For the average shopper in Norway, the budget-friendly labels of First Price or Eldorado are staples of a cost-conscious household. These “private labels”—known in the industry as EMV (egne merkevarer)—offer a promise of simplicity and savings. However, a growing debate over corporate opacity is casting a shadow over these aisles, as critics argue that the secrecy surrounding who actually produces these goods is less about trade secrets and more about misleading the public.
Bent Sofus Tranøy, a professor at the University of Inlandet and Kristiania, contends that major grocery chains are deliberately obscuring the identities of the manufacturers behind their cheapest lines. According to Tranøy, this lack of transparency creates a curated “illusion” of variety and competition, where consumers believe they are choosing between different products when they may, in fact, be buying the same item packaged under a different name.
This tension highlights a fundamental conflict in the Nordic retail market: the balance between a company’s right to protect its competitive strategy and a consumer’s right to know the origin of the food they put on their table. While some chains have embraced openness, others have maintained a wall of silence that persists despite years of public criticism.
The ‘Competition Illusion’ and Market Loyalty
The strategic use of private labels is not merely about price. it is a primary tool for building customer loyalty. In a market where major players like Kiwi, Rema 1000 and Extra all stock the same primary brands from giants such as Orkla, Tine, and Ringnes, there is very little differentiation in terms of selection. To stand out, chains lean heavily on their exclusive labels—First Price, Eldorado, Prima, Xtra, and Jacobs.
Tranøy argues that these labels often function as copies of existing products. He suggests that grocery chains pressure established producers to create a version of their product under the store’s own brand. This process, he claims, maintains a facade of increased choice while actually consolidating power within the retail chain.
“The consumers’ right to information is sacrificed on the altar of the competition illusion,” Tranøy says, explaining that the private label is often just a copy produced by a pressured supplier to maintain the appearance of a diverse market.
The scale of this phenomenon is significant. A 2023 report commissioned by the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries revealed that more than one in five items purchased in Norwegian grocery stores now fall into the private label category. Since these products cannot be bought at competing chains—for instance, First Price is exclusive to Norgesgruppen stores—they become the primary anchor for customer retention.
Decoding the Secret: The EFTA Loophole
Despite the official silence from some retailers, there is a technical way for consumers to uncover the producers of their food. For products derived from animals—such as meat, eggs, and milk—packaging must include an EFTA approval mark. This oval stamp is a mandatory requirement to prove the facility has been approved and controlled by the Norwegian Food Safety Authority (Mattilsynet).
By searching the EFTA number on specialized databases, such as those provided by the meat industry, the actual production facility is revealed. This effectively bypasses the “business secret” designation used by retailers to retain producers anonymous.
Olga Soleng, a senior advisor in the biological food safety section of Mattilsynet, notes that the mark is a critical safety and regulatory tool. While it serves a public health purpose, it has inadvertently become a tool for consumer transparency in a market where retailers are reluctant to volunteer the same information.
Corporate Responses and the Packaging Defense
The approach to transparency varies wildly between the major Norwegian players. Coop has historically been open about the producers behind its own brands. In contrast, Norgesgruppen—the owner of Kiwi and Meny—has faced long-standing criticism for its opacity.
When pressured regarding the anonymity of products like First Price mackerel or white cheese, Norgesgruppen has pointed to the logistical challenges of updating thousands of individual product lines. The company claims that the delay in transparency is a matter of packaging cycles rather than a strategic choice to mislead.
| Retailer/Group | Transparency Status | Primary Justification |
|---|---|---|
| Coop | Open | Standard operating procedure |
| Norgesgruppen | Partial/Limited | Packaging update timelines |
| Rema 1000 | Mixed/Strategic | Competitive business secrets |
Kine Søyland, Communications Director at Norgesgruppen, stated that while most products have been updated with producer information, some are still missing. She noted that with a assortment of 4,500 products, the process of implementing these changes is resource-intensive. For those who still cannot find the information on the label, Søyland suggests that customers contact customer service directly to learn who produced a specific item.
As the cost of living continues to rise, the reliance on budget labels like First Price will likely increase, further amplifying the impact of these branding strategies. The ongoing tension between the “competition illusion” and the demand for transparency suggests that the pressure on retailers to fully disclose their supply chains will only grow.
The next critical checkpoint for this issue will be the continued monitoring of packaging updates by Norgesgruppen and any potential recent directives from the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries regarding the labeling of EMV products to ensure fair competition.
Do you believe grocery stores should be required to list the original producer of all private label goods? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
