2024-01-03 19:08:07
► It is an unfair practice by manufacturers
Sophie Coisne, deputy editor-in-chief of 60 million consumers, published by the National Consumer Institute
Deliver less for the same price. “Shrinkflation” – it is better to use the term “hidden inflation” – is the contraction of English to shrink, reduce, and the word inflation. This practice consists of reducing the content of a product (its weight or volume) while maintaining its price.
This year, Lay’s plain chips lost 15g, while Pampers baby wipes went from 44 to 42 units per pack. Result: the consumer has the impression that he is buying the same product and if he does not look carefully, he will not know that the volume has decreased.
I find this to be an unfair practice on the part of manufacturers because they do it without informing the buyer. When brands increase the prices of a product, the consumer has an immediate perception that inflation exists, whereas by decreasing their quantity, they do not notice it.
In France, the magazine 60 million consumers was the first, in 2008, to reveal this type of dubious practice – which he described as “techniques not always very glorious”. At the time, brands had discreetly reduced their volume, such as the Prince LU packets, from 330 to 300 g.
In September 2023, when Carrefour and Intermarché identified brands that were carrying out shrinkflation, Findus was singled out. The company had reduced the quantities in its boxes of hash browns while increasing its price. Result, an increase in the price per kilo of 68%. Under pressure, the Findus group defended itself by ensuring that it faced significant price increases from its suppliers.
We are in a period of inflation, the French are struggling. This practice creates a climate of distrust on the part of consumers. And the latter do not mince their words when they see that the price has remained the same while the content has decreased. They talk about “scam”of “sneaky practices”say that they “made to pigeon” … You have less to eat, less laundry, less periodic protection… And when you really watch your budget, having to go shopping more often is a problem.
Currently, a manufacturer is legal if he notes the weight of the product on the packaging – he does not need to mention the former. The idea is to push companies to be more transparent. For this, several initiatives were mentioned by Bercy in September 2023: the possibility for the consumer to report on the government application SignalConso a product which would have caused hidden inflation and the preparation of a text of law to oblige manufacturers to make the content reduction visible on packages.
Ultimately, it is the designation by supermarkets of products subject to shrinkflation that seems to be chosen. Too bad, because this exempts manufacturers from an obligation of transparency. The ideal would be for the new weight of the product to be noted on the packaging next to the old, scratched one. Or even that it is marked “new weight”.
► We must frame the debate from the angle of meeting needs
Philippe Goetzmann, consultant specializing in mass distribution
Instead of permanently stigmatizing brands which resort to “shrinkflation”, that is to say which reduce the weight of their products while maintaining the initial price, we must think more broadly about the essential question posed by this practice. : the inevitable and essential drop in consumption volumes of agri-food products. Today, we produce too much compared to what we actually consume. And we consume too much compared to what we really need. This leads to well-known problems, such as waste and obesity.
We must therefore move away from a consumerist logic, which always links consumption to an exchange for a fixed quantity of material and no longer corresponds to today’s world, to pose the debate from the angle of satisfying needs. When you go to a restaurant, it’s not to eat a 400 or 350 gram pizza, but to have a friendly time that satisfies your hunger and your taste buds. This should be the same for store-bought products! Being sober and consuming less does not necessarily mean less satisfaction.
“Shrinkflation” remains a very marginal phenomenon. At the start of the September school year, certain distributors circulated a list of around 120 affected references: of the 30,000 that a hypermarket has on average, this only represents 0.4% of the offer!
Of course, this reduction in quantities must be done in a transparent and responsible manner. And I even think that this could be an asset for manufacturers. Because reducing weight on the sly is a serious mistake. This can only trigger the feeling of a scam and fuel the distrust of the French towards the agri-food sector. But communicating openly, changing recipes to make them healthier and potentially reducing the waste previously generated by excess portions can even lead to better satisfaction of needs.
The example of Kiri cheese speaks for itself: the group was widely criticized in 2022 when it reduced its famous square portions from 20 to 18 grams. But this 10% reduction responded to a double challenge: maintaining the initial price while gradually changing the recipe to remove additives. It was therefore not strictly speaking a question of “shrinkflation”, since, by reducing quantities, the Bel cheesemaker aimed to improve the quality of the product.
However, if this reduction of a few grams does not change the lives of consumers, it represents very considerable volumes on an industry scale. The money released can be injected elsewhere. It all depends where. If these amounts are allocated correctly, they can very well be used for the necessary transition towards a healthier and more sustainable diet.
#consumers #sufficiently #protected