《食品加工营养手册》参考资料（英文版）6 Consumers and nutrition labelling.pdf_大学文库

Consumers and nutrition labelling 143 Standards Agency(FSA); the last-named has taken over responsibility for this area from the(now defunct) Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAFF) since april 2000 Nutrition information is, therefore, an aspect of a very broad debate, often highly politicised, about the nutritional quality of the modern food supply, and specifically about the contribution to the modern diet, and therefore to the health of the population, made by pre-packed foods which, together with fast food restaurants and take-aways, make a substantial contribution to the total dietary intake of a significant proportion of the UK population. In terms of issues, the provision of nutrition information ranks very high in the diet and health debate. The UK has possibly been more absorbed by this subject than have most other European Member States, a reflection, perhaps, of the cultural attitude towards food as fuel and the growing obsession with fitness and body form in population inclining towards obesity. Where food has traditionally been enjoyed as one of life's great pleasures, notably France, the most important factor is what the product tastes like, not the vital statisticsof its content. These cultural dif- ferences across Europe have had a significant bearing on the regulatory controls governing food labelling, including nutrition information, and are in part respon- sible for what is generally regarded as a somewhat user unfriendly approach to nutrition labelling. This will be discussed in greater detail later in the chapter, but firstly the current application of nutrition labelling will be considered The provision of nutrition information, as with the provision of any other form of information, is an enabling mechanism intended to assist the purchaser to make a reasoned choice about the product he or she is considering buying. The degree of interest in this particular segment of the mass of information printed on a food label is a matter which will be discussed in greater detail in section 6.4, but two essential points should be borne in mind: The provision of nutrition information on a label is voluntary, unless a claim is made Approximately 80%o of pre-packed foods manufactured in the UK carry nutri tion labelling; this is far higher than in most other EU Member States The strict and detailed regulatory requirements which govern the presentation of nutrition information are set out below, and it will be clear from a brief glance that the legislation was not drafted with consumer understanding in mind. This is not necessarily a criticism of the lawyers-laws are, after all, drafted and inter preted by lawyers, not by the general public. So whilst the formulaic nature of the required presentation may appear unnecessarily prescriptive, there is good reason for this. The intention of the current legislation was to encourage the pro- vision of nutrition information in a prescribed format which would allow con- sumers to compare the nutritional content of various products. The effectiveness of this policy is another issue which will be discussed in greater detail in a later section, but it is not arbitrary and reflects the complexity of negotiating legisla tion on a contentious issue to cover a large trading block made up of a dozen European Member States, risen to 15 at the time of writing. These states have

Standards Agency (FSA); the last-named has taken over responsibility for this area from the (now defunct) Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAFF) since April 2000. Nutrition information is, therefore, an aspect of a very broad debate, often highly politicised, about the nutritional quality of the modern food supply, and specifically about the contribution to the modern diet, and therefore to the health of the population, made by pre-packed ‘convenience’ foods which, together with ‘fast food’ restaurants and take-aways, make a substantial contribution to the total dietary intake of a significant proportion of the UK population. In terms of issues, the provision of nutrition information ranks very high in the diet and health debate. The UK has possibly been more absorbed by this subject than have most other European Member States, a reflection, perhaps, of the cultural attitude towards food as fuel and the growing obsession with fitness and body form in a population inclining towards obesity. Where food has traditionally been enjoyed as one of life’s great pleasures, notably France, the most important factor is what the product tastes like, not the ‘vital statistics’ of its content. These cultural differences across Europe have had a significant bearing on the regulatory controls governing food labelling, including nutrition information, and are in part responsible for what is generally regarded as a somewhat ‘user unfriendly’ approach to nutrition labelling. This will be discussed in greater detail later in the chapter, but firstly the current application of nutrition labelling will be considered. The provision of nutrition information, as with the provision of any other form of information, is an enabling mechanism intended to assist the purchaser to make a reasoned choice about the product he or she is considering buying. The degree of interest in this particular segment of the mass of information printed on a food label is a matter which will be discussed in greater detail in section 6.4, but two essential points should be borne in mind: • The provision of nutrition information on a label is voluntary, unless a claim is made. • Approximately 80% of pre-packed foods manufactured in the UK carry nutrition labelling; this is far higher than in most other EU Member States. The strict and detailed regulatory requirements which govern the presentation of nutrition information are set out below, and it will be clear from a brief glance that the legislation was not drafted with consumer understanding in mind. This is not necessarily a criticism of the lawyers – laws are, after all, drafted and interpreted by lawyers, not by the general public. So whilst the formulaic nature of the required presentation may appear unnecessarily prescriptive, there is good reason for this. The intention of the current legislation was to encourage the provision of nutrition information in a prescribed format which would allow consumers to compare the nutritional content of various products. The effectiveness of this policy is another issue which will be discussed in greater detail in a later section, but it is not arbitrary and reflects the complexity of negotiating legislation on a contentious issue to cover a large trading block made up of a dozen European Member States, risen to 15 at the time of writing. These states have Consumers and nutrition labelling 143

