Post by Trade Coach on Dec 9, 2013 9:55:22 GMT 1
Global soft drinks manufacturers are dependent on the emulsifier but with a lack of transparency over supply chains, sustainable gum arabic is hard to find.
Imagine opening a fizzy drink and finding all the sugar had fallen to the bottom and crystallised. It'd be disappointing. But that's what would happen if it wasn't for gum arabic.
Alternatively known as acacia gum or E414, gum arabic is an emulsifier and a stabiliser made from the branches of acacia Senegal trees. Among its many uses, it's found in shoe polish and makes newspaper print more cohesive. It's also an ingredient in chocolate and sweets, but most importantly is the role it plays in the soft drinks industry – it binds the sugar to the drink. Essentially it's an edible glue.
For a natural ingredient that is so useful, it also comes with its fair share of criticism. Gum arabic has a chequered history. In 1997, when the US government brought sanctions against Sudan – the world's biggest producer of the gum – for giving refuge to Islamic terrorists, lobbyists protested and as a result the only product exempt from an export ban was gum arabic; the US said such a ban would have hurt the country's food industry.
Then in a news conference in 2007, the Sudanese ambassador to Washington responded to sanctions that were still imposed and talk of US intervening in Sudan's civil war, by holding up a bottle of Coca-Cola and claiming: "I can stop that gum arabic and all of us will have lost this".
Recently there have been ethnic clashes over land where acacia trees are grown, in an attempt to exchange resources for arms or cash. It's claimed that supplies of the extracted sap are being smuggled over the border into neighbouring countries such as Chad, affecting Sudan's monopoly.
Companies that source their gum arabic from the north African country undoubtedly find themselves in a quandary, though it would be rash to suggest the situation is similar to that of conflict minerals such as coltan.
Sudan is responsible for up to 70-80% of the world's production of the gum – some experts put the figure as low as 40% – and global supply chains within the soft drinks industry seem to be dependent on it more than ever. Reports suggest that in the first half of 2013, the country's exports rose to 33,000 tonnes with a revenue of $50m(£32m), which is expected to rise to $70m by the end of the year.
Knowledge of which companies source their supply of gum from Sudan is non-existent. Even finding out which soft drink firms use it as an ingredient is a hard task as it's rarely listed on labels. An online search of the UK's top supermarkets shows numerous results under the words 'gum arabic', 'acacia gum' or 'E414'. ASDA for instance lists Colgate, Haribo, Nestle and Rowntrees products, among others, as containing the ingredient. None of these major supermarket websites list a soft drink from a major brand.
There is no mention of gum arabic in Coca-Cola's Sustainability Report from 2012 and the company won't confirm or deny its source. However, in an interview a few years back, Mansour Khalid, the board president of the Gum Arabic Company, told National Public Radio that "[Coca-Cola] buy processed gum and the processed gum comes from Europe, and Europe buys from Sudan. And you know, the whole thing is silly."
PepsiCo didn't respond to an interview request either, but confirmed that its products contain the stabiliser - even if the information is not easily accessible on its main corporate website, but via a subsidiary site.
The reasons behind companies being reluctant to discuss gum arabic are multi-fold. The latest turmoil may have hurt the confidence of buyers, especially as the fighting could impact on the pricing and continuity of Sudan's production. And making the public aware that the source of their supply could have a negative effect on their global image, and subsequently share prices.
The lack of transparency is unlikely to be an attempt to mislead consumers, yet it has to be questioned why pressure hasn't been put on soft drink companies to bring gum arabic into their sustainability agenda.
"[C]commitment to sustainability plays a role in supporting consumer loyalty" says Louise Stevens, sustainability manager at Innocent Drinks, whose products do not include gum arabic or any other stabilisers and who found that being "open and natural in all our communications … helped to build the relationship we have with our consumer base."
Stevens doesn't believe sustainability is a purchase driver for the majority of consumers but from her experience, "when more about our sustainability work … their affection and loyalty to [the brand] deepens."
"The problem is that with soft drinks like coke, a consumer is buying a product that is packed full of sugar and probably isn't wondering whether the ingredients have been ethically sourced" claimed a director of a soft drinks wholesaler, who preferred not to be identified. "Looking at it from Coca-Cola and PepsiCo's perspective, they may be asking themselves who's really going to benefit from knowing where the gum arabic comes from, when most consumers have probably never heard of it anyway".
Sarah Rivas, an independent humanitarian worker who has spent time in Sudan, working on projects to build sustainable markets for small-scale farmers, feels that companies should be transparent for the benefit of their global supply chain.
"For many local farmers, the acacia crop is their livelihood. Boycotting Coke in protest won't necessarily work, as these companies will source from elsewhere or look for alternatives. And cheaper, chemical substitutes aren't the answer either" she explained. Up to five million people in Sudan alone depend on income from gum arabic, with some earning less than £900 a year.
"As far as I'm aware, soft drink companies do not buy the raw gum directly from the farmers, but maybe they should. If done properly, it could lead to improved wages and regulated working conditions," said Rivas, referring to the need for investment in sustainability programmes for gum arabic – similar to Coca-Cola's project to support sugarcane cultivation.
