[Feature: The Future of "Food" in Japan] Roundtable Discussion: To Deliver Rich and Sustainable Food

Today's theme is "The Future of Food in Japan." Everyone gathered here today is working to deliver rich, delicious, and safe food, and to solve social issues through food. I believe that "food" is not just about the nutritional aspect of sustaining life, but is something nurtured in countries, regions, and individual homes, supporting a person's unique happiness and way of life.

Food is also deeply involved, both directly and indirectly, in many of the SDGs. Issues regarding the environment and resources, as well as social inequality and exclusion, and challenges toward realizing diversity and inclusion, can all be seen through the lens of food.

First, Mr. Hayashi from Hikari Miso, could you speak about your areas of interest and concerns?

Lately, terms like "sustainable" and "ethical" are often used in the context of food, but in Japan's case, I believe the biggest headwind is economic power. Japan is almost the only developed country where disposable income has not increased over the past 30 years. Now, as we move into the post-COVID or "with-COVID" era, there are increasing reports that Japan alone is falling behind.

I believe that sustainable and ethical consumption costs money. When you add health and wellness aspects to that, from the perspective of a private sector manager, the slowdown in economic growth looks like the biggest handicap.

For example, our company is currently focusing on exports. Before COVID, when I visited local restaurants and supermarkets during overseas business trips, I would hear people say they didn't mind the cost and wanted us to stop using plastic bags for instant miso soup and switch entirely to paper, because they would raise the unit price and make a profit that way. This is unthinkable in Japanese supermarkets. Even if we say we want to switch to paper as an environmental measure, it is not easy to get them to accept even a 1-yen price increase. When I think about the cause of this, it ultimately comes down to economic power.

In European or American distribution, in most cases, price increases are passed on, and the end consumer accepts them. That is not happening in Japan. This is the most painful part of the Japanese market. This is something that cannot be solved by corporate effort alone; a response is needed, including from the government, but nothing is being implemented.

To put it bluntly, Japan works hard to use tax money to export rice and beef. However, regarding ethical or environmental responses, while they might say "that's a good direction," they don't actually implement it as a policy on a national level. I think we need to think more about the local domestic consumption right in front of us. I'm not saying we should leave everything to the government, and corporate effort is of course important, but I think it lacks balance.

To give another example, shopping bags now cost money in Japanese supermarkets, but they are 2 or 3 yen everywhere. In European supermarkets, they cost about 10 or 20 yen in Japanese currency. In exchange, they are of a quality that can be used many times. I wonder what Japan is doing by handing out shopping bags that can only be used once.

That kind of thing is half-baked, or in my interpretation, it's all about a "follow-the-leader" mentality within each industry. So, even for a single shopping bag, they started charging because the government told them to. But because they don't have the confidence to charge 5 or 10 yen, it ends up being 2 or 3 yen wherever you go. That's not a real solution to the problem, is it?

It's true that words like "sustainable" and "ethical" are trendy, but in reality, there are doubts about how much people actually value paying for them.

Even if the direction of sustainability and ethics is visible, I feel it's still not grounded in reality. However, it is a fact that Japan originally had a good environment regarding food. Japanese dietary habits are extremely healthy compared to the Western emphasis on animal fats and meat.

You've raised a point that gets to the heart of the matter. Mr. Kanamaru, what are your thoughts?

I understand what you're saying very well. Probably during the post-war high-growth period, when Japan didn't have an abundance of goods yet, companies and distributors worked hard so that everyone could eat delicious food. At that time, mass production and mass promotion worked well, so that remains strongly as a value.

Today, values have diversified, everyone wants to live in their own way, and we are in an era where we must also think about the global environment, but the old model remains as a successful experience. I think consumers have also come to take it for granted that they can continue to get good things cheaply.

Distributors think of the customers and believe that lowering prices will lead to sales. But I think that's a short-term view. To make things cheaper, raw material manufacturers and farmers have to cut their profits. The strain has to show up somewhere.