144 The nutrition handbook for food processors diverse geographic and cultural backgrounds, and there are therefore differences in local food supply and eating patterns. If criticism is due, it should perhaps be aimed at those authorities whose job it is to explain the existence and meaning of legislation in lay terms, but this too can be a complex communication issue and many attempts have been made to bridge the gap between legislator and con- sumer, and in the case of nutrition information are still on-going. This aspect wi be developed later 6.2 Current EU nutrition information Legislation on nutrition labelling was developed as a means of providing consumers with information about the nutrient content of the foods they were choosing in a standardised format recognisable across the European Community, thereby also promoting the freedom of movement of goods in the Single market. the principal EU legislative instrument in this area , trition Labelling Directive. An essential part of the philosophy behind the Nu the growing recognition of the link between diet and health and the need to encourage consumers to make an informed choice about the foods they consume. It was considered that knowl- edge of the basic principles of nutrition and the provision of nutrition labelling would contribute significantly in this and act as a tool in the nutrition education of the public. To this end, it was deemed that the information provided should be simple and easily understood, with a standardised format that would allow comparison of one product with another. This means that the dual principles underlying EU legislation on nutrition labelling are consumer information and education and the removal of technical barriers to trade As usual in the development of harmonised legislation, one of the drivin forces was the divergence in national legislation that risked causing reciprocal barriers to trade after completion of the Single Market on 31 December 1992. In the UK there was no specific legislation on nutrition information, but the Food Advisory Committee(FAC)had issued guidelines on nutrition labelling, which had been widely adopted by the industry. The FAC was abolished in December 2001 because its functions have now been taken over by the board of the Food Standards Agency, but its advice at the time in question carried considerable weight. The Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food(MAFF) indicated its intention to introduce national legislation on the compulsory indication of fat content. This spurred the European Commission into pushing its own proposals forward, on the basis that the UKs freedom to legislate in this area was con- strained by its Community obligations under the Food Labelling Directive, 79/112/EEC(updated and consolidated in 2000 as Directive 2000/13/EC Work on European harmonisation began in 1988, when the Commission put forward two linked proposals, one on compulsory nutrition labelling and the other Official Joumal of the european nies,No.L276/40-44,6.10.90

diverse geographic and cultural backgrounds, and there are therefore differences in local food supply and eating patterns. If criticism is due, it should perhaps be aimed at those authorities whose job it is to explain the existence and meaning of legislation in lay terms, but this too can be a complex communication issue and many attempts have been made to bridge the gap between legislator and consumer, and in the case of nutrition information are still on-going. This aspect will be developed later. 6.2 Current EU nutrition information Legislation on nutrition labelling was developed as a means of providing consumers with information about the nutrient content of the foods they were choosing in a standardised format recognisable across the European Community, thereby also promoting the freedom of movement of goods in the Single Market. An essential part of the philosophy behind the Nutrition Labelling Directive, the principal EU legislative instrument in this area,1 was the growing recognition of the link between diet and health and the need to encourage consumers to make an informed choice about the foods they consume. It was considered that knowledge of the basic principles of nutrition and the provision of nutrition labelling would contribute significantly in this and act as a tool in the nutrition education of the public. To this end, it was deemed that the information provided should be simple and easily understood, with a standardised format that would allow comparison of one product with another. This means that the dual principles underlying EU legislation on nutrition labelling are consumer information and education and the removal of technical barriers to trade. As usual in the development of harmonised legislation, one of the driving forces was the divergence in national legislation that risked causing reciprocal barriers to trade after completion of the Single Market on 31 December 1992. In the UK there was no specific legislation on nutrition information, but the Food Advisory Committee (FAC) had issued guidelines on nutrition labelling, which had been widely adopted by the industry. The FAC was abolished in December 2001 because its functions have now been taken over by the Board of the Food Standards Agency, but its advice at the time in question carried considerable weight. The Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAFF) indicated its intention to introduce national legislation on the compulsory indication of fat content. This spurred the European Commission into pushing its own proposals forward, on the basis that the UK’s freedom to legislate in this area was constrained by its Community obligations under the Food Labelling Directive, 79/112/EEC (updated and consolidated in 2000 as Directive 2000/13/EC). Work on European harmonisation began in 1988, when the Commission put forward two linked proposals, one on compulsory nutrition labelling and the other 144 The nutrition handbook for food processors 1 Official Journal of the European Communities, No. L 276/40-44, 6.10.90

