Efficacy of front-of-pack nutrition labels in improving health status

Food Compass and the challenge of sustainability on the route towards healthful diets

In order to tackle the global increase in overweight and obesity prevalence, several nutrient profiling systems have been developed; among others, Food Compass Score (FCS) has been designed to encompass multiple domains of food healthfulness. However, environmental sustainability of healthy diets is another crucial dimension which should not be overlooked in the context of human health. The aim of the present study is to assess the association between healthiness and environmental sustainability of food items, using the FCS and Agribalyse databases, respectively. A total of 806 matching food items were identified, grouped in 12 food categories; within each category, differences in median Z-scores between FCS and Single Environmental Footprint (EF) Score were assessed. While Fruits, Legumes and Nuts, Mixed foods, Meat Poultry and Eggs (MPE), Savory and Sweets, and Vegetables showed statistically significant differences (all p < 0.001), Beverages (p = 0.361), Dairy (p = 0.092), Fats and Oils (p = 0.594), Grains (p = 0.436), Sauce and Condiments (p = 0.093), and Seafood (p = 0.241) had similar Food Compass and Single EF Z-scores distributions. These findings underscore a relevant lack of difference between healthfulness and environmental impact of some prominent food categories, such as Grains and Seafood. Therefore, we suggest matching nutrient profiling systems with adequate environmental sustainability indices.

How Much Do Front-Of-Pack Labels Correlate with Food Environmental Impacts?

Nutrient profiling and front-of-pack labeling (FOPL) have been developed to categorize food products as more or less healthy based on their nutrient content and to easily communicate this information to consumers. The goal is to change individual food choices toward a healthier diet. Since global climate change has recently become an urgent matter, this paper also aims to investigate the correlations between different food health scales, including some FOPLs currently adopted by one or more countries, and several sustainability indicators. For this purpose, a food sustainability composite index has been developed to summarize environmental indicators and compare food scales. Results indicate, as expected, that well-known healthy and sustainable diets are strongly correlated with both environmental indicators and the composite index, while FOPLs based on portions or on 100 g show moderate and weak correlation values, respectively. Within-category analysis has not found any associations that explain these results. Hence, 100 g standard, on which FOPLs are usually developed, seems not to be the ideal basis for developing a label that aspires to communicate healthiness and sustainability in a unique format, as required by the need for simple messaging. On the contrary, FOPLs based on portions appear to be more likely to achieve this goal.

The importance of front-of-pack labels in improving health status and eating behavior

The aim of this Editorial is to give an overview on the multiple aspects of front-of-pack labels (FOPLs) and provide the readers a balanced view of the problems raised in this research field, placing them in a wider context. Furthermore, this editorial paper discusses whether and how the use of FOPLs can promote health status in relation to the individual eating pattern and which should be the next research scenarios to investigate to further improve and integrate these tools.

Front-of-pack labels: "Directive" versus "informative" approaches

Front-of-pack labels (FOPLs) aim at communicating to consumers the health value of food items in support of public health policies. Two main types can be discerned: directive and semidirective FOPLs using color schemes (e.g., Nutri-Score) and informative FOPLs (e.g., Nutrinform Battery). Directive approaches tend to show a "wear-out effect" and, additionally, they tend to have various underlying conceptual problems. Usually, their nutritional scores are calculated using changing, arbitrary algorithms and involve a reductionist set of parameters of debatable validity. Thus, they overstate the effects of selected nutritional factors, such as saturated fat and energy, while overlooking the food matrix and the more holistic aspects of nourishment. Moreover, they do not reflect the portion that is consumed, ignore the preparation steps at home, and fail to serve as a useful basis for composing a healthy diet. Also, so long as the nutritional formulations match the algorithmic standards, they tend to allow ultra-processed products. Thus, this might confuse and mislead consumers. Overconfidence in green-colored labels could even result in unbalanced dietary choices, whereas avoidance of red products may eliminate certain foods from the diet that are rich in essential nutrients (e.g., cheese), leading to opposite results than aimed for. The latter is particularly relevant to vulnerable populations, such as the young, pregnant women, and older adults, or for individuals with specific needs. Taken together, directive FOPLs such as Nutri-Score contradict the declared intent of the European Commission to empower consumers to undertake healthy and balanced diets based on easily accessible and robust information. Although informative systems usually also keep the focus on a few selected nutritional parameters, they have are less paternalizing and obviate the need to classify foods as healthy or unhealthy. They also focus attention on the individual portions that are consumed (even if the definition of portion size remains contentious). Given the importance of dietary patterns, rather than individual foods or nutrients, directiveFOPLs of the Nutri-Score type represent a regretful case of nutritionism. Finally, attempts to associate the adoption of a FOPL with an improvement in the health status are few and mainly applied in virtual settings; none of which are longitudinal, nor have they been able to identify a causal link.