People in the food service industry, raw material manufacturers, and farmers all work hard for the sake of delicious smiles, but it's a great shame that those efforts are not reflected in the cost, and at the end of the line, it becomes all about cost-performance.

Even when we talk about "ethical," the difference between clothes and food is that food is instinctive and a daily necessity, so I think it's unavoidable that people want to eat delicious and cheap things. Therefore, I feel it would be good if mutual understanding progressed in a way that benefits the customer, where there is a story behind the food, and they can feel satisfied that they can feel enriched even if it's 10 or 20 yen more expensive.

Right now, there are parts where people are communicating only through price without understanding each other. If it becomes a form where there is a benefit to knowing more about each other, I think customers will start to see it as their own concern.

Mr. Kanamaru, you started your current company as an internal venture from a major food manufacturer. Was that kind of awareness the catalyst for your entrepreneurship?

I wanted to solve issues through food by combining sustainability and diversity, so I focused on plant-based foods. What I learned from processing and selling them is the difficulty of solving social issues through food. Preaching absolutely doesn't work; I felt keenly that customers won't pick it up unless there is a sense of excitement. No matter how many fine words you say, you need a design to connect that to daily actions.

Mr. Kawagoe, from what kind of awareness did you start your business?

I was originally in the food and beverage industry for a long time. Even while at SFC, I worked part-time behind the scenes at a Japanese restaurant, spending every day throwing massive amounts of leftovers into the trash, which made me realize the internal circumstances of restaurants. After graduation, I joined Ginza Lion, and even while doing store management and floor operations, I kept the perspective of food loss in mind.

I was also involved in the Slow Food movement. In recent years, the Slow Food movement in Japan had become like a gathering of gourmets, so I worked as a director of the association to rejuvenate it and return it to a grassroots movement, while also conducting awareness-raising activities for food loss.

At the Aoyama Farmers Market, once a month, we would buy up all the unsellable vegetables from farmers to reduce food loss and make soup in something like a disaster relief cooking pot for 600 people. By doing that, things that would have been thrown away can be eaten normally. We did that as an awareness-raising activity on a donation basis.

At that time, I had already started a company called "Co-Cooking," but I felt that awareness-raising activities alone were difficult. I thought the speed of changing the world would be very slow with just that.

I thought we had to prepare the system and infrastructure and create a path like a "1.5-tier distribution," if not a secondary distribution. When I looked into it, I found that in Europe since around 2015, there were services like the current "TABETE" that sell ingredients resulting from food loss through a different form of distribution. At the time, no one was doing this in Asia, so I started it as a leap of faith.

I've become like a food loss specialist now, but I feel more like I'm currently focusing on food loss from the perspective of Slow Food. I believe food sustainability and diversity are what we should originally aim for, and I'm taking on the challenge because I believe we need to change the entire over-optimized supply chain into a more sustainable form suited for the current era.

Everyone's stories are very impressive. I personally believed that food information, such as traceability, creates value, so I made food my field of research. Eventually, I started focusing more on food safety themes like HACCP, but I also feel that imagination is necessary to promote ethical consumption and local production for local consumption.

For example, in a certain region of Germany, everyone drinks local wine, but according to experts, that wine isn't actually that delicious. However, they buy it by the case because it's their village's wine, and everyone drinks it throughout the year. Also, in Swiss supermarkets, even if there are cheaper eggs from other regions, they buy local eggs because they feel that if they don't, the Swiss dairy and livestock industries will disappear.

In this way, if we can imagine the producers and the future, I think we will be able to find satisfaction in paying for food within that region. While that is quite difficult in Tokyo, I am currently involved in the field of food education, so I hope to raise many people who can have that imagination.

I think the Japanese phrase "taru o shiru" (to know what is enough) is a very good one. Human desires are limitless, but if we can think "this is enough," things will change significantly. I want to raise people who can face food with imagination, based on their own uniqueness rather than comparison with others.