Consumers and nutrition labelling 145 etting out what that labelling should be. The Directive eventually adopted in 1990, Directive 90/496/EEC on nutrition labelling for foodstuffs, did not require compulsory labelling, except where a claim is made, and focused more on the nature and format of the labelling, about which it goes into great detail Interestingly, for a piece of legislation for which one of the primary aims is the provision of information regarded as being of benefit to the consumer, it is a highly technical Directive, unlikely to be understood by anyone without some knowledge of food science or food legislation, and ideally both. To understand and use it requires detailed analysis. The following are its main provisions 6.2.1 Provisions of the current legislation: format The provision of nutrition labelling is voluntary, unless a nutrition claim is made e.g. reduced fat, high fibre, 'low sodium. If nutrition information is given, it must be in one of two formats: either. Group I information: energy, protein, carbohydrate and fat(in that order) Group 2 information: energy, protein, carbohydrate, sugars, fat, satu ates,fibre and sodium(in that order These formats are commonly referred to as The Big 4 and The Big 4 plus Little 4. Quantities must be given per 100g or 100 ml of the food or drink,or per 100g/100ml and per serving. The Directive requires that the information be given in one place, in tabular format, with the numbers aligned if space permits Declarations may also be made in respect of vitamins and minerals, provided ey are listed in the Annex of the Directive and are present insignificant amounts currently defined as 15% of the Recommended Daily Amount(RDA), supplied per 100g or 100 ml of the food, or per package if the package contains only a single portion. The vitamins and minerals currently listed and their RDAs are Vitamin A(ug) 800 Vitamin B1(ug) Vitamin D(ug) 5 Biotin(mg) Vitamin e(mg) 10 Pantothenic acid(mg) 6 Vitamin C(mg) 60 Calcium(g) Thiamin(mg) 1. 4 Phosphorus(mg) Riboflavin(mg) 1.6 Iron(mg) Niacin(mg) 18 M SIum Vitamin B(mg) Zinc (mg) Folacin(ug) 200 lodine (ug) 150 a declaration may also be given in respect of one or more of the following · starch mono-unsaturates polyunsaturates

setting out what that labelling should be. The Directive eventually adopted in 1990, Directive 90/496/EEC on nutrition labelling for foodstuffs, did not require compulsory labelling, except where a claim is made, and focused more on the nature and format of the labelling, about which it goes into great detail. Interestingly, for a piece of legislation for which one of the primary aims is the provision of information regarded as being of benefit to the consumer, it is a highly technical Directive, unlikely to be understood by anyone without some knowledge of food science or food legislation, and ideally both. To understand and use it requires detailed analysis. The following are its main provisions. 6.2.1 Provisions of the current legislation: format The provision of nutrition labelling is voluntary, unless a nutrition claim is made, e.g. ‘reduced fat’, ‘high fibre’, ‘low sodium’. If nutrition information is given, it must be in one of two formats: either • Group 1 information: energy, protein, carbohydrate and fat (in that order). or • Group 2 information: energy, protein, carbohydrate, sugars, fat, saturates, fibre and sodium (in that order). These formats are commonly referred to as ‘The Big 4’ and ‘The Big 4 plus Little 4’. Quantities must be given per 100 g or 100 ml of the food or drink, or per 100 g/100 ml and per serving. The Directive requires that the information be given in one place, in tabular format, with the numbers aligned if space permits. Declarations may also be made in respect of vitamins and minerals, provided they are listed in the Annex of the Directive and are present in ‘significant amounts’, currently defined as 15% of the Recommended Daily Amount (RDA), supplied per 100 g or 100 ml of the food, or per package if the package contains only a single portion. The vitamins and minerals currently listed and their RDAs are: Vitamin A (mg) 800 Vitamin B12 (mg) 1 Vitamin D (mg) 5 Biotin (mg) 0.15 Vitamin E (mg) 10 Pantothenic acid (mg) 6 Vitamin C (mg) 60 Calcium (mg) 800 Thiamin (mg) 1.4 Phosphorus (mg) 800 Riboflavin (mg) 1.6 Iron (mg) 14 Niacin (mg) 18 Magnesium (mg) 300 Vitamin B6 (mg) 2 Zinc (mg) 15 Folacin (mg) 200 Iodine (mg) 150 A declaration may also be given in respect of one or more of the following: • starch • polyols • mono-unsaturates • polyunsaturates • cholesterol Consumers and nutrition labelling 145

