Annexes to COM(2013)755 - Mandatory indication of the country of origin or place of provenance for meat used as an ingredient

Please note

This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.

Annex D (consumer survey) to the "Study on the application of rules on voluntary origin labelling of foods and on the mandatory indication of country of origin or place of provenance of meat used as an ingredient", (hereinafter the 'FCEC study'), not yet published. Given the fact that the FCEC consumer survey took place in the midst of the horse meat scandal (December 2012-March 2013) affecting consumer trust in the meat product/meat-containing product sector, it cannot be excluded that this factor might have influenced the outcomes of the study.

[11]             This study was carried before 2013, i.e. before the horse meat scandal.

[12]             Commission Staff Working Document, at pp. 22-28.

[13]             FCEC study, at p. 10.

[14]             These differences are elaborated in the Commission Staff Working Document, at pp.30-32.

[15]             Commission Staff Working Document, at p. 40.

[16]             Annex D to the FCEC study'.

[17]             "Study on mandatory origin labelling for pig, poultry and sheep and goat meat", LEI Wageningen University (2013).

[18]             FCEC study, at p. 25.

[19]             Other scenarios (i.e. mandatory labelling indicating place of provenance at higher or lower level than a country, mandatory origin labelling based on origin split in three stages – "born, raised and slaughtered" or mandatory origin labelling based only on the place of birth, or place of birth and slaughter or only place of slaughter) were considered unfeasible and therefore they have not been analysed in detail.

[20]             For example, it appears that in Brazil traceability and origin labelling is currently provided at country level on the basis of the place of farming and rearing.