I am also currently creating an online space called "OUR TeRaSu," and the themes there are also imagination and curiosity. Since people tend to be satisfied with only the information they are given, I want to convey that by having curiosity about food and experiencing the expansion of oneself, one's imagination becomes richer.

I am currently doing joint research with SFC students, and the theme is exploring a new relationship between consumers and producers. Instead of the producer providing things unilaterally, we are trying to create the future through mutual understanding, viewing the eater as a partner as well.

However, the largest population segment is still the 40s and 50s. As a result, they still tend to prefer cheaper options, and I think it's still difficult to create a market by mixing in the values that are budding in younger people.

There must be generational differences in the purchasing demographic. For example, current university students learn about the SDGs as a matter of course, and everyone knows the word "ethical." I think consumption trends might change when that segment eventually becomes the primary consumers, but right now we are in a transitional period.

The difference between generations is very troubling. When it comes to the question of who will buy miso, we never reach a conclusion no matter how much we discuss it. For example, in the industry, it's said that younger people don't eat Japanese food but return to it as they get older, but I don't think that's true. In McDonald's in Tokyo, you see elderly people working hard at eating hamburgers (laughs).

What I felt listening to everyone's stories is that, for example, the origin of traceability was something that had to be done reactively. The BSE problem arose, the GMO problem arose—in other words, because consumers became distrustful due to scandals on the supply side, it was done in a hurry, and we were forced to respond whether we liked it or not.

I think the story of GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms) is exactly like that. To begin with, the ones who created trends like "Roundup Ready" (herbicide-resistant crops) were globally notorious giant chemical companies. Because they did not fulfill sufficient accountability, consumer groups got the impression that no matter what they did, it was bad, and that's why all GMO crops became unacceptable.

I also used to travel overseas often to purchase soybeans, and non-GMO seeds and pesticides are sold as a set. Moreover, they have to be bought every year for just one generation. After pesticides are sprayed, the soybean fields are white to the horizon. No matter how much we are told scientifically that there are no health problems, once you see that site, you don't want to eat it, emotionally included.

So, various things emerged from a reactive place initially, and we are now in a transitional period, but I think from here on, it will become proactive, and consumers will first come to accept future directions, ethical, sustainable, and the feeling of "mottainai" (wastefulness), and then they will start taking proactive actions.

I think we have just started to accept it. Next, the supply side must also take proactive actions, and consumers will take action themselves, saying they have the right to choose. I think they will gradually wake up in that way.

I think many people don't know the essential truths behind the GMO story. It's very important to make that known.

Information disclosure is truly important. I think it has really changed in every country over the last 30 years or so. Companies that are indifferent to the consumer's right to know will have a difficult time from now on.

When I entered this industry about 30 years ago, some parts of the food industry could label products as domestic if they used 70% domestic raw materials; that's how Japan was back then. That would be unthinkable now. Corporate managers, consumers, and middle distributors have all steadily undergone a change in consciousness, so I think this is a good direction.

Another thing is that, like us, many processed foods are imported from China. For example, instant miso soup and various other things contain dried or freeze-dried vegetables, but seeing the production site is a shock. Spinach with even slightly yellowed leaves is thrown away ruthlessly. Only the tiny beautiful parts are processed and sent to Japan. I wonder if it's okay to be doing this.

Not just household consumers, but the entire supply chain and value chain must practice "mottainai" or "knowing what is enough."

When you go to the supermarket, there are only tomatoes and cucumbers of the same size, partly because standardization has progressed so much. It was a very rational system, but I think we are currently unable to successfully correct the parts that have become irrational.

It's important to let people know; if you don't convey anything, they will think that's normal. It's about explaining the reasons and the background properly so that they can buy with understanding.

In that sense, TV programs have recently started showing the production sites of food factories. Furthermore, I think it's very important that initiatives like TABETE, which Mr. Kawagoe is doing, have become increasingly recognized.

