Unhealthy diets are increasing contributors to poor health and mortality in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Government interventions targeting the structural drivers of unhealthy diets are needed to prevent these illnesses, including nutrition labelling regulations that create healthier food environments. Yet, implementation remains slow and uneven. One explanation for slow implementation highlights the role of politics, including powerful ideological discourse and its strategic deployment by economically powerful actors. In this article, we advance research on the politics of nutrition policies by analysing political discourse on nutrition labelling regulations within an influential and under-studied global institution: the World Trade Organization (WTO). We identified WTO Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee meeting minutes with reference to nutrition labelling policies proposed by Thailand, Chile, Indonesia, Peru, Ecuador, Bolivia, and Uruguay (2007–2019; n = 47). We analysed the frames, narratives, and normative claims that feature in inter-country discourse within TBT meetings and examined how actors mobilize ideological and material sources of power via these statements. We find that informal government challenges to nutrition labelling proposals within the Committee featured a narrative that individualized the causes of and solutions to poor diet, downplayed harms from industrialised food products, and framed state regulation as harmful and unjust. These non-technical claims mobilised neoliberal ideology and rhetoric to contest the normative legitimacy of members' proposals and to de-socialize and de-politicize poor diets. Furthermore, high-income countries (HICs) re-framed policy goals to focus on individual determinants of poor nutrition whilst calling for their preferred policies to be adopted. Patterns of discourse within TBT meetings also had striking similarities with arguments raised by multi-national food corporations elsewhere. Our findings suggest that non-technical and ideological arguments raised during TBT meetings serve as inconspicuous tools through which nutrition labelling policies in LMICs are undermined by HICs, industry, and the powerful ideology of neoliberalism.
Background: Front-of-pack nutrition labels (FoPLs) are increasingly implemented by governments internationally to support consumers to make healthier food choices. Although the Nutri-Score FOPL has officially been implemented in Belgium since April 2019, no study has been conducted before its implementation to compare the effectiveness of different FOPLs. Methods: The aim of this study was to compare food choices, objective understanding and perceptions of Belgian consumers in response to five different FOPLs, currently implemented in different countries internationally, namely the Health Star Ratings (HSR), the Multiple Traffic Lights (MTL), Nutri-Score, Guideline Daily Amounts (GDA), and Warning symbols. During the summer 2019, 1007 Belgian consumers were recruited and randomized to one of the five different FOPLs. Through an online questionnaire they were asked to choose one of three different foods within each of three categories (pizzas, cakes, breakfast cereals), as well as rank those same three foods according to nutritional quality, in the condition without as well as with FOPL. In addition, various questions were asked on their perceptions in relation to the FOPL they were exposed to. Results: Perceptions of consumers were favorable for all FOPLs with no significant differences between the different FOPLs. There were no significant differences in food choices among the different FOPLs, but Nutri-Score performed best for ranking food products according to nutritional quality. Conclusions: While there were no significant differences among different FOPLs for food choices and perceptions, the Nutri-Score was the most effective FOPL in informing Belgian consumers of the nutritional quality of food products.
BACKGROUND: Front-of-pack nutrition labels (FoPLs) are increasingly implemented by governments internationally to support consumers to make healthier food choices. Although the Nutri-Score FOPL has officially been implemented in Belgium since April 2019, no study has been conducted before its implementation to compare the effectiveness of different FOPLs. METHODS: The aim of this study was to compare food choices, objective understanding and perceptions of Belgian consumers in response to five different FOPLs, currently implemented in different countries internationally, namely the Health Star Ratings (HSR), the Multiple Traffic Lights (MTL), Nutri-Score, Guideline Daily Amounts (GDA), and Warning symbols. During the summer 2019, 1007 Belgian consumers were recruited and randomized to one of the five different FOPLs. Through an online questionnaire they were asked to choose one of three different foods within each of three categories (pizzas, cakes, breakfast cereals), as well as rank those same three foods according to nutritional quality, in the condition without as well as with FOPL. In addition, various questions were asked on their perceptions in relation to the FOPL they were exposed to. RESULTS: Perceptions of consumers were favorable for all FOPLs with no significant differences between the different FOPLs. There were no significant differences in food choices among the different FOPLs, but Nutri-Score performed best for ranking food products according to nutritional quality. CONCLUSIONS: While there were no significant differences among different FOPLs for food choices and perceptions, the Nutri-Score was the most effective FOPL in informing Belgian consumers of the nutritional quality of food products.
