packing, marketing and transporting fruit and vegetables to school could be partially engaged by the supermarkets. Scheme 2 SCHOOL VENDING COMPANIES WHOLESALER PRODUCER PRODUCER PRODUCER - 4 -

5 According to a study on vending in Dutch schools, only 29% offer a balance with 40% healthy foods 3. This is an opportunity to push the vending companies to put 100% offer a balance with 50% healthy foods (fruit, vegetables, nuts, soup etc.). 4. Characteristic of the produce to deliver free of charge to schools. It is the aim to provide a great variety of fresh products taking into account that some fruits and vegetables are fragile and they have a short shelf life. Others are not feasible given some students behaviour. In many cases, in a scholarship environment, to provide a product without a suitable quality among the children result in a damage of fruit and vegetables healthy image. For this reason is very important that the product should carry out the following characteristics to avoid loss of products for not accomplishment of the specific qualities for the consumption. Table 2: Qualities of fruit and vegetables. FRUIT QUALITIES OF THE FRUIT Apple EC Class 1 Any variety but preferably not large varieties. Size: 55-60mm Where used more than once a week, varieties in different colour-groups should be used on different days. Firmness to spec. Defects to spec (same as Class 1?). Pear EC Class 1 Any variety which complies with the size requirement Size: 50mm ±10% (check against EC) mm exceptionally and if smaller fruit not available. Never 60mm+. Firmness to spec (4.5kg avg) Defects to spec (=class 1?) Citrus easypeelers Easy-peel varieties only (e.g. clementines, mandarins, satsumas) EC Class 1 Size 6, 43-52mm, tolerance 10% Defects to spec Bananas EC Class 1 Any variety Size: 165mm long, min grade 30mm, ±10% Ripeness: colour stage 5 (i.e. mainly yellow) when delivered to schools Kiwis EC Class 1 Variety: Hayward Size: 36/ g Taste: further spec: Brix min 10%, target 12% Firmness to spec (0.9-2kg) VEGETABLES QUALITIES OF THE VEGETABLES Whole carrots EC Class 1 Variety: Chantenay Finished product diameter 30-45mm, product length mm weight 55-80gram Defects as in spec Tomatoes EC class 1 3 Het aanbod van levensmiddelen op middelbare scholen 23 januari

6 Sugars minimum 6% Variety: cherry tomatoes including cocktail tomatoes (not, we understand, baby plums?) Diameter 20-30mm Defects as in spec 5. Periodicity distribution of F&V to the schools. The quantities of fruit required for the scheme are not specified precisely because we have to know the number of children in each school who are eligible to receive the fruit. This number is approximately the same as the number of fruit to be supplied on any particular day (in fact the latter will be larger, particularly in rural areas with small schools, as fruit tends to be delivered to schools in units of 10, so supplies need to allow for wastage in addition to the number required for children). To deliver the number of fruit required per year, it is necessary to multiply this number-per-day by the number of days on which each type of fruit is required. This number can be found on the supply calendar which shows which type of fruit is to be provided on each day of the school year. So far, different supply calendars have been drawn up for different regions. The figures below come from the supply calendar for the North-West, being the most recent and therefore in many ways the one which most reflects current thinking about best practice. However, the North-West is unusual in that it has been particularly hostile to pears (perhaps because the contractor supplying pears there has struggled to provide them suitably ripe). The supply calendar for the region therefore only includes pears on 4 days per year, which is unusually low and not representative of country as a whole 4. An example of the supply calendar for the North-West can be summarised in the following Table 3: Table 3: Periodicity of distribution F&V. Seasonal Fruit Times per year Apples 71 Twice a week Jan-early Oct, otherwise once Easy peel 39 One a week except for 4 weeks mid Sept to early Oct Bananas 40 One a week throughout the school year Carrots 28 One a week Aug April Cherry tomatoes 11 Once a week mid April to early July. 3 per serving. Pears 4 mid Oct to mid Nov Kiwifruit 4 mid Sept to early Oct 4 Detailed information can be obtained from the Website:

7 6. Creation of a European School Fruit Agency Some challenges have to managed properly be overcome if the project will succeed. A central administration has to overview the running of the project. It will be involved in programming of the distribution, general administration and monitoring and advising on nutrition education and promotions. The central administration responsibility 5 comprises: Anticipate the need for extra staff time to prepare and deliver the fruits and vegetables and have adequate funding to obtain any additional staff. Anticipate the need for extra staff time to process reports and other paperwork at regional or urban levels. Coordinate efforts to communicate the purpose of the program to principals, teachers, foodservice staff, students, and parents. In order to obtain early support, pay attention to logistics to make sure the staff understands the program and how it will be implemented. Respond to reports from the custodians about trash and mess and take needed actions. Increase the xx-percent cap on nonfood, administrative costs. Provide schools with additional references and resources to find FVPP foods and additional labor sources. The US experience teaches us that a 10 % cap on non-food costs by the schools should be raised. Some schools said that a non-food cap of %, rather than the 10 % cap on non-food costs, would be more feasible and would increase flexibility and efficiency in using pilot funds. Second, the experience of the pilot schools could help schools new to the program speed up implementation time, allowing more efficient and effective use of program funds. Third, if nutrition education and promotion efforts were part of an expanded program, some schools would need more preplanning time to develop and implement the activities. Fourth, new ways to motivate students to eat more vegetables could be identified that do not rely on high-fat dips and condiments. A wider variety of fresh fruits was served than fresh vegetables, and fresh fruits were more

8 appealing to students. The use of condiments, such as dips (some low-fat) and peanut butter, improved vegetable consumption. Eucofel would like to request to European Commission elaborate a concrete proposal where engage all participants in the fruit and vegetables channels (governmental and private) for a successful EU School Fruit Programme which will have wide ranging benefits to all of society. It is suitable that this programme become reality as soon as possible. As final remark, we would welcome an European directive which lowers the VAT rate on fresh fruits and vegetables at 0%. But this will bring us far further in time