but if a declaration is made in respect of polyunsaturates, mono-unsaturates or cholesterol, the amount of saturates must also be given. 6.2.2 Calculation of energy value For the purpose of calculating the energy value for these nutrients, the Directive specifies the values on which they are to be calculated by means of the following conversion factors: • carbohydrate (except polyols) 4 kcal/g – 17 kJ/g • polyols 2.4 kcal/g – 10 kJ/g • protein 4 kcal/g – 17 kJ/g • fat 9 kcal/g – 37 kJ/g • alcohol (ethanol) 7 kcal/g – 29 kJ/g • organic acid 3 kcal/g – 13 kJ/g 6.2.3 Definitions The Directive, like most pieces of legislation, must specify to what it refers so that all the nutrients are defined scientifically. So, for example, the Directive states that: ‘protein’ means the protein content calculated by using the formula: protein = total Kjeldahl nitrogen ¥ 6.25 and ‘saturates’ means fatty acids without a double bond This exemplifies the earlier comment that it is a Directive written for the food scientist rather than for the average consumer. The Directive also defines ‘average value’. This is necessary because the composition of foods is subject to natural variation due, for example, to variations in cultivar, weather, growing location, conditions and practices (crops) and in breed, seasonality, rearing conditions and practices (animal-derived materials). The Directive therefore states that: ‘average value’ means the value which best represents the amount of the nutrient which a given food contains, and reflects allowances for seasonal variability, patterns of consumption and other factors which may cause the actual value to vary.’ 6.2.4 Declared values These are the average values of the nutrients, as defined above, based on: 1 The manufacturer’s analysis of the food. 2 A calculation from the known or actual average values of the ingredients used. 3 A calculation from generally established and accepted data. 146 The nutrition handbook for food processors

Consumers and nutrition labelling 147 The amounts declared must be for the food as sold. However, where appro- priate they may relate to the foodstuff after preparation, provided that sufficiently detailed instructions for preparation are given and the information relates to the food as prepared for consumption The Directive provides for the use of the Standing Committee procedure in the event of discrepancies being found between the declared values and those estab- lished during the course of official analysis. The Standing Committee is convened from experts from all Member States who will adjudicate on the matter(s) placed before them. In the UK, the term'typical' is preferred toaverageand is more gen erally used as a more representative indication of value than the average. 6.2.5 Nutrition claims As stated earlier, the provision of nutrition information is voluntary unless a claim is made. So, for example, if a claim is made that a product is"low in fat', at least Group I information must be given. Very often the full Group 2 information is given, but this would only be compulsory if the claim were for one of the ' Little 4 nutrients, i.e. ' saturated fat rather than fat The directive defines as a nutrition claim any representation and any advertising message which states, suggests or implies that a foodstuff has particular nutrition properties due to the energy(calorific value)it provides provides at a reduced or increased rate or and/or due to the nutrients it contains contains in reduced or increased proportions or does not contain Only generic advertising is excluded from this, so if a producer decided to launch a campaign to persuade people to eat more fresh green vegetables and claimed hat green vegetables are low in fat, he would not have to include the nutrition information alongside his images of leafy green 6.2.6 Timescale e Directive came into force in September 1990 and required that trade in prod- ucts complying with the Directive be permitted by 1 April 1992 and that prod ucts not complying with the Directive be prohibited with effect from 1 October 1993. The Directive also required that, eight years from its notification, the Com mission would submit to the European Parliament and the Council a report on the application of the Directive and any appropriate proposals for amendment This review, due in autumn 1998, has not yet taken place at the time of writing and will be discussed further in sections 6.5 and 6.6