From 2016, it will be mandatory for most pre-packed food to carry nutrition labelling. This provides an opportunity to review the provision of additional nutrition labelling that is provided voluntarily on the front of packs. The Governments across the UK are committed to the provision of nutritional information to help consumers make better informed food choices. Key points from IPH response Obesity and related chronic conditions are already very prevalent and are expected to increase over the next decade, placing greater financial burden on health care services. Helping consumers to make informed choices about their diet is an important aspect of tackling obesity. Providing clear consistent and easy to understand front of pack (FoP) nutrition information is important in helping consumers to make healthy choices. IPH would support FoP nutrition information using the traffic light labelling scheme and High/Medium/Low text. FoP nutrition labelling should be supported by a public information campaign to educate consumers about portion sizes and recommended daily intakes of fat, sugar and salt. IPH would support a nutrition labelling approach which empowers and enables consumers to take responsibility for their own health through informed dietary choices. The FoP traffic light labelling scheme has the potential to encourage healthier product formulation as manufacturers pursue market share. This in turn would contribute to wider availability of healthier products.
The main objective of this dissertation was to expose the process involved in the design and the actual design of a nutrition label for restaurant's menus. The increasing overweight and obesity rates are a major concern for health organizations and governments. In order to fight this epidemic, the Commission of the European Communities outlined a Strategy for Europe on Nutrition, Overweight and Obesity related to health issues determining, among others, that providing nutritional information to consumers is a critical factor that may influence healthier food choices. Since the habit of eating out-of-home is related to the increasing overweight and obesity rates as well, the disclosure of nutritional information in restaurants (or mass caterers in general) can provide guidance to consumers while choosing their food. The process of designing a nutrition label for restaurant's menu was divided in to parts. The first part addressed research on communication, infographics and on the state-of-the-art of nutrition labels. The second part, and supported in the collected information and case studies' analysis, was related with determining the type of information to include in the label and the nutritional criteria in which it was going to be based. It also included the actual design decisions related to the model of a nutrition label for restaurants' menus, to be software generated. As future work it was pointed the necessity of testing it within the market and consumers and to develop an interactive solution for providing customized nutritional guidance. ; O principal objectivo desta dissertação consistia em expor o processo envolvido no design de um rótulo nutricional assim como desenvolver o seu próprio design. O aumento das taxas de excesso de peso e de obesidade são uma das grandes preocupações das organizações de saúde e dos governos. De forma a combater esta epidemia, a Comissão Europeia delineou o documento Strategy for Europe on Nutrition, Overweight and Obesity related to health issues que determina, entre outras decisões, que a provisão de informação nutricional aos consumidores é um factor crítico para influenciar a escolha de alimentos mais saudáveis. Dado que o hábito de consumir refeições fora de casa também está relacionado com o aumento das taxas de excesso de peso e de obesidade, a provisão de informação nutricional em restaurantes (ou estabelecimentos de restauração colectiva) pode orientar os consumidores na escolha das suas refeições. O processo de desenhar um rótulo nutricional para incluir no menu de restaurantes foi divido em duas partes. A primeira parte envolveu pesquisa nas áreas de comunicação, infografia e do estado da arte da rotulagem nutricional. Na segunda parte, e com base na informação reunida e análise de casos de estudo, foi determinado o tipo de informação a incluir no rótulo e os critérios nutricionais em que se fundamentaram. Incluiu também as decisões relativas ao design do modelo de rótulo nutricional para menus, que será gerado digitalmente. Como trabalho futuro foi apontada a necessidade de testar o rótulo nutricional no mercado e juntos dos consumidores e também a de desenvolvimento de uma solução interactiva para a provisão de orientação nutricional personalizada.
Food labelling legislation in the EU began with Council Directive 79/112/EEC relating to the labelling, presentation and advertising of foodstuffs. It has been made more detailed, more informative and more complicated by Council Directive 2000/13/EC and its amendment 2003/89/EC. Nutrition labelling and nutrition claims are regulated in Council Directive 90/496/EEC. The discussion of health claims in the Codex Alimentarius Committee on Food Labelling has been of influence in the EU and is one of the bases of the recent Proposal on Nutrition and Health Claims Made on Foods of 2003. There is a need to investigate consumer perception of the information provided on food labels and the lessons the consumer derives from such information.
