Dataset Information

Setting Policy Priorities for Front-of-Pack Health Claims and Symbols in the European Union: Expert Consensus Built by Using a Delphi Method.

ABSTRACT: Despite the fact that front-of-pack nutrition labels such as health claims and symbols have received growing attention in consumer behavior research, comprehensive conclusions could not yet be drawn to develop concrete policy actions, owing to the complexity of the subject and a constantly changing market environment. In this study, evidence-based policy recommendations and communication guidelines have been derived from the findings of the EU FP7 project CLYMBOL ("Role of health-related CLaims and sYMBOLs in consumer behavior", Grant Agreement 311963), and have been evaluated and prioritized by European stakeholders using a three-round Delphi method. A moderate level of consensus was achieved and results suggest that policy priority should focus on ways to improve consumer motivation and interest in healthy eating. Consumers' interest in healthy eating could be increased by adopting appropriate communication strategies such as using innovative ways to communicate the importance of healthy eating, which may aim to change the possible negative association between healthiness and tastiness. The highest-rated finding was related to consumers' favorable attitude towards health claims with shorter and less complex messages and health symbols with a visible endorsement. Meanwhile, there was a clear consensus that health claims need to be scientifically substantiated and credible but phrased without using overly complex scientific wordings, in order to be meaningful for consumers. Furthermore, stakeholders from academia and industry believe that consumer awareness about existing health claims should be increased. The identified policy recommendations and communication guidelines stem from recent empirical evidence and provide useful insights that guide future policy development aligning consumer protection issues as well as public health and food marketing communication interests.

SUBMITTER: Hung Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6412322 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Setting Policy Priorities for Front-of-Pack Health Claims and Symbols in the European Union: Expert Consensus Built by Using a Delphi Method.

Hung Yung Y Hieke Sophie S Grunert Klaus G KG Verbeke Wim W

Nutrients 20190214 2

Despite the fact that front-of-pack nutrition labels such as health claims and symbols have received growing attention in consumer behavior research, comprehensive conclusions could not yet be drawn to develop concrete policy actions, owing to the complexity of the subject and a constantly changing market environment. In this study, evidence-based policy recommendations and communication guidelines have been derived from the findings of the EU FP7 project CLYMBOL ("Role of health-related CLaims ...[more]

PMID: 30769879

Similar Datasets

Project description:To stem the increasing incidence of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and obesity, front-of-pack labels (FOPLs) have been developed since 1989. Whereas several countries have already adopted one voluntarily, the European Community wants to harmonize an FOPL system that will be mandatory for all member states. The purpose of this narrative review is to describe what could be achieved or not by FOPLs, and to discuss if there is enough evidence to establish whether such labels are effective in modifying purchasing behavior, in directing individual dietary patterns towards a healthy and sustainable diet, and in reformulating food products by the food industry. Non-directive FOPLs, which are still under study, appear to be informative and well-accepted by consumers even if they require a cognitive effort. Conversely, directive FOPLs are supported by several studies, but they are mostly conducted in simulated scenarios and/or performed as retrospective studies. Nevertheless, directive FOPLs are rated as an intuitive tool, and they have demonstrated a high capacity to help consumers rank food products as more or less healthy. In conclusion, directive and non-directive FOPLs convey different messages. No FOPL individually can be considered exhaustive in relation to all the objectives outlined in this narrative review, and therefore, the development of a model synthesizing both messages is advisable. Many questions remain open, such as the possibility of reformulating pre-packaged products, how to deal with traditional products, and the impact on the incidence of NCDs and obesity. In the light of the complexity of factors that condition consumption choices and health, none of the current FOPLs can be considered a health policy tool on its own. The possibility of development remains open, but as the state of the art, these tools do not seem to be able to achieve all the European Community goals together. We can speculate that they could meet these goals only if they are integrated into a multi-tiered, structured health policy intervention.

Project description:BackgroundConcern has been raised that the coexistence of multiple front-of-pack (FOP) nutrition rating systems in a marketplace may mislead consumers into believing that a specific food with a FOP is 'healthier' than foods without the symbol. Eleven summary indicator FOP systems are in use in Canada, including one non-profit developed system, the Heart and Stroke Foundation's Health Check™, and ten manufacturer-developed systems, like Kraft's Sensible Solutions™. This study evaluated FOP's potential to mislead consumers by comparing the number of products qualifying to carry a given FOP symbol to the number of products that actually carry the symbol.MethodsThe nutritional criteria for the Health Check™ and the Sensible Solutions™ systems were applied to a 2010-2011 Canadian national database of packaged food products. The proportion of foods qualifying for a given FOP system was compared to the proportion carrying the symbol using McNemar's test.ResultsCriteria were available to categorize 7503 and 3009 of the 10,487 foods in the database under Health Check™ and Sensible Solutions™, respectively. Overall 45% of the foods belonging to a Health Check™ category qualified for Health Check's™ symbol, while only 7.5% of the foods carried the symbol. Up to 79.1% of the foods belonging to a Sensible Solutions™, category qualified for Sensible Solutions's™ symbol while only 4.1% of the foods carried the symbol. The level of agreement between products qualifying for and carrying FOP systems was poor to moderate in the majority of food categories for both systems. More than 75% of the products in 24 of the 85 Health Check™ subcategories and 9 of 11 Sensible Solution™ categories/subcategories qualified for their respective symbols based on their nutritional composition.ConclusionsFOP systems as they are currently applied are not, in most instances, a useful guide to identifying healthier food products in the supermarket as many more products qualify for these systems than the number of products actually displaying these symbols on FOP, and the level of agreement between qualifying and carrying products is poor to moderate. The adoption of a single, standardized FOP system would assure consumers that all products meeting certain nutritional standards are designated by the symbol.

Dataset Information

Setting Policy Priorities for Front-of-Pack Health Claims and Symbols in the European Union: Expert Consensus Built by Using a Delphi Method.

Publications

Setting Policy Priorities for Front-of-Pack Health Claims and Symbols in the European Union: Expert Consensus Built by Using a Delphi Method.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets