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

Today's theme is "The Future of Food in Japan." Everyone gathered here today is working toward delivering rich, delicious, and safe food, and further solving social issues through food. I view "food" not just in terms of the nutritional aspect of sustaining life, but as something nurtured by countries, regions, and individual households—something that supports 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 disparity and exclusion, and the challenges of achieving diversity and inclusion, can all be seen through the lens of food.

First, Mr. Hayashi from Hikari Miso, could you tell us about your areas of interest and your awareness of the issues?

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 nation where disposable income has not increased over the past 30 years. Now, as we talk about the post-COVID or with-COVID era, there are increasing reports that Japan alone is falling behind.

I believe that consumption based on sustainability and ethics ultimately 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 voices saying, "We don't mind the cost, so please stop using plastic bags for instant miso soup and switch entirely to paper; we'll 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 a price increase of even 1 yen accepted. 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. It's something that cannot be solved by corporate effort alone; a response is needed regarding what to do, including the administration, but nothing is being implemented.

To put it bluntly, Japan works hard to use tax money to export rice and beef. However, regarding ethical and environmental responses, while they might say "that's a good direction," they don't actually implement them as policies on a national level. I think we need to think more about the local domestic consumption right under our feet. I'm not saying we should leave everything to the administration, 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 are usually 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.

Those areas are 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 administration 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?

Certainly, words like "sustainable" and "ethical" are trendy, but there are doubts about how much value people actually feel there is in paying money for them in reality.

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 animal fat and meat-heavy diets of the West.

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 yet have an abundance of goods, companies and distributors worked hard so that everyone could eat delicious food. At that time, mass production and mass promotion worked well, so I think that remains strongly as a value.

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

Distributors think of the customers and believe that making things cheap will make them sell. But I think that's a short-term view. To make things cheap, 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 a delicious smile, but it's a great shame that those efforts aren't 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 customers as well—where there is a story behind the food, and they can be convinced 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 we can create 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 of the issues the catalyst for starting your business?

I wanted to solve problems 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's a sense of excitement. No matter how many fine words you say, you need a design to connect that to everyday actions.

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

I was in the food and beverage industry for a long time. Even while I was a student at SFC, I worked part-time behind the scenes at a Japanese restaurant, spending every day stuffing massive amounts of leftovers into trash cans, which made me realize the internal circumstances of restaurants. After graduation, I worked at Ginza Lion, and even while doing store management and floor work, 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 things like food loss.

At the Aoyama Farmers Market, once a month to reduce food loss, we would buy up all the unsellable vegetables from farmers and make soup in something like a disaster relief cooking pot for 600 people. That way, 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 the company "Co-Cooking," but I felt that awareness-raising activities alone were difficult. I thought the speed of changing the world through that alone was very slow.

I thought we had to prepare the infrastructure as a system 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 think we need to turn the over-optimized entire supply chain into a more sustainable form that fits the current era.

Everyone's stories are very impressive. Personally, I chose food as my field of research because I believed that food information, such as traceability, creates value. 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 the 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. There are parts where that is quite difficult in Tokyo, but since I am currently involved in the field of education through food, I hope to raise many people who can have that imagination.

I think the phrase "taru o shiru" (to know what is enough) is a very good Japanese expression. Human desires are limitless, but things would change significantly if we could think, "This is enough." I want to raise people who can face food with imagination and based on their own identity, rather than in 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 imagination becomes richer through experiences that expand oneself by having curiosity about food.

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 demographic volume zone is still largely in their 40s and 50s. In that case, 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 young 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 demographic 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 actually buy miso, we never reach a conclusion no matter how much we discuss it. For example, it's said in the industry that young people don't eat Japanese food but return to it as they get older, but I don't think that's the case. In McDonald's in Tokyo, you see elderly men and women working hard at eating hamburgers (laughs).

What I felt listening to everyone's stories is that, for example, the origin of traceability was something we were forced to do reactively. When the BSE issue came out, or the GMO issue came out—in other words, because consumers felt distrust due to scandals on the supply side—we did it in a hurry; 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 didn't fulfill sufficient accountability, consumer groups got the impression that nothing they did was any good, 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 are only for one generation, so you have to buy them every year. After pesticides are sprayed, the horizon of the soybean field is pure white. 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 speaking as well.

So, various things emerged from a reactive place initially, and we are in a transitional period now, but I think from here on, consumers will become proactive—first accepting future directions like ethical, sustainable, and the feeling of "mottainai" (wastefulness), and then taking action proactively.

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

I think many people don't know the essential parts behind the GMO story either. 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; Japan was at that level back then. That would be unthinkable today. 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 many processed foods, including ours, are imported from China. For example, instant miso soup and various other things contain dried or freeze-dried vegetables, but seeing the manufacturing sites is a shock. They throw away spinach whose leaves have turned just slightly yellow. They process only the tiny beautiful parts and send them 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 "taru o shiru."

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.

In the end, informing people is important; if you don't convey anything, they think that's normal. It's about explaining the reasons and the background properly so that they can be convinced when they buy.

In that sense, TV programs have recently started showing the manufacturing 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 there are distribution networks like the JA (Japan Agricultural Cooperatives), we can buy vegetables at prices like 40 yen per cardboard 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 next based on that. When talking about food loss, there are often people who 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 the price were twice as high. There are many evaluations that think in extremes, so I think we should let people know that there is a middle ground.

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

I've heard that department stores also keep products lined up until closing because they'd be in trouble if they ran out of stock.

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

For bakeries in commercial facilities or stations, only about 40% are baked in the shop, and the remaining 60% come from factories. In that case, they don't deliver all the bread just once in the morning; they are 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 items left over at night the next morning. We use TABETE as a means to inform people of such things.

We absolutely have the reasons for listing on TABETE written down. We want them to disclose as much as possible that loss is occurring for these reasons, and I think it's very important to create touchpoints 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 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 that even supermarkets are throwing away 500 billion yen worth annually.

Regarding food loss, I think the general public started to learn various information after the SDG goal of "responsible consumption and production" emerged. Before that, was it like an inconvenient truth?

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

That finally started to change a bit about a year ago. A sense that it's no use just talking about the economy finally emerged. This is exactly like a story of Sustainability Transformation; the feeling used to be that environmental value, social value, and economic value were three things fused together, but instead of being fused, it's a stack where social value exists because of environmental value, and economic value exists because of social value. It's come to be understood that if this bottom part collapses, the top will all fall together.

Also, I think "deliciousness" isn't just about taste. Deliciousness changes depending on with whom, how, and at what timing you eat. A meal eaten with someone you dislike isn't 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 one can find deliciousness with a high degree of satisfaction and conviction for oneself.

In Japan, because fast food entered rapidly, "cheapness equals deliciousness" became the norm. But deliciousness should be diverse for each person. It's the same for vegans. They don't eat things like beef because they dislike the background, such as environmental impact issues or animal welfare issues.

I think the way of eating that is delicious for oneself is very important. It's about searching for a way of eating and a deliciousness that has a high degree of conviction.

Due to a 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 and stop to think about what you want to eat now and what is delicious to you.

I think there's also an issue of education. It's common in Japan for uniform education to be provided. What I also idealize is food that I myself am convinced by. If each person chooses what they like and eats it deliciously, it doesn't matter what the person next to them is eating; 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 top-tier people respect each other's ways of thinking. However, when people like a "noisy minority" go "that's no good," people who don't know much follow them and start attacking, so I think that's a challenge.

That's why it's very important how we guarantee that people can choose after knowing diverse options.

That's right. Regarding the story of the uniformity of vegetables, I think it's strange that while it's natural for humans to have tall and short children, people feel they must have uniform vegetables. Like a musical jam session, I think it would be good if it became fun to think creatively, like "Today we got sour tomatoes instead of the usual sweet ones, so what kind of dish should I make?"

The story that society is the foundation of the economy and the environment is the foundation of society was eye-opening. I think certification is one means of informing people 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 this also have the meaning of accountability to society?

I believe my company has acquired certifications more aggressively than our competitors or other general processed food manufacturers. This includes organic certification, Halal, Kosher, and gluten-free.

Over the past 20 years, I have traveled frequently overseas and noticed something while looking at sales floors and the people there: abroad, safety and peace of mind are things you have to buy with money. This is especially true in the United States. That is why certification systems are so important.

Conversely, Japan has a culture where water and safety are considered free. Therefore, companies tended to view certifications as meddling, and consumers didn't think much about them either. There is a mindset that domestic soybeans are naturally better than imported ones, so even now, there isn't much of a foundation for buying something with confidence just because it has a certification mark.

Because I was so determined to export miso overseas, I decided to get every certification I could. A senior executive once told me, "No one complains if a company spends money on the environment," which made sense to me, so the first thing I did was quickly obtain ISO 14001.

After that, I began to work hard on organic miso, which made me want the organic certification mark. Also, while traveling frequently abroad, I learned about things like Kosher, which follows Jewish dietary laws. We use this certification for exports to the U.S. now, but I don't necessarily expect Jewish people to buy it. I view Kosher as a standard given to things that are properly made.

Regarding Halal, when I looked at Southeast Asia, I noticed at local supermarkets that Halal food was the standard and non-Halal was the exception. In large supermarkets, there would be a small separate room, and only that area was non-Halal.

Certification systems have developed overseas as a way to spend money to buy safety, peace of mind, and perhaps even taste. I believe we should utilize this effectively in Japan as well. To begin with, Japanese culture and values are based on the idea of "please look at the effort we are making." This is true in corporate education as well, where seniors tell juniors to watch how hard they are working.

But that doesn't work in the global market. We are in an era where we must actively promote ourselves. I believe certification systems are one way to do that.

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

I believe organic and gluten-free certifications pay for themselves many times over. In fact, it has reached the point where you can't do business without them.

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

I heard that Mr. Ogawa supports the introduction of HACCP, including at facilities for people with disabilities. Has the situation changed significantly 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 complying with the institutionalization of HACCP. The world is becoming a place where you must be able to prove that you are doing things properly by recording data.

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

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

Exactly. For Japan, it can be described as adapting to international standards for hygiene management. It is also a non-tariff barrier. For example, there is a barrier for Japanese companies exporting to Europe, stating that food must be made according to 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 institutionalizing HACCP. I think you could say Japan has finally joined that movement.

I completely agree.

In international trade, there is a principle of non-discrimination, so if you don't institutionalize HACCP in your own country, you can't really 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 expect this will have 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 do 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 with overseas ingredients. However, now the price of containers has 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. Now, when soybeans leave a U.S. port, they go to Busan, Qingdao, or Dalian before coming to Japan. Direct flights have almost disappeared. Because cargo for Japan is no longer profitable, all direct services have been eliminated.

Given this situation, I feel that 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, I have been conscious of finishing products using things that can be harvested locally. My honest feeling is that I should have focused on making products using domestic ingredients much earlier.

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 occurred regarding COVID-19?

I was mostly providing venues or working on projects, so there wasn't much change for 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 things will move toward a regionally decentralized society, and it will become a dual-axis system. I feel that many people in their 30s and 40s at manufacturers are starting to think about what they can do within that decentralized society, as they will be with their companies for a bit longer.

In work, increasing sales is important, but it is also vital to use our resources 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, those who noticed that the back end of the Japanese food industry was quite exhausted all feel that we cannot continue like this.

My honest impression is that consumer behavior hasn't changed much, even with a pandemic of this scale. Certainly, on the business side, various information was disclosed—for example, there was constant reporting on what happens to restaurants when customers disappear.

In a sense, I think it was good that the spotlight hit primary industries. Reports came out daily saying that people in primary industries were in great trouble. People wondered why, even though supermarkets were busy with home consumption, and it revealed scenes of distribution that are usually not 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 don't think this has changed much even after COVID-19. Admittedly, the makers themselves don't like to talk much about the effort they are putting in.

That's true. It's like, "You'll understand once you eat it." There's a bit of a culture where it's considered cool not to show the incredible effort being made behind the scenes.

There is 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 pay attention. This isn't necessarily just a matter of money; it's also a matter of mindset.

I saw on the news that through "TABETE Rescue Deli," you are taking vegetables that went unsold at local direct sales offices, putting them on trains, and selling 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, isn't it?

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

Farmers usually bring less to the direct sales office because they assume it won't sell anyway, but when there is someone like us buying up the surplus, they start bringing more as a challenge, 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 how to address 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. It is 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 at the sales floor.

When I buy 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 do not guarantee zero pesticide residue. I do business with those who will support us in an emergency. 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 simply saying it's safe and secure or that it's made here from a third-party perspective is no longer persuasive. Speaking your own thoughts—I believe that is the most important thing.

When you think about speaking one's mind and certification together, rather than certifying a finished product, it is now becoming process certification—certifying that production or manufacturing is done properly according to promised procedures.

Obtaining certification serves as 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, there is informed consent where risks are discussed and the patient decides whether to receive treatment after being satisfied. I think food is also entering an era where we provide explanations and then let people choose whether to eat it or not by providing options.

Finally, I would like to ask what the future of our food will look like. 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 Japanese people have somehow lost their 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 excellent. In fact, average life expectancy is long, and bodies have been built with good ingredients over many years.

After the war, protein that used to come from fish and beans was replaced by dairy and meat, and carbohydrates that used to be rice were replaced by wheat flour. Of course, there was some enjoyment in that, and things became cheaper and everything became available through 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 currently a bit lost.

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

Furthermore, there is no other nation as delicate and sensitive as this one. 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 has been pasteurized (heat-sterilized).

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

That's how much of a coveted target Japanese food is as a business. I don't want to sound like I'm "blowing my own horn" (miso)—though it literally is miso (laughs)—but the combination of Japanese food and fermentation has a great reputation.

Compared to 10 or 20 years ago, the trend has shifted toward the idea that not just miso, but fermented Japanese foods improve the intestinal environment, boost immunity, and lead to overall health and wellness. I want us 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 great, they end up saying "no, no, not yet" and focusing on cost reduction.

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.

It's difficult to think about the future, but I think the environment is changing little by little. I'm thinking about how to create a business where no one loses, but 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 brings you high satisfaction, rather than just money?" I think it's about how we can 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 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 today who are struggling to eat. What are your thoughts on that?

I don't believe 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 certainly necessary as a symptomatic treatment, and I hope that activities like food banks continue to expand. For our part, we need to think about how the TABETE app can include mechanisms for payment even for those without smartphones or credit cards.

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

On the other hand, there are quite a few people in poverty in large metropolitan areas. However, the law currently does not allow CtoC (consumer-to-consumer) as a business mechanism or app. How we can 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 sharing through CtoC. This is still a dream for now.

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 blurred them even further. Does that mean competition will become fiercer? Not necessarily. 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 while 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. Instead of fighting over markets, the idea of sharing them, or work-sharing, and complementing each other in various ways has the potential to be realized in the food sector 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 how to support things close to home that cannot be solved with money, such as helping facilities for people with disabilities comply with the institutionalization of HACCP. 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 eye-opening insights. I personally felt through this discussion 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.