International audience ; Objectives: The European Union (EU)-funded project FLABEL (Food Labelling to Advance Better Education for Life) aims to understand how nutrition information on food labels affects consumers' dietary choices and shopping behaviour. The first phase of this study consisted of assessing the penetration of nutrition labelling and related information on various food products in all 27 EU Member States and Turkey. Methods: In each country, food products were audited in three different types of retailers to cover as many different products as possible within five food and beverage categories: sweet biscuits, breakfast cereals, pre-packed chilled ready meals, carbonated soft drinks and yoghurts. Results: More than 37000 products were audited in a total of 84 retail stores. On average, 85% of the products contained back-of-pack (BOP) nutrition labelling or related information (from 70% in Slovenia to 97% in Ireland), versus 48% for front-of-pack (FOP) information (from 24% in Turkey to 82% in the UK). The most widespread format was the BOP tabular or linear listing of nutrition content. Guideline daily amounts (GDA) labelling was the most prevalent form of FOP information, showing an average penetration of 25% across all products audited. Among categories, breakfast cereals showed the highest penetration of nutrition-related information, with 94% BOP penetration and 70% FOP penetration. Conclusions: Nutrition labelling and related information was found on a large majority of products audited. These findings provide the basis for subsequent phases of FLABEL involving attention, reading, liking, understanding and use by consumers of different nutrition labelling formats.
This document is guidance information on the regulation of nutrition and health claims in Ireland. The document provides an overview of the: – Nutrition and health claims legislation – Nutrition labelling requirements for food products bearing authorised nutrition and health claims ; IE; en; info@fsai.ie
Greater availability of low nutritional quality foods and decreased consumption of nutrient-dense foods have negatively impacted the nutrient profile of the Canadian diet. Poor diet is now the leading risk factor for chronic disease and premature death in Canada. To help consumers choose healthful foods, nutrition labelling is one policy tool for communicating relevant nutrition information. However, there are notable shortcomings with current nutrition labelling systems, which make it difficult for Canadians to navigate the complex food environment. Government action on nutrition labelling systems, including front-of-package (FOP), shelf, and menu labelling, is required. In May 2016, we hosted a consensus conference with experts from research, policy and practice to review available evidence, share experiences and come to consensus regarding the next best steps for action on nutrition labelling in Canada. In this paper, we examine the evidence, opportunities and challenges surrounding FOP, shelf, and menu labelling. We outline recommendations, emphasizing FOP, shelf, and menu labelling as part of a standardized, coordinated and multi-pronged strategy supported by a robust, evidence-based nutrition profiling system. Recommendations for monitoring adherence to regulations and participation of stakeholders to avoid conflict of interest in policy development, implementation and evaluation are included. Within a comprehensive strategy, these recommendations can help to improve the nutrition information environment for Canadians.
More than half of German adults are overweight. Those most often affected include the elderly, poor, and individuals with poor education. Yet is overweight an issue that economists should address? Poor nutrition and lack of exercise play a major role in widespread diseases. One third of total health care expenditures are devoted to illnesses related to overweight. This is just one of the reasons why economists should examine how to promote more health-conscious nutritional decisions. One instrument favored by policy makers in this regard is nutrition labelling. At present, manufacturers display nutritional information on food packaging on a voluntary basis and in a non-standardised format. This is supposed to change. In the near future, the European Parliament will convene to debate the standardisation of nutritional information.