I think economic rationality and so-called efficiency were systems that Japan could be proud of globally. Precisely because of things like the JA (Japan Agricultural Cooperatives) distribution network, we can buy vegetables at prices like 40 yen per box. This system is probably hard to find anywhere else in the world.

This system was very convenient and good. But I think it's important to reflect on the fact that it caused this kind of pain. I believe we are in a transitional period of thinking about how to move forward based on that. When talking about food loss, some people often say, "Producing non-standard vegetables is bad because standards exist," but I don't think that's the case. We should appreciate past systems; perhaps there were many people who would have gone hungry if prices were twice as high. There are many evaluations that think in extreme divisions, so I think people should know that there is more of a middle ground.

However, the supply chain has become too long and complex, so it's true that there are parts that consumers have no way of knowing. For example, in industries like bakeries or what is called the "nakashoku" (ready-to-eat meal) industry, the wind of innovation hasn't blown at all for the last 30 years. In other words, the model of "lining up a lot on shelves and selling a lot" has not changed at all on the food retail side.

I've heard that department stores also keep products lined up until closing because it would be a problem if they ran out of stock.

That's right. How to solve the visualization of inventory with technology—we should actually be able to do more, but no one tries to do it. Also, when talking about food loss, we get complaints like, "Loss occurs just before closing, so why do you sell from the daytime?"

For bakeries in commercial facilities or stations, only about 40% is baked in the shop, and the remaining 60% comes from a factory. In that case, they don't deliver all the bread just once in the morning; it's delivered in shifts like first, second, and third deliveries.

In other words, loss occurs at the timing of delivery when switching products to new ones. It's also possible with things like bread to sell what was left over at night the next morning. We use TABETE as a means to let people know about such things.

We always have them write the reason for listing on TABETE. I think it's very important to have them disclose as much as possible that loss is occurring for these reasons, and to create a point of contact for consumers to know.

It's also becoming a tool for consumer education and social awareness.

To begin with, the existence of food loss itself was something that was more convenient if it wasn't known. But now, the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries and the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry are disclosing information, saying that supermarkets and others are throwing away 500 billion yen worth annually.

I think the general public has come to know various information about food loss since the SDG goal of "responsible consumption and production" emerged. Was it like an inconvenient truth before then?

Yes. This TABETE site officially opened in 2018, but when we started, shop owners would say that loss was a necessary evil. Because they were doing business on the premise of loss. In other words, the idea that the economy is most important was strong.

That has finally started to change a bit in the last year or so. The feeling that it's no use just talking about the economy has finally emerged. This is exactly like the story of Sustainability Transformation, where the feeling was that environmental value, social value, and economic value were three things fused together, but instead of being fused, social value exists because there is environmental value, and economic value exists because there is social value—they are stacked. It's come to be understood that if this bottom part collapses, the top will all fall together.

Also, I think "deliciousness" is not just about taste. Deliciousness changes depending on with whom, how, and at what timing you eat. A meal eaten with someone you dislike is not delicious even if you eat the same thing. It's delicious because you eat it with someone you like. Actually, deliciousness is something with that much fluctuation, and I think it's important how you can find deliciousness that is highly satisfying and convincing for yourself.

In Japan, because fast food and such entered rapidly, cheapness became synonymous with deliciousness. But deliciousness should be diverse for each person. The same goes for vegans. They don't eat beef because they dislike the background, such as environmental impact issues or animal welfare issues.

I think a way of eating that is delicious for oneself is very important. It's about searching for a way of eating and a deliciousness that is highly convincing.

Because of the follow-the-leader mentality in both individuals and companies, Japanese people have a strong tendency to feel anxious if they aren't the same as everyone else, so it's important to step away from that for a moment and stop to think about what you want to eat now and what is delicious.

I think there's also an issue with education. Japan often has uniform education. What I also idealize is food that I am personally convinced by. If everyone chooses what they like and eats it deliciously, it's fine no matter what the person next to them is eating, and I think it's good to enjoy those differences.