The amounts declared must be for the food as sold. However, where appropriate they may relate to the foodstuff after preparation, provided that sufficiently detailed instructions for preparation are given and the information relates to the food as prepared for consumption. The Directive provides for the use of the Standing Committee procedure in the event of discrepancies being found between the declared values and those established during the course of official analysis. The Standing Committee is convened from experts from all Member States who will adjudicate on the matter(s) placed before them. In the UK, the term ‘typical’is preferred to ‘average’and is more generally used as a more representative indication of value than the average. 6.2.5 Nutrition claims As stated earlier, the provision of nutrition information is voluntary unless a claim is made. So, for example, if a claim is made that a product is ‘low in fat’, at least Group 1 information must be given. Very often the full Group 2 information is given, but this would only be compulsory if the claim were for one of the ‘Little 4’ nutrients, i.e. ‘saturated fat’ rather than ‘fat’. The Directive defines as a nutrition claim: ‘any representation and any advertising message which states, suggests or implies that a foodstuff has particular nutrition properties due to the energy (calorific value) it – provides, – provides at a reduced or increased rate or – does not provide and/or due to the nutrients it – contains, – contains in reduced or increased proportions or – does not contain.’ Only generic advertising is excluded from this, so if a producer decided to launch a campaign to persuade people to eat more fresh green vegetables and claimed that green vegetables are low in fat, he would not have to include the nutrition information alongside his images of leafy greens. 6.2.6 Timescale The Directive came into force in September 1990 and required that trade in products complying with the Directive be permitted by 1 April 1992 and that products not complying with the Directive be prohibited with effect from 1 October 1993. The Directive also required that, eight years from its notification, the Commission would submit to the European Parliament and the Council a report on the application of the Directive and any appropriate proposals for amendment. This review, due in autumn 1998, has not yet taken place at the time of writing and will be discussed further in sections 6.5 and 6.6. Consumers and nutrition labelling 147

148 The nutrition handbook for food processors 6.2.7 Implementation Most legislation is only as good as its implementation and enforcement and the application of these procedures has been variable in the case of the Nutrition Labelling Directive. Some Member States were tardy in including it in their national legislation and some, the UK being a prime example, did it so clumsily hat it would have been a deterrent to use had the Directive itself not already been familiar to most UK food and drink manufacturers and its provisions already widely used on a voluntary basis. Reports from elsewhere in Europe suggest that national implementing rules, which invariably entail a degree of interpretation, have indeed been a deterring factor and have acted as a disincentive in provid- ing nutrition information voluntarily. The UKs record of some 80% of manu- factured food and drink products voluntarily carrying nutrition information remains a matter of surprise, admiration and consternation in other Member UK implementation of the Nutrition Labelling Directive is via the Food Labelling Regulations 1996(as amended). These are complex Regulations cov ering all the essentials of food labelling from batch marking to medicinal claims Implementation of the Nutrition Labelling Directive, which took place in 1994. carried with it the usual burden of complexity that comes with turning the posi tive approach of EU legislation(you are not allowed to do it unless the Directive says so) into the negative style of UK Regulations (you can do what you like unless the Regulations state that No person shall. ) The transposition of Article 4.1 of Directive 90/496/EEC, which states simply that Where nutrition labelling is provided, the information to be given shall consist of either group I or group 2 in the following order: Group I (a) energy value; (b) the amounts of protein, carbohydrate and fat. Group 2 (a) energy value b) the amounts of protein, carbohydrate, sugars, fat, saturates, fibre and became in Schedule 6A Part I of The Food Labelling(Amendment) Regulations 1994 a half page single table listing both Group I and Group 2 nutrients, plus all the additional nutrients allowed to be mentioned, such as polyols under carbo- hydrates and polyunsaturates under fats, with a complex set of cross references to Part Il of the Schedule and subsequent paragraphs of Part I to explain the two separate groups and how they should be set out. It is no wonder that MAFF needed to issue explanatory guidance notes to accompany the amendment to the 2 MAFF Guidance Notes on Nutrition Labelling, issued 18 March 1994