In South Africa there has been a paucity of data on food and nutrition labelling since the publication of the new food‐labelling legislation. This study aimed to explore whether the nutrition information on food products influences consumer purchasing behaviour; reasons for reading or ignoring nutrition information on labels, and to investigate expectations regarding food / nutrition labelling. Nine focus‐group discussions were held with adult consumers (N=67) in Cape Town, South Africa. Food price was sometimes the only consideration when selecting food products, irrespective of quality and nutritional value. When buying products for the first time, consumers were more inclined to read the nutrition information compared to habitual purchases or buying known brands. The list of ingredients, nutrient content claims and specific health endorsement logos were considered important. Reasons for reading nutrition information were mainly to assess the nutritional value or health properties, to avoid certain ingredients/allergens and to determine quality. Consumers struggled to understand the information on labels, specifically the nutrition information table. A lack of time or interest, price concerns and trust in labelling information also emerged as reasons why consumers ignore the nutrition information. There is a need for simpler food labelling, more graphics, and less complex terminology, information overload and quantitative information. It is recommended that a standardised front‐of‐package labelling scheme and a single health endorsement logo for South Africa be considered. More should be done to educate consumers on utilising the information on food labels correctly, in order for them to make healthier food choices
Since nutrition labelling is obligatory for all packed food circulating across the European Union (EU), out-eating people demand, ever more often, to be provided with proper nutrition information on food they are eating through the restaurant menu. Given that, at present, no EU laws and regulations mandate nutritional menu labelling, this study aimed to explore a possible relationship between the perception of the need for menu and packed food labelling in a group of Hospitality Management students (n=324; out of which 84 men and 240 women). To that end, a comprehensive three-section questionnaire comprising demographic data, the perception of the need for menu labelling and questions about packed food labelling was developed. The perception of the need for menu labelling was assessed using a five-point Likert scale, the answers thereby scoring from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (fully agree). The students of both genders consider menu-delivered nutritional information important (3.59±0.95) for making healthier food choices (3.96±0.98) and achieving better caloric intake control (3.81±1.07). Health impact of menu labelling is more appreciated by female as compared to male students. Students did not perceive menu labelling as a significant cost for the restaurant management (2.67±1.17). The results confirmed that in students of both genders there exists a significant correlation between their habit of reading nutrition labels and a positive perception of menu labelling (p=0.001), the perception of menu labelling health impact (p<0.001) and the perception of menu labelling as a means to an end of better energy intake control (p<0.001). However, when it comes to energy value labelling, a significant correlation was seen solely among female students. The results of multiple regression analysis confirmed that, unlike male students, female students perceive food labelling as a strong predictor of menu labelling intention (nutrition label reading habit, β=0.17; p=0.008; energy value label reading habit, β =0.23; p<0.001. These findings suggest that hospitality managers could act as valuable promoters of this innovative foodservice approach.
If each of us were to consider the food we had for lunch, we can probably estimate whether it was relatively healthy (e.g., did we go hungry, did it add to the variety of our diet, or consumption of five fruits and vegetables a day?). How easy is to make a similar judgement on whether our lunch contributed to a sustainable diet? For example, the carbon emissions associated with a simple sandwich can more than double, depending on the filling, where it is made, the packaging used and many more factors.1 Drawing on the past experiences of nutrition labelling on food products, we consider whether sustainability labelling can provide a practical route to encourage sustainable food choices, sustainable market changes, and a move towards sustainable and healthy food systems. Sustainability labelling on food products is most commonly associated with social and ecological certification schemes (e.g., USDA Organic Seal; Fairtrade mark; Friend of the Sea).2 More recently, an increasing number of labels have emerged which estimate the impact of a product on one or more environmental factor e.g., carbon foot-printing as a marker of greenhouse gas emissions or climate change.3 Research suggests there is a demand for these different types of sustainability labels; yet, it is uncertain if these labels will affect our everyday selections and purchases of food.4 Price, taste, brand, appearance, product familiarity and habits are still dominant reasons for our food choices; however, over 20 years' of research indicates nutrition labelling can drive healthy food choices and incentivise product reformulation.5 In 2019, a meta-analysis investigated the impact of nutrition labels on food products and menus (including a variety of nutrient content labels, claims, logos, or indices, such as warning labels and traffic light labels). They concluded a small impact of labels, which can reduce total energy and total fat consumption, increase vegetable intake, and positively impact industry reformulation for sodium and trans fat content.5 Further research is on-going regarding whether these impacts follow a social gradient and compound diet-related health inequalities (e.g., reformulated 'healthier' products are added to a range at a higher price point/available only in higher income countries; or numeracy skills are required to interpret health indicating labels).6 Food labelling has become part of the food system infrastructure, yet there are challenges with governing this sector. Voluntary recommendations and mandatory regulations are used to facilitate inter-/national trade (e.g., country of origin requirements by the FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius food labelling standards), and signify quality assurance, safety and traceability standards (e.g., declaration of trans fatty acids content). Ensuring compliance with regulation requires considerable resources from those responsible for governing the food system. For example, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has been harmonising and adapting food labelling regulation since 2006 to keep pace with a proliferation of food labels in the market. EFSA now require a portfolio of evidence from each manufacturer to authorise the use of a health or nutrient claim on their food product. This is to protect fair competition within the food industry and also to monitor the validity of claims to protect the public from being misled. Producing and reviewing these portfolios has taken considerable resources for both EFSA and the food industry. It is worthwhile to consider whether existing regulation and regulatory resources are sufficient to monitor sustainability claims if they were to become more widespread. Trust and transparency in any labelling scheme is essential for it to be meaningful and motivate change in individuals or industries. We have seen confusion surrounding the use of the term 'organic' on food products. These products can be ascribed a 'health halo', yet there are limitations in the evidence indicating a superior nutrition quality of organic products and health benefits may be more associated with the social values attributed to organic production. The use of certification schemes can encourage transparent standards; however, this is less clear with schemes (e.g., Fair Trade) which have been brought in-house: where products are self-certified rather than part of an 'independent' certification scheme. It is difficult to discern the sustainability of a product at point of purchase and maintaining the trust and transparency of different sustainability indices or metrics, across inconsistent product categories, will be paramount to ensuring accountability for food fraud or the use of exploitative marketing techniques.7 A major challenge with sustainability labelling of food products is the complexity of the sustainability concept itself, as well as the food system within which it operates. Sustainability is multi-faceted and sustainable food systems represent not only environmental factors (ecology), they are also sensitive to the health of the population today and in the future (nutrition, food security), and society as a whole (ethics and social welfare). Food systems themselves are also dynamic and complex: involving a multitude of changeable and inter-related activities, actors, and infrastructure from the production to the consumption, recycling and/or disposal of food. At every point there can be multiple environmental impacts, related to biodiversity, green house gas emissions (carbon dioxide, methane etc.), land, water or other resource use (e.g., nitrogen or phosphorous management). All these factors complicate the ability to create a metric or index that can trace a product as it journeys through the food system in order to assess its environmental, health or social impacts. Creating food systems that provide healthy food to everyone today and in future generations without exploiting human or planetary resources is one of the greatest challenges of this century. The development and use of sustainability labelling has the potential to play a role in moving towards sustainable and healthy food systems and a sustainable future, as outlined in the aims of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. The reach of food labelling is considerable and could increase public awareness of how food is produced and consumed. Nutrient labelling remains a popular public health intervention, with mandatory nutrition labelling in at least 50 countries worldwide, with highly processed and packaged foods making an ever greater contribution to the global diet (e.g., in a sample of sixteen countries approximately 85 % of packaged food carried a nutrient label, health/nutrition claim, or a health/nutrition marketing claim).8 9 Past experiences of nutrition labelling provide a number of cautions to the rise in sustainability labelling. First, sustainability labelling is unlikely to be a panacea for behaviour change in consumers. Instead it can target small incremental changes at different levels and actors in the food system, within both individuals and organisations. Second, there is the potential for confusion with sustainability concepts, which can be exploited for commercial or political use, particularly where competing interests are present. The media and public attention on climate change and rise in sustainability labelling of food products provides an opportunity to develop food system analytics and sustainability metrics. Using these metrics, actors within the food system will be better equipped to communicate the nuances and evaluate the risks and trade-offs of system-wide interventions, and ultimately contribute to the evolution of sustainable and healthy food systems. The authors declare no competing interests. KAB, FH, CK contributed substantially to the conception and drafting of this work; KAB, FH, FH, CK, CP revised the work critically for important intellectual content; all authors approved the final version to be published and agree to be accountable for the work. All authors receive funding from the Wellcome Trust's Our Planet, Our Health programme: KAB, FH, CK via the Sustainable and Healthy Food Systems (SHEFS) programme [grant number 205200/Z/16/Z], and CP via the Livestock, Environment and People (LEAP) project [grant number 205212/Z/16/Z]. This commentary does not necessarily reflect the views of the Wellcome Trust or its future policy in this area.
