The trial started on January 1 and meant foodstuffs containing more than 8% meat must indicate the countries of birth, rearing and slaughter.
For milk and food with dairy ingredients, the requirement was for the label to state the country where the milking was done and where the milk was transformed.
That information had to appear in the list of ingredients, either immediately after the name of the relevant ingredient or at the bottom of the list.
Italy, Lithuania and Portugal have adopted similar country of origin requirements for dairy products.
Beef + Lamb NZ chairman James Parsons said his organisation supported country of origin labelling so long as it was not mandatory.
NZ lamb sold in France was labelled accordingly and the trial would have little impact but Parsons said country of origin labelling could evolve in to a non-tariff barrier if adopted widely.
Meeting the labelling requirements could disrupt processing, there were direct and auditing costs and it compromised market drivers.
“Our fear is this can put a cost on the supply chain without adding value,” he said.
Dairy Companies Association executive director Kimberly Crewther described it as a move in the wrong direction for trade.
“They are a non-tariff barrier which has a chilling effect on trade by imposing additional costs and creating perceptions regarding quality or safety, that are not evidenced based.”
Mandatory labelling should be reserved for issues of food safety and consumer interests in food’s country of origin can be addressed through voluntary labelling, she said.
Crewther said country of origin schemes had previously been challenged through the World Trade Organisation.
When the trial ends in two years, the French Ministry of Agriculture would provide a report on the trial to the European Commission but there was no suggestion it could be rolled out among the 28 member nations.
The initiative would have market repercussions, according to a statement from the European lobby group FoodDrinkEurope.
Last year it said it “deeply regrets” the decision to impose a mandatory measure that had negative supply-chain consequences, created difficulties with labelling and would mean higher costs for producers and consumers.
“Moreover, of crucial importance in today’s context for Europe, this protectionist measure also sets an irreversible precedent for the fragmentation of the EU single market for foods and drinks.”
The group said by allowing France to embark on the trial, the European Commission accepted there was a difference in quality between French produce and that produced elsewhere in the European Union.