The influence of front-of-pack nutritional labels on eating and purchasing behaviors: a narrative review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Front-of-Pack Nutritional Labels are considered a useful tool to help consumers orient themselves in their food choices and direct their behavior toward a healthier diet. FOPNL development and use are part of a framework that includes cognitive, biological, hedonic and cultural aspects, able to affect consumers' eating and purchasing behavior.

AIM

Given the complexity of the matter, the aim of this narrative review is to analyze the combination of different factors that drive food choices and eating behaviors and to highlight some aspects that are not fully studied.

METHODS

The authors conducted the research using a top-down approach at first, followed by a bottom-up approach; starting with general considerations about the purchasing process, gradually narrowing the discussion to a specific sub-population, and finally extending the discussion back to more general reasonings about the direction to adopt in future, or at least to evaluate, for effective communication.

RESULTS

Biases and attitudes toward food products were found to regularly interfere with buying behavior patterns, making it impossible to standardize an average consumer. This reflects in current research, increasing the complexity of the topic. All determinants influencing food choices are often assessed individually rather than in a synergistic and multidimensional context, while the purchasing scenario is characterized by multiple stimuli to which the consumer is subjected. FOPNLs' impact on perceived healthiness has been studied in different conditions, but some population subgroups have not been sufficiently represented. In particular, the effect of FOPNLs on consumers suffering from eating disorders is understudied and needs further attention. Furthermore, some approaches can be compared to "negative nutrition" or "loss-framed communication", putting nutrients out of context, emphasizing losses more than gains and risking promoting negative feelings in consumers.

CONCLUSION

Due to the heterogeneity of studies, evidence on what works best in driving people to adopt lasting lifestyle changes is still mixed. Science communicators and policymakers should consider the possibility that a multi-component approach incorporating nutrition information and education may be a key strategy to promote consumers' self-consciousness and to support them in their cognitive efforts toward a healthy and sustainable diet.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level V, narrative review.

Uncovering the Effect of European Policy-Making Initiatives in Addressing Nutrition-Related Issues: A Systematic Literature Review and Bibliometric Analysis on Front-of-Pack Labels

The last decades have been marked by the introduction of front-of-pack labels (FoPL) as an institutional corrective action against obesity and nutrition-related illnesses. However, FoPL-related policy-making initiatives issued by the European Union evolved over time and led to a diversity of labels with different effects on consumers’ decisions. As a result, the extant literature adapted to the regulative scenario over the years and investigated the effects of the labels, creating consensus on some topics while being fragmented on others. Similarly, policy-makers adapted some regulations to the evidence supported by the research. With the aim to systematize the overall structure and evolution of the literature on FoPL, investigate the presence of a consensus on specific topics through a co-citation analysis, and examine the evolution of the consensus and co-citation networks over the years and potential research gaps, we report the results of bibliometric and co-citation analyses and a systematic literature review involving 170 papers and a selection of 49 articles published in the last months, for a total of 219 articles, analysed according to three timespans (Period 1 (1989–2011); Period 2 (2012–2016) and Period 3 (2017–2022)). Our findings highlight the interplay of policy development and FoPL research, the presence of few self-reinforcing and well-established co-citation networks based on validated evidence in the literature and the presence of alternative emerging theories that offer different and valid perspectives overlooked by mainstream co-citation research networks.