Logo image
Back
Not Free to Roam: Misleading Food Credence Claims, the ACCC and the Need for Corporate Social Responsibility
Journal article   Peer reviewed

Not Free to Roam: Misleading Food Credence Claims, the ACCC and the Need for Corporate Social Responsibility

Sharne Hobill and Jay Sanderson
Monash University Law Review, Vol.43(1), pp.113-147
2017
url
https://www.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/1092674/04_Hobill.pdfView
Webpage

Abstract

Law
This article explores misleading food credence claims. The article commences by drawing attention to a concomitant increase in differentiated foods (eg locally sourced, free-range or 'healthy') and information asymmetry (ie where food businesses possess more accurate and useful information than consumers). The article then examines attempts by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission ('ACCC') to deter misleading food credence claims and identifies a taxonomy of misleading food credence claims including those made about a food's: (i) provenance; (ii) manufacture or production; and (iii) qualities or characteristics. The article then situates the ACCC's efforts within the dialectic of Corporate Social Irresponsibility ('CSI') and Corporate Social Responsibility ('CSR'), and in so doing, within regulatory theory that espouses a mix of deterrence and cooperation. We argue that while the ACCC plays a crucial role in deterring misleading food credence claims its focus is on CSI: meaning that more needs to be done to encourage CSR in relation to accurate and unbiased food credence claims. By treating food credence claims as a matter of CSR, food businesses can support informed decision-making and perhaps even contribute to better health outcomes. Indeed, conceptualising food credence claims as CSR is an important and necessary step in ensuring that honest and accurate food credence claims become the norm, not just the law.

Details

Metrics

3 File views/ downloads
724 Record Views
Logo image