A Country-of-Origin Discussion
Very few people would be happy to discover their food was not what they thought it was. That’s part of the reason food labels exist: to keep us informed and safe when making grocery decisions. Some insights, like general ingredient lists to determine the presence of allergens, can be obvious requirements however, more intrinsic properties like the carbon footprint of production or the country of origin are reliant on labels for transparency. Occasionally, mistakes and nefarious practices can riddle our retail spaces with “maplewashing,” making shelves look more Canadian than they actually are.
What makes a label?
Throughout 2025, geopolitical tensions with our southern neighbours have led to increasing calls for Canadian-made products. In 2026, the fervor for Buy Canadian has continued, with much of what would have been American purchases being substituted with Canadian products even in spite of higher prices. With a much weaker processing capacity than many of the countries we regularly import from, Canada’s strength can be ignorantly cornered as an economy of raw goods or ingredients. Unfortunately, just because Canada was involved does not mean the product can be labelled “Canadian.” Thus, the inclusion of Country-of-Origin Labels (COOLs), which are used to clarify where in the world our foods primarily come from.
It’s important to remember that, with the exception of a few major food categories, COOLs are largely voluntary. This serves to differentiate the product from its competitors namely, that the country this product is from is superior to that similar product over there. We cannot taste where something comes from directly, but we value labels that inform us of indirect quality. That’s partially why certain foods like maple syrup from Canada, pineapple from Costa Rica, and chocolate from Belgium are considered top quality offerings. A voluntary COOL does not change the product’s safety, as all goods sold in Canada must adhere to the same guidelines. Those who do opt into COOL when it is not required must adhere to additional conditions to remain compliant i.e. that a Product of Canada is, in fact, 98% sourced from Canada.
Regulatory Imperfection
The perceived problem with COOL is with the technicalities. Technically, so long as a food product is labelled imported, they do not have to write the origin country on the front of the packaging. Technically, “Made in Canada” can apply to products with and without Canadian ingredients. These minute differences can sometimes cause confusion about the true origins of a product and, amongst consumers actively searching for it, can cause extreme frustration over the ethicality of a business.
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency, between April 2025 and mid-March 2026 handed out tens of thousands of dollars in fines to businesses and suppliers misrepresenting imported goods as Canadian. No noncompliance is acceptable when retailers are, to most, the only gate between consumers and the rest of the food supply chain however, the quantity of 2026 fines was surprising given the federal government’s announced crackdown on country-of-origin claims, via the Safe Food for Canadians Act.
So, if mandatory COOLs would provide peace of mind, why not?
To answer this, we will look back to the United States of America, who has had mandatory COOL legislations since 2009. Originally, all cuts of meat were required to be identifiable by the country the animal was raised in however, the World Trade Organization ruled in 2015 that revisions be made to remove certain cuts of beef; the policy had led to significant declines in Canadian red meat exports and farmer livelihoods. As the conversation continues in 2026, mandatory COOL policy is seen as protectionist opposed to an advertisement for domestic consumption.
Are there any options?
When Canada mandated its front-of-packaging nutrition symbols in January 2026, the responsibility fell to suppliers. Mandatory COOLs across food categories would fall under the responsibility of the retailer. Canada’s current retail market works such that suppliers pay to position their products on shelves, often looking for eye level locations or endcaps to draw greater attention to their product over the neighbouring one. Advertising Canadian products would force that system to change, which may not be a bad thing for grocery fairness, but likely has not been fully considered in the long term.
If retailers want to start actually promoting Canadian goods, their pricing systems must also change. For example, if grocery stores are already making an effort to supply more Canadian produce, supplementing the demand difference with imports, then the products should not be lumped together into the same sale. That skews the perceived value of Canadian goods. Honest labelling is a cornerstone of food credibility, and it can be difficult to navigate labels to determine from where it was sourced. While ensuring every product on our shelves prominently identifies the country from which it was sourced may not be the answer to increased transparency, there are real changes retailers can make without official legislation that can help promote Canadian goods. Knowing where we can support our farmers, our businesses, or our overall economy can never be a bad thing.