There are various ways of thinking like macrobiotics (a diet based on traditional Japanese foods like grains and vegetables) or low-fat (a diet with restricted fat intake), and it seems that top-tier people respect each other's ways of thinking. However, when people like the "noisy minority" go "that's no good," people who don't know much follow that and start attacking, so I think that's a challenge.

That's why it's very important how to guarantee the ability to choose after knowing diverse options.

That's right. Regarding the story of the homogenization of vegetables, I think it's strange that while it's natural for humans to have tall and short children, people insist that vegetables must be uniform. Like a musical jam session, I think it would be good if it became fun to think creatively, like "it's not a sweet tomato today, it's a sour one, so what kind of dish should I make?"

I was struck by the idea that society is the foundation of the economy, and the environment is the foundation of society. I think certification is one means of letting people know where raw materials come from, what kind of product it is, and what route it took to reach them. Hikari Miso has been quick to obtain various certifications; does that also have the meaning of accountability to society?

My company has probably obtained certifications indiscriminately compared to competitors or other general processed food manufacturers. Organic certification, Halal, Kosher, Gluten-free, and so on.

Over the past 20 years, I've traveled back and forth overseas frequently and noticed that in other countries, safety and peace of mind are things you have to buy with money. This is especially true in America. That's why certification systems become important.

Conversely, Japan has a culture where water and safety are free. Therefore, on the corporate side, certifications were seen as meddling, and consumers didn't think much about them either. Since there's a consciousness that domestic soybeans are naturally better than imported ones, there isn't much of a foundation even now for buying with peace of mind just because a certification mark is attached.

Because I was determined to export miso overseas, I thought I would try to get certifications indiscriminately. A senior manager told me, "No one complains if a company spends money on the environment," and I thought that made sense, so the first thing I did was obtain ISO 14001 early on.

After that, I started working hard on organic miso, and then I wanted the organic certification mark. Also, while frequently traveling overseas, I found things like Kosher, which follows Jewish dietary laws. I use this certification for exports to America now, but I don't particularly expect Jewish people to buy it. I see Kosher as a standard given to things that are made properly.

Regarding Halal, when I was conscious of Southeast Asia, I noticed at local supermarkets that Halal food was the standard and non-Halal was the exception. There would be a small separate room in a large supermarket, and only that part was non-Halal.

Certification systems have developed overseas as a way to buy safety, peace of mind, and perhaps even deliciousness with money. I believe this should be effectively utilized in Japan as well. To begin with, Japanese culture and values are "please look at where we are making an effort." It's the same in company education, where a senior says to a junior, "look at how hard I'm working."

But that doesn't work in the world. We are in an era where we must actively appeal. I believe certification systems are one part of that.

It's like a tool for global communication, a kind of language. I imagine certification costs money, but does that investment yield a proper return?

I believe organic and gluten-free certifications pay for themselves and then some. In fact, we've reached a point where you almost can't do business without them.

In Western markets, if you say, "This is miso made from the most expensive domestic soybeans from Hokkaido," no one will buy it. The angles for products that are valued in Japan are completely different from those overseas. Perhaps there is a slight trend toward that in Japan as well.

I heard that Mr. Ogawa is supporting the introduction of HACCP, including at facilities for people with disabilities. Does it feel like the situation has changed completely in terms of food safety and hygiene?

Yes, hygiene management based on HACCP has become mandatory by law in Japan. We are supporting cafes at facilities for people with disabilities and local restaurants in responding to the institutionalization of HACCP. It means we are moving into a world where you must be able to prove you are doing things properly by recording data.

Since HACCP was institutionalized, it is no longer a voluntary certification. It is now an obligation that businesses must fulfill, so it has become different from the certifications for differentiation that Mr. Hayashi was talking about.

So it has become something that must be done as a mechanism to fulfill accountability when something happens.

That's right. For Japan, it can be described as adapting to international standards for hygiene management. It is also a non-tariff barrier. For example, just as there is a barrier for Japanese companies exporting to Europe where food must be made in accordance with HACCP. With various free trade zones like the TPP being established, the government must protect its own fisheries, agriculture, and food industries. One means of doing that is the non-tariff barrier aspect of HACCP institutionalization. I think you could say Japan has finally gotten on board with that.

I completely agree.

In international trade, there is a principle of non-discrimination, so if you don't institutionalize HACCP in your own country, I think there are parts where you can't say no to imported goods.

I feel that while the globalization of food is progressing further alongside institutional changes, movements toward localization, such as local production for local consumption, are also proceeding in parallel.

After being pushed around by the COVID-19 issue for two years, as we move toward balancing it with the economy, what we are suffering from most right now is the massive chaos in global container logistics. I see this having a significant impact for the next 5 to 10 years.

Actually, all the raw materials for our organic miso are sourced from overseas. When I decided to go organic about 20 years ago, I wondered why Japan was so focused on domestic ingredients, and I wanted to challenge the idea that delicious miso could be made even with overseas ingredients. However, now container prices have doubled, tripled, or quadrupled, and even after they leave port, we don't know when they will arrive.

Japan has been completely left out of global logistics. Currently, when soybeans leave a port in the US, they first go to Busan, Qingdao, or Dalian before coming to Japan. Direct flights have almost disappeared. Since cargo bound for Japan is no longer profitable, all direct services have been eliminated.

Given this situation, I think excessive dependence on overseas sources is risky. In the case of overseas raw materials, from a long-term perspective, there is also the question of whether it is right to use fossil fuels to transport materials from far away. Therefore, for about two years now, I have been conscious of moving toward finishing products using things that can be harvested locally. My honest feeling is that I wish I had focused earlier on making products using domestic ingredients.

So COVID-19 became a turning point?

It feels like various Japanese vulnerabilities and weaknesses are being exposed right now.

In your businesses or within the scope of what you see, what other changes have there been regarding COVID-19?

Since I was mostly providing venues and doing projects, there wasn't much change in the company itself, but my way of thinking changed.

Even considering the environment, the era led by large-scale American agriculture might be coming to an end. I think that will still exist in parallel, but I feel like there will be things that circulate in a regionally decentralized society, and it will become a dual-axis system. I feel there are many people in their 30s and 40s at manufacturers who will be with their companies a bit longer and are starting to think about what they can do in a decentralized society.

In work, increasing sales is important, but it's also important to use the resources we have to do what is necessary for the society of the future. If we stay as we are, we will end up making our children endure hardships.

Even before COVID-19, people who noticed that the backside of the Japanese food industry was quite exhausted all feel that we cannot continue like this.

My honest impression is that consumer behavior doesn't change much even when such a pandemic occurs. Certainly, various information was disclosed on the business side, and for example, the media kept reporting on what would happen to restaurants if customers disappeared.

In a sense, I think it was good that the spotlight hit primary industries. Reports came out daily saying people in primary industries were in great trouble, and while supermarkets were busy with home consumption, people wondered why. This revealed scenes of distribution that aren't usually seen, such as tens of tons of vegetables grown for school lunches being discarded.

However, what Japanese people fundamentally lack is respect for the people who make things, such as those in primary industries, and I think this hasn't changed much even after COVID-19. Although, to be fair, the makers themselves don't like to talk much about the effort they put in.

That's true. They have an attitude like, "You'll understand if you eat it." There's a bit of a sense that it's cool not to show it on the surface, even though they are making incredible efforts behind the scenes.

There's also the issue of the supply chain. Retail has become the strongest. In Japan's pursuit of efficiency and economic development, retail is supreme, and the structure has become such that the further upstream you go, the weaker you become.

But ultimately, that directly affects the sustainability of food. In other words, the makers disappear. Japan needs to seriously consider what will happen if there are no makers left in 50 years, but it's hard to get people to look at that. I think this isn't necessarily just a matter of money, but also a matter of mindset.

