» Articles » PMID: 32961760

What Makes a Front-of-Pack Nutritional Labelling System Effective: The Impact of Key Design Components on Food Purchases

Overview
Journal Nutrients
Date 2020 Sep 23
PMID 32961760
Citations 7
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The relative impacts on food purchases of many alternative front-of-pack nutritional labelling systems were tested, with various methods-from opinion pool to nationwide experiments. Clearly, some systems induce better purchasing responses, having better nutritional impacts on food baskets. Nonetheless, we still ignore what the ingredients of an efficient label are. Here, we propose guidance for label designers. To do so, we first propose a typology that breaks down established labelling systems into four elementary components: , , and . On this basis, we then build seven alternative generic labelling systems that we test in a framed-field experiment enabling us to measure the effect of each component on food purchases in isolation. Our results show that an effective front-of-pack labelling system should be Food-Directive (instead of Diet-Directive) and be displayed on both healthy and unhealthy food. The reference set, which is across categories or within categories, produces the same average nutrition score but generates contrasting behavioural responses.

Citing Articles

Calorie (energy) labelling for changing selection and consumption of food or alcohol.

Clarke N, Pechey E, Shemilt I, Pilling M, Roberts N, Marteau T Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025; 1:CD014845.

PMID: 39820897 PMC: 11738108. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014845.pub2.


Exploring Consumer Understanding and Perceptions of Front-of-Pack Labelling of Foods and Non-Alcoholic Beverages in Kenya.

Kirui C, Asiki G, Ojiambo V, Karugu C, Mohamed S Nutrients. 2024; 16(22).

PMID: 39599679 PMC: 11597709. DOI: 10.3390/nu16223892.


The Relation between Consumer Perception and Objective Understanding of Front-of-Package Nutrition Labels (FOPNLs); Results from an Online Representative Survey.

Magriplis E, Marakis G, Panagiotakos D, Samona A, Kotopoulou S, Kouretas D Nutrients. 2024; 16(11).

PMID: 38892684 PMC: 11174983. DOI: 10.3390/nu16111751.


Potential consumer response to the healthy symbol proposed by the U.S. food and Drug Administration.

Hyink J, McFadden B, Ellison B Heliyon. 2024; 10(10):e30863.

PMID: 38778947 PMC: 11109763. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e30863.


Sensitive and Compact Evanescent-Waveguide Optical Detector for Sugar Sensing in Commercial Beverages.

Buzzin A, Asquini R, Caputo D, de Cesare G Sensors (Basel). 2023; 23(19).

PMID: 37837014 PMC: 10574832. DOI: 10.3390/s23198184.


References
1.
Steenhuis I, Kroeze W, Vyth E, Valk S, Verbauwen R, Seidell J . The effects of using a nutrition logo on consumption and product evaluation of a sweet pastry. Appetite. 2010; 55(3):707-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2010.07.013. View

2.
Vyth E, Steenhuis I, Heymans M, Roodenburg A, Brug J, Seidell J . Influence of placement of a nutrition logo on cafeteria menu items on lunchtime food Choices at Dutch work sites. J Am Diet Assoc. 2010; 111(1):131-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.jada.2010.10.003. View

3.
Darmon N, Lacroix A, Muller L, Ruffieux B . Food price policies improve diet quality while increasing socioeconomic inequalities in nutrition. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2014; 11:66. PMC: 4045909. DOI: 10.1186/1479-5868-11-66. View

4.
Neal B, Crino M, Dunford E, Gao A, Greenland R, Li N . Effects of Different Types of Front-of-Pack Labelling Information on the Healthiness of Food Purchases-A Randomised Controlled Trial. Nutrients. 2017; 9(12). PMC: 5748735. DOI: 10.3390/nu9121284. View

5.
Acton R, Hammond D . The impact of price and nutrition labelling on sugary drink purchases: Results from an experimental marketplace study. Appetite. 2017; 121:129-137. DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2017.11.089. View