There’s a lot of excitement right now from Big Food companies about how blockchain technology is going to provide the transparency that consumers crave in food. We’re optimistic on that long term vision, and we know many of the people working hard on blockchain solutions right now. But the reality is that initial implementations, while heavily buzzword-compliant, have been distinctly underwhelming in terms of the information they provide.
“What people want to know is where and how was my food grown, and who grew it?”
What people want to know, simply, is where and how was my food grown and who grew it? With that information, they can make their own informed choices about whether to trust the food and whether to buy it.
The irony of the blockchain buzz is that, architecturally, and when implemented correctly, it could be a neat solution to provide traceable information about industrially-produced food, which can travel for weeks to get to the consumer while passing through multiple vendors performing multiple processing steps along the way. But, increasingly, consumers are turning towards local real food they can trust, precisely because there are fewer steps in the supply chain.