I saw on the news that Mr. Kawagoe's "TABETE Rescue Deli" takes vegetables that were left unsold at local direct sales offices, puts them on trains, and sells them in the city center. That is exactly a case of successfully matching vegetables that were left over partly due to the impact of COVID-19.

At seven direct sales offices of JAs around Higashimatsuyama in Saitama, farmers have to go pick up whatever is left over after closing. Many are elderly, and that is exhausting, so we buy up everything that is left over, put it on the Tobu Tojo Line from Shinrin-koen to Ikebukuro by train, and sell it in Ikebukuro.

Farmers usually only bring a small amount to the direct sales office because they assume it won't sell anyway, but when there is someone like us to buy up the surplus, they take the challenge and bring more, which I think is great.

The quality of vegetables at direct sales offices is high. Unlike those picked early for distribution, they are put out fully ripe, so the taste is completely different. But farmers put them out at surprisingly low prices, so I'm struggling with what to do about that.

Both producers and manufacturers must speak about their feelings in the first person. In Japan, there is a deep-rooted culture that silence is golden, the nail that sticks out gets hammered down, or the mouth is the source of disaster. I believe this is the root of all evil in modern Japan. I think it's important to talk about what you are doing and your feelings in your own name, and to write that on product packaging and on signs in the sales area.

When I purchase organic certified soybeans, I basically always go to the producer to see if they are trustworthy. I don't buy just because they have JAS certification. Certification systems don't guarantee zero pesticide residue. I do business with those who will support us in the unlikely event of a problem. Some have even provided all their cultivation records for about 100 farms.

We are entering an era where consumers won't buy unless the producer speaks to them. It's becoming an era where just saying it's safe and secure or that it's made here from a third-party perspective lacks persuasiveness. Speaking your own thoughts—I think that is the most important thing.

Thinking about speaking one's thoughts together with certification, rather than certifying the finished product, it is now becoming process certification—certifying that production or manufacturing is done properly according to promised procedures.

Obtaining certification becomes proof that you are doing what you should be doing every day, and I think the world is gradually becoming a place where it is considered good to properly promote that you are doing so. Regarding HACCP as well, I think it's about proving that you are following the process properly through records.

That's right.

Conversely, there is an accountability to provide evidence if something happens. In medicine, through informed consent, risks are discussed and patients are convinced before deciding whether to receive treatment. I think for food as well, we are entering an era of providing options where people choose whether to eat something after an explanation is given.

Finally, I'd like to ask what the future of our food will be. While Japanese food itself is diversifying greatly, I also feel that Japanese food traditions and culture are being re-evaluated.

Currently, it seems to me that for some reason, Japanese people are losing pride and confidence in traditional Japanese food culture. For example, they tend to be drawn to cutting-edge food trends from places like Northern Europe, but Japanese food was originally good. In fact, average life expectancy is long, and bodies have been built with good ingredients over many years.

After the war, protein intake shifted from fish and beans to dairy and meat, and carbohydrates shifted from rice to wheat flour. Of course, I think there was some enjoyment in that, and things became cheap and available everywhere due to vast processed food technology. That has its good points, but in the process, people lost confidence in the base of their diet, and I think they are wandering a bit aimlessly now.

I believe business related to Japanese food is a wonderful job and has international competitiveness. Japan was originally in a good place regarding food. I want to say that although we've lost a little confidence now, let's aim for the world's cutting edge.

Furthermore, there is no nation as delicate and sensitive as this. Therefore, to succeed as a business there, high quality in various senses is naturally required. I want to work with more confidence in that, and since what a single private company can do is limited, I want to connect with various sectors and sometimes have the government help as well.

So while Japanese food is attracting a lot of attention overseas, it's the Japanese people who have lost confidence.

For example, on our English website, we get inquiries almost every day asking if our miso is probiotic or if it's pasteurized (heat-sterilized).

However, inquiries from within Japan are zero. Additionally, from overseas, we get offers almost every day from people wanting to carry our miso or asking to be a distributor.

To that extent, Japanese food is a coveted target for business. I don't want to sound like I'm "beating my own drum" (miso)—pardon the pun—but Washoku plus fermentation has a great reputation.

Compared to 10 or 20 years ago, the trend has changed not just for miso but for Washoku fermented foods, with the understanding that they improve the intestinal environment and boost immunity, leading to overall health and wellness. I want to be a company that contributes to everyone's health by changing dietary habits.

Japanese food is praised worldwide. Despite that praise, there is a culture of humility, and because people feel they can't say they are that good, they end up thinking, "No, no, we're not there yet," and ultimately resort to cost-cutting.

There are various technicians, and there are top-level manufacturers and producers. It's a waste that they are exhausted within Japan despite being praised globally.

Thinking about the future is difficult, but I think the environment is changing little by little. I'm thinking about how to create a business where no one loses, but for that to happen, it's meaningless if only we do it; we need to involve all stakeholders and the entire supply chain, including various companies and producers.

It's about saying, "Wouldn't you be happier if you seriously thought about what gives you a high level of satisfaction, rather than just money?" I think it's about how to create a movement where people feel that way is more fun and satisfying. For TABETE users, it's fine if they are people who weren't interested in food loss but somehow started to care about it.

Saying we want to make the world better sounds a bit too lofty, so we just naturally involve people in the idea of "Isn't this a better world?" I think there is a future if the number of players from the younger generation who act as the epicenter of such movements increases.

I thought a business where no one loses also relates to the inclusion of "leaving no one behind," but on the other hand, there are people in Japan right now who are struggling to eat. What are your thoughts on that?

I don't think the problem of poverty is something that can be solved just by giving food. So, I don't really link the problem of food loss with the problem of poverty. However, I think that is of course necessary as a symptomatic treatment, and I hope that activities like food banks will continue to spread. For our part, we need to think about making the TABETE app work for people even if they don't have a smartphone or credit card.

From the beginning, we have been saying, "The TABETE service is a modern version of osusowake (sharing surplus)." I think the culture of osusowake contributed greatly to the security of society and communities. But the culture of osusowake has disappeared in large metropolitan areas.

On the other hand, there are quite many people in poverty in large metropolitan areas. But currently, the law doesn't allow doing CtoC as a business mechanism or app. How to realize that—whether it's through credit transactions or blockchain, I don't know—but I think it's important to see how we can create a world of modern osusowake through CtoC. This is still a dream story, though.

It feels like something could be done by combining technology like IT with mechanisms of trust. Mr. Ogawa, what do you think?

The boundaries between retail, ready-to-eat meals, and dining out were already becoming blurred, and I think COVID-19 made them disappear even more. While you might think competition would become fiercer, there are parts where that's not the case. For example, there are stories of a cafe in Harajuku that employs people with disabilities starting to provide bento boxes to children's cafeterias, creating various new community connections.

A restaurant operator in Kagoshima, who used to do business for tourists, started finding things they could do within the community as foreigners stopped coming altogether, such as providing vegetable scraps from the restaurant to the local zoo.

In that way, while boundaries disappear and things get tough in some areas, there are also aspects where new horizontal connections and new complementary relationships are being formed within communities. The idea of sharing rather than competing for markets, or work-sharing—there is a possibility that the concept of complementing each other in various ways will be realized in the food field as well.

In the sense of connecting people, goods, and services, information will become increasingly important. I think the role played by IT platforms and technology to realize this is significant.

While I research these large global trends, what I want to focus on most is supporting those nearby who cannot solve problems with money, such as how to support the response to HACCP institutionalization at facilities for people with disabilities. There are places that will listen if a student goes instead of a university faculty member, so I hope to engage in initiatives where students enter society to contribute and, in turn, are raised by the community.

I was also thinking about what I can do in my own position while listening to your stories. Today was full of truly eye-opening stories. I felt firsthand in today's roundtable that knowing things changes one's mindset and way of thinking, which in turn changes actions. I will continue to learn. Thank you very much.