6.2.7 Implementation Most legislation is only as good as its implementation and enforcement and the application of these procedures has been variable in the case of the Nutrition Labelling Directive. Some Member States were tardy in including it in their national legislation and some, the UK being a prime example, did it so clumsily that it would have been a deterrent to use had the Directive itself not already been familiar to most UK food and drink manufacturers and its provisions already widely used on a voluntary basis. Reports from elsewhere in Europe suggest that national implementing rules, which invariably entail a degree of interpretation, have indeed been a deterring factor and have acted as a disincentive in providing nutrition information voluntarily. The UK’s record of some 80% of manufactured food and drink products voluntarily carrying nutrition information remains a matter of surprise, admiration and consternation in other Member States. UK implementation of the Nutrition Labelling Directive is via the Food Labelling Regulations 1996 (as amended). These are complex Regulations covering all the essentials of food labelling from batch marking to medicinal claims. Implementation of the Nutrition Labelling Directive, which took place in 1994, carried with it the usual burden of complexity that comes with turning the positive approach of EU legislation (you are not allowed to do it unless the Directive says so) into the negative style of UK Regulations (you can do what you like unless the Regulations state that ‘No person shall . . .’). The transposition of Article 4.1 of Directive 90/496/EEC, which states simply that ‘Where nutrition labelling is provided, the information to be given shall consist of either group 1 or group 2 in the following order: Group 1 (a) energy value; (b) the amounts of protein, carbohydrate and fat. Group 2 (a) energy value; (b) the amounts of protein, carbohydrate, sugars, fat, saturates, fibre and sodium.’ became in Schedule 6A Part I of The Food Labelling (Amendment) Regulations 1994 a half page single table listing both Group 1 and Group 2 nutrients, plus all the additional nutrients allowed to be mentioned, such as polyols under carbohydrates and polyunsaturates under fats, with a complex set of cross references to Part II of the Schedule and subsequent paragraphs of Part I to explain the two separate groups and how they should be set out. It is no wonder that MAFF needed to issue explanatory guidance notes to accompany the amendment to the Regulations.2 148 The nutrition handbook for food processors 2 MAFF Guidance Notes on Nutrition Labelling, issued 18 March 1994

Consumers and nutrition labelling 149 6.2.8 General requirements It is important that nutrition information is correct. Not only is it a legal require ment that any labelling information must be accurate and not misleading, but peri- odically consumer organisations run checks on the values given for the various nutrients and publicise embarrassing inaccuracies. The manufacturer also has an obligation to ensure that the label is understandable in the market(s) in which the product is sold. However, this requirement has not yet been extended to ensure that the consumer understands the nutrition information per se, only the language in which it is provided. Regrettably, it cannot be assumed that consumers through out the eu understand the nutrition information if given in the language of the country of manufacture even though it is set out in a recognised format and order of nutrients. On the other hand, consumers may well express interest in the nutri tional attributes of the product, whether or not nutrition information is provided Many manufacturers and retailers produce leaflets to help explai labelling and how it can help them to choose a balanced diet, or refer their cus tomers to some of the tions and resources referred to in section 6.7 6.3 Consumer expectations and understanding of nutrition labelling Of the many factors governing food choice, of which price is likely to be quite high on most people's lists, nutrition information may not figure strongly for many. But the enormous number and variety of food products available on the market today including imports of exotic foods and ingredients from all over the world, resulting from the increasing interest in ethnic dishes generated by long haul travel and TV cooks, not to mention new ranges of products inspired by these developments, means that the consumer needs ever greater knowledge and information to allow him or her to choose from this vast range. At point of pur- chase it is the food label that provides the information that will enable the con- sumer to make the choice between products. If diet and health are important to the consumer, the provision of nutrition information on the pack may be a decid- ing factor between purchasing the product and leaving it on the shelf or a more careful study of the nutrition panel later in the home may influence a repeat purchase A further influence on the provision(or not) of nutrition information may be the intermediate customer, namely the retailer, rather than the end consumer. The najor UK supermarket chains exert an enormous influence on the highly com petitive retail market for food and therefore on food production. All major retail ers stock a wide range of own label products, manufactured to their own specification by a variety of food manufacturers. The specification will cover not only the composition of the product but also the details of the food label. This will almost certainly include 'full nutrition labelling, i.e. theBig 4 and ' Little 4 nutrients( see section 6.2. 1)and possibly additional, supplementary voluntary information. which is discussed in detail in sections 6.5 and 66. Most retailers

6.2.8 General requirements It is important that nutrition information is correct. Not only is it a legal requirement that any labelling information must be accurate and not misleading, but periodically consumer organisations run checks on the values given for the various nutrients and publicise embarrassing inaccuracies. The manufacturer also has an obligation to ensure that the label is understandable in the market(s) in which the product is sold. However, this requirement has not yet been extended to ensure that the consumer understands the nutrition information per se, only the language in which it is provided. Regrettably, it cannot be assumed that consumers throughout the EU understand the nutrition information if given in the language of the country of manufacture even though it is set out in a recognised format and order of nutrients. On the other hand, consumers may well express interest in the nutritional attributes of the product, whether or not nutrition information is provided. Many manufacturers and retailers produce leaflets to help explain nutrition labelling and how it can help them to choose a balanced diet, or refer their customers to some of the organisations and resources referred to in section 6.7. 6.3 Consumer expectations and understanding of nutrition labelling Of the many factors governing food choice, of which price is likely to be quite high on most people’s lists, nutrition information may not figure strongly for many. But the enormous number and variety of food products available on the market today including imports of exotic foods and ingredients from all over the world, resulting from the increasing interest in ethnic dishes generated by longhaul travel and TV cooks, not to mention new ranges of products inspired by these developments, means that the consumer needs ever greater knowledge and information to allow him or her to choose from this vast range. At point of purchase it is the food label that provides the information that will enable the consumer to make the choice between products. If diet and health are important to the consumer, the provision of nutrition information on the pack may be a deciding factor between purchasing the product and leaving it on the shelf or a more careful study of the nutrition panel later in the home may influence a repeat purchase. A further influence on the provision (or not) of nutrition information may be the intermediate customer, namely the retailer, rather than the end consumer. The major UK supermarket chains exert an enormous influence on the highly competitive retail market for food and therefore on food production. All major retailers stock a wide range of ‘own label’ products, manufactured to their own specification by a variety of food manufacturers. The specification will cover not only the composition of the product but also the details of the food label. This will almost certainly include ‘full’ nutrition labelling, i.e. the ‘Big 4’ and ‘Little 4’ nutrients (see section 6.2.1) and possibly additional, supplementary voluntary information, which is discussed in detail in sections 6.5 and 6.6. Most retailers Consumers and nutrition labelling 149

150 The nutrition handbook for food processors and many food brands now carry a range of healthy products, in which the com- position is strictly formulated to meet specified nutrition criteria such as reduced fat content, lower sodium content, lower calorie, high fibre or any combination of these. They will invariably carry 'full nutrition information, but consumers interested in a healthier diet may find some of the research work taken out of their shopping expeditions if such ranges of products meet their needs, tastes and pockets. Consumers may also exert their purchasing power by choosing not to buy a product which does not provide nutrition information. In the UK, it has become a general accusation of consumer groups against those manufacturers who choose, for whatever reason, not to provide nutrition information, that they have got something to hide, i.e. it is a'bad food containing high levels of sugar, fat or salt It is a long-held view of many nutritionists and dieticians that nutrition labelling alone cannot educate the consumer to select a healthy balanced diet, but that it should provide the cornerstone of any nutrition education policy. Research has shown that relatively few consumers actually read the nutrition information provided, and even fewer of them understand it. Nevertheless, consumer organi- sations have continuously requested greater clarity and use of nutrition infor- mation,at least Group 2 nutrition labelling, and on a mandatory basis. In this context, research conducted by the UK Consumers'Association in 1995 revealed some interesting results. A survey conducted in March/April 1995 questioned consumers on a number of issues about food purchases. The research was both qualitative and quantitative; the qualitative research consisted of four discussion groups held with women responsible for choosing and buying food. The quanti- ive research involved personal interviews with a representative sample of 1454 ple in Great Britain aged over 15 years who were responsible for choosing food and doing any of the food shopping Respondents were asked which of the following were important to them when shopping for food Most important Important at all (more than l answer) Base 1454 Base 1454 Price/value for money Quality 21% Nutrition/how healthy it is 16% 61% How quick/easy to prepare 5% 33% How ning it Is Brand name/lab Special diet for medical reasons 3% 10% Ethical/religious considerations 1 The following statements make interesting reading both for nutritionists and marketing departmen

and many food brands now carry a range of ‘healthy’ products, in which the composition is strictly formulated to meet specified nutrition criteria such as reduced fat content, lower sodium content, lower calorie, high fibre or any combination of these. They will invariably carry ‘full’ nutrition information, but consumers interested in a healthier diet may find some of the research work taken out of their shopping expeditions if such ranges of products meet their needs, tastes and pockets. Consumers may also exert their purchasing power by choosing not to buy a product which does not provide nutrition information. In the UK, it has become a general accusation of consumer groups against those manufacturers who choose, for whatever reason, not to provide nutrition information, that they have got something to hide, i.e. it is a ‘bad’ food containing high levels of sugar, fat or salt. It is a long-held view of many nutritionists and dieticians that nutrition labelling alone cannot educate the consumer to select a healthy balanced diet, but that it should provide the cornerstone of any nutrition education policy. Research has shown that relatively few consumers actually read the nutrition information provided, and even fewer of them understand it. Nevertheless, consumer organisations have continuously requested greater clarity and use of nutrition information, at least Group 2 nutrition labelling, and on a mandatory basis. In this context, research conducted by the UK Consumers’Association in 1995 revealed some interesting results. A survey conducted in March/April 1995 questioned consumers on a number of issues about food purchases. The research was both qualitative and quantitative; the qualitative research consisted of four discussion groups held with women responsible for choosing and buying food. The quantitative research involved personal interviews with a representative sample of 1454 people in Great Britain aged over 15 years who were responsible for choosing food and doing any of the food shopping. Respondents were asked which of the following were important to them when shopping for food: Most important Important at all (more than 1 answer) Base 1454 Base 1454 Price/value for money 34% 87% Quality 21% 77% Nutrition/how healthy it is 16% 61% Family’s/personal preference 12% 53% How quick/easy to prepare 5% 33% How fattening it is 4% 33% Brand name/label 3% 28% Special diet for medical reasons 3% 10% Ethical/religious considerations 1% 3% The following statements make interesting reading both for nutritionists and marketing departments: 150 The nutrition handbook for food processors

Consumers and nutrition labelling 151 Agreement with statements about information given on food labels Agree Neither Disagree (Base1454) I believe all of the health messages and claims that appear on products nowadays 33% 17% I never believe the nutrition claims on food packaging and always check the label for more information 47% I find it difficult to work out from the nutrition information panel on food products what is good for me and what 49% Nutrition information panels should be laid out in the same way for all food products 90%0 Claims are a quick and easy way of seeing how healthy a food product is 54% % Health messages and nutrition claims should all be regulated 10% It is important that nutrition information is shown on all food products 88% 8% 3% 6.4 The use of nutrition panels e majority of UK food manufacturers and retailers provide nutrition informa- tion on most of their products, at least the 'Big 4, and in many cases theBig 4 plus Little 4(see'format under Section 6. 2. 1 above). However, for as long as a voluntary regime continues, the decision as to whether or not to provide nutri tion information is largely a commercial one. The arguments for change will be discussed in detail later in this chapter, but taking points 3, 6 and 8 from the Con sumers' Association's research into the factors which are important to consumers when shopping for food as relevant to nutrition, diet and health, 23% of respond ents consider this the most important aspect when shopping for foods, and a much higher number of some importance, even though nutrition and health ranked third after price/value for money and quality. Of those asked, 86%o recognised a nutri- tion information panel, although of these only 42%o took notice of it, with 33%0 stating that it was what they took most notice of Clearly, nutrition panels are very familiar and the circumstances in which nutri tion information panels are used are of note: 36% when buying food not bought very often or never bought before; 34%o when comparing two different makes or types of the same product; 26% when checking the nutrition claims made on the front of the pack; 15% never use this information; 15% every time food is bought that has this information on it: 14 have never seen this information

Agreement with statements about information given on food labels: Agree Neither Disagree (Base 1454) I believe all of the health messages and claims that appear on products nowadays 33% 17% 48% I never believe the nutrition claims on food packaging and always check the label for more information 47% 24% 27% I find it difficult to work out from the nutrition information panel on food products what is good for me and what is not 49% 18% 32% Nutrition information panels should be laid out in the same way for all food products 90% 7% 3% Claims are a quick and easy way of seeing how healthy a food product is 54% 17% 25% Health messages and nutrition claims should all be regulated 84% 10% 3% It is important that nutrition information is shown on all food products 88% 8% 3% 6.4 The use of nutrition panels The majority of UK food manufacturers and retailers provide nutrition information on most of their products, at least the ‘Big 4’, and in many cases the ‘Big 4 plus Little 4’ (see ‘format’ under Section 6.2.1 above). However, for as long as a voluntary regime continues, the decision as to whether or not to provide nutrition information is largely a commercial one. The arguments for change will be discussed in detail later in this chapter, but taking points 3, 6 and 8 from the Consumers’ Association’s research into the factors which are important to consumers when shopping for food as relevant to nutrition, diet and health, 23% of respondents consider this the most important aspect when shopping for foods, and a much higher number of some importance, even though nutrition and health ranked third after price/value for money and quality. Of those asked, 86% recognised a nutrition information panel, although of these only 42% took notice of it, with 33% stating that it was what they took most notice of. Clearly, nutrition panels are very familiar and the circumstances in which nutrition information panels are used are of note: 36% when buying food not bought very often or never bought before; 34% when comparing two different makes or types of the same product; 26% when checking the nutrition claims made on the front of the pack; 15% never use this information; 15% every time food is bought that has this information on it; 14% have never seen this information. Consumers and nutrition labelling 151