"If they'd rather not be closely associated with Sudan, the likes of Coca-Cola and PepsiCo should at least consider shedding some light on the matter."
Source: Guardian Professional.
Imagine opening a fizzy drink and finding all the sugar had fallen to the bottom and crystallised. It'd be disappointing. But that's what would happen if it wasn't for gum arabic.
Alternatively known as acacia gum or E414, gum arabic is an emulsifier and a stabiliser made from the branches of acacia Senegal trees. Among its many uses, it's found in shoe polish and makes newspaper print more cohesive. It's also an ingredient in chocolate and sweets, but most importantly is the role it plays in the soft drinks industry – it binds the sugar to the drink. Essentially it's an edible glue.
For a natural ingredient that is so useful, it also comes with its fair share of criticism. Gum arabic has a chequered history. In 1997, when the US government brought sanctions against Sudan – the world's biggest producer of the gum – for giving refuge to Islamic terrorists, lobbyists protested and as a result the only product exempt from an export ban was gum arabic; the US said such a ban would have hurt the country's food industry.
Then in a news conference in 2007, the Sudanese ambassador to Washington responded to sanctions that were still imposed and talk of US intervening in Sudan's civil war, by holding up a bottle of Coca-Cola and claiming: "I can stop that gum arabic and all of us will have lost this".
Recently there have been ethnic clashes over land where acacia trees are grown, in an attempt to exchange resources for arms or cash. It's claimed that supplies of the extracted sap are being smuggled over the border into neighbouring countries such as Chad, affecting Sudan's monopoly.
Companies that source their gum arabic from the north African country undoubtedly find themselves in a quandary, though it would be rash to suggest the situation is similar to that of conflict minerals such as coltan.
Sudan is responsible for up to 70-80% of the world's production of the gum – some experts put the figure as low as 40% – and global supply chains within the soft drinks industry seem to be dependent on it more than ever. Reports suggest that in the first half of 2013, the country's exports rose to 33,000 tonnes with a revenue of $50m(£32m), which is expected to rise to $70m by the end of the year.
Knowledge of which companies source their supply of gum from Sudan is non-existent. Even finding out which soft drink firms use it as an ingredient is a hard task as it's rarely listed on labels. An online search of the UK's top supermarkets shows numerous results under the words 'gum arabic', 'acacia gum' or 'E414'. ASDA for instance lists Colgate, Haribo, Nestle and Rowntrees products, among others, as containing the ingredient. None of these major supermarket websites list a soft drink from a major brand.
There is no mention of gum arabic in Coca-Cola's Sustainability Report from 2012 and the company won't confirm or deny its source. However, in an interview a few years back, Mansour Khalid, the board president of the Gum Arabic Company, told National Public Radio that "[Coca-Cola] buy processed gum and the processed gum comes from Europe, and Europe buys from Sudan. And you know, the whole thing is silly."
PepsiCo didn't respond to an interview request either, but confirmed that its products contain the stabiliser - even if the information is not easily accessible on its main corporate website, but via a subsidiary site.
The reasons behind companies being reluctant to discuss gum arabic are multi-fold. The latest turmoil may have hurt the confidence of buyers, especially as the fighting could impact on the pricing and continuity of Sudan's production. And making the public aware that the source of their supply could have a negative effect on their global image, and subsequently share prices.
The lack of transparency is unlikely to be an attempt to mislead consumers, yet it has to be questioned why pressure hasn't been put on soft drink companies to bring gum arabic into their sustainability agenda.
"[C]commitment to sustainability plays a role in supporting consumer loyalty" says Louise Stevens, sustainability manager at Innocent Drinks, whose products do not include gum arabic or any other stabilisers and who found that being "open and natural in all our communications … helped to build the relationship we have with our consumer base."
Stevens doesn't believe sustainability is a purchase driver for the majority of consumers but from her experience, "when more about our sustainability work … their affection and loyalty to [the brand] deepens."
"The problem is that with soft drinks like coke, a consumer is buying a product that is packed full of sugar and probably isn't wondering whether the ingredients have been ethically sourced" claimed a director of a soft drinks wholesaler, who preferred not to be identified. "Looking at it from Coca-Cola and PepsiCo's perspective, they may be asking themselves who's really going to benefit from knowing where the gum arabic comes from, when most consumers have probably never heard of it anyway".
Sarah Rivas, an independent humanitarian worker who has spent time in Sudan, working on projects to build sustainable markets for small-scale farmers, feels that companies should be transparent for the benefit of their global supply chain.
"For many local farmers, the acacia crop is their livelihood. Boycotting Coke in protest won't necessarily work, as these companies will source from elsewhere or look for alternatives. And cheaper, chemical substitutes aren't the answer either" she explained. Up to five million people in Sudan alone depend on income from gum arabic, with some earning less than £900 a year.
"As far as I'm aware, soft drink companies do not buy the raw gum directly from the farmers, but maybe they should. If done properly, it could lead to improved wages and regulated working conditions," said Rivas, referring to the need for investment in sustainability programmes for gum arabic – similar to Coca-Cola's project to support sugarcane cultivation.
"If they'd rather not be closely associated with Sudan, the likes of Coca-Cola and PepsiCo should at least consider shedding some light on the matter."
Source: Guardian Professional.
