Food Labels: An Overview into the Existing Gaps and Future

Submitted by: DeLissa Balgobin

Table of Contents

Abstract 2

Introduction 3

Current Label Information 5

Gaps in Label information 6

Differences in Labelling Regulations 9

The Future of Label Regulations/ Information 13

Discussion 16

Conclusion 18

References 19

2

PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT

FAPT6302

Prof. N.Badrie

ABSTRACT

Food labels are seen as vital tools used by the manufacturer of a product to inform the customer.

Food labels serve as marketing tools which aid in consumer choices. Labels have different

requirements which are beneficial to the customer. These information types can be mandatory or

voluntary requirements based on their knowledge requirements. “Need to know” requirements

are seen as mandatory requirements while “want to know” are seen currently as voluntary

requirements in some countries.

This paper seeks to identify gaps in the current label legislation since it has been found that no

existing label legislation encompasses all the requirements to give consumers all the information

to make the best decision possible. This paper will also look at some of the differences which

exist in labelling practices globally. Currently few countries have standalone label laws or

policies which are enforced. Some countries currently rely on their existing food and drug

policies while others have recognised the need to create separate laws. Of the countries with

label laws some have recognised the gaps exist and have begun the process to update said laws.

3

INTRODUCTION

Food labels serves as the manufacturers’ major method of conveying information to

consumers. Initially labels contained only the name of the product and brand. Over the years

labels have evolved to include more information due to pressures and regulations implemented

by public authorities, consumer organisations, retail groups. (1) Label laws are regulated by

governments and other international statutory bodies. (2)

Governments have found it important to develop these for a number of reasons. The first

is the provision of a standard format for labelling nutrients, thus preventing the use of a

potentially confusing number of different formats by different food companies. Secondly

ensuring that food companies label the ‘less desirable’ nutrients (e.g. saturated fats) as well as

‘positive’ nutrients (e.g. vitamins).(2,3)Governments must also ensure that nutrition labelling

does not describe a product or present information about it which is in any way false, misleading

or deceptive so as to allow consumers to make informed decisions. Lastly and importantly,

4

governments must ensure that nutrition labelling requirements for other countries are met, thus

assisting in the export process. (4, 5)

There are basically four categories of food labels. They can be classified as “need to know”

versus “right to know” versus “want to know” and “prevention of fraud”. “Need to know”

labelling deals with pertinent information that customers require such as nutritional facts, brand

name or food safety. These often aid in purchase decisions. “Right to know” information are

usually seen as voluntary labelling decision in some countries while others may mandate it.

Currently in the United States, genetically modified organism (GMO) labelling is the best

example of this. “ Want to know” labelling refers to information that customers may use to

inform buying decisions based on product attributes or production processes such as 100%

organically grown, free-range farmed or no preservatives added. Lastly is “prevention of fraud”

labelling such as the omission of or understatement of additives which can cause health issues.

(2, 3)

This paper seeks to describe the information contained on labels, the differences worldwide

between label regulations as well as the need for label modifications through the identification of

gaps and the future of labelling.

5

CURRENT LABEL INFORMATION

Labels currently contain many important informational panels. The Codex Alimentarius created

the Codex Committee on Food Labelling (CCFL) in 1991. Their task was to devise labelling

standards and codes of practice which were applicable to all foods as well as investigate

issues/claims of misleading descriptions of foods. (6)

All packages should have a principal display panel also known as the front display panel.

Depending on the type of package and product there will be additional panels of information.

The following are the basic requirements as set out in the CODEX STAN 1-1985 (2010):the

name of the food, list of ingredients, net contents and drained weight, name and address of

manufacturer or distributor, country of origin, lot identification, date marking and storage

instruction and instructions for use. (7)

The Name of the Food

6

This requires manufacturers to place the true nature of the food on the label. It also states that

established names should be used or names prescribed by national legislation. In addition brand

names and trades can be used. The Codex states though that descriptor words must be included

to properly inform the consumer of the processing conditions e.g. dried or reconstituted. (7)

List of Ingredients

This stipulates that all manufacturers must list all ingredients on the label in descending order of

weight. It requires that all products containing gluten, shellfish, eggs and its products, fish and its

products, nuts, milk and sulphite since these are known allergenic compounds. It also requires

that additives such as bulking agents, sweeteners, thickeners, flavour enhancers etc be stated next

to the relevant compound. (7)

Net Contents and Drained Weight

Codex stipulates that contents should be declared using the metric system. It requires liquids

foods be declared by volume, while solid foods be declared by weight with semi solid foods by

either method. (7)

Name and Address

It requires that there must be “ownership” such that the name and address of the manufacturer,

packer, and distributor much be included on the package. (7)

Country of Origin

The country of origin must be included to as to fully inform customers. The country of origin is

considered the country in which the food undergoes processing which changes its nature prior to

packaging. (7)

7

GAPS IN LABELLING

Quantitative Ingredient Declarations

As previously mentioned most countries have stipulated that an ingredient list must be included

in decreasing order of proportion. However, this requirement does not provide consumers with

full information. Disclosures which give the percentage of ingredients contained in the food

should be considered. This is known as the quantitative ingredient declarations (QUID). (3, 8)

QUID informs consumers if a particular ingredient is present in a significant amount.

QUID informs consumers for example exactly how much water the product contains, enabling

them to make more educated purchasing decisions. It allows customers to compare similar

products more easily. It will also aim to reduce claims made by manufacturers which can be

misleading to customers. Classic examples to consider are those by juice manufacturers or

confectionary manufacturers as to sugar added or even the use of sucralose in products.

Freshness Dating

Freshness dates allows consumers with a means to judge the quality of a food product by

determining the length of time between manufacture and date of purchase. It also allows

manufacturers a level of protection since it can prevent unnecessary lawsuits stemming from

improper consumption of pre-packaged foods. This is particularly important in the global

economy since foods are transported over greater distances. (3)

However a major problem faced is that the types of dates and descriptors of said dates are vast in

the terminology used. Terms which have been used are “expiration”, “dates of minimum

8

durability” or “best before”. Some manufacturers prints codes or dates on the label or package

which are ambiguous since they may contain no accompanying terms.

In some packaged foods, a popular terminology used is “sell by date” or “pack date”. These two

terms are used singularly and are often unclear since it gives consumers no idea as to the stage of

product degradation the product may be in. This is especially important in products which have

short shelf lives since they experience production degradation quickly.

Nutritional Panel/Serving Size

Consumers must have complete nutrition information for all foods in order to make informed

purchasing decisions by being able to compare the nutritional value of different foods.

In most countries, requirements are limited largely to pre-packaged foods. (5, 8)

Studies have shown that consumer understanding of nutrition labelling also proves that

consumers have some problems understanding nutrition labels. It was found that consumers

misinterpret the labelling information due its presentation methods. (4, 9) Many foods are

presented per 100 grams or millilitres. Often packages are larger than this, with consumers

misinterpreting serving size. Based on studies done by FDA and EC it was found that customers

would prefer nutritional panels be displayed “per package” so as to present a more realistic view

on calories likely to be consumed as well as % of daily recommended amounts of nutrients such

as sugars and sodium.(3,5,9)

GMO Status

9

170.3 million hectares of biotech crops were grown globally in 2012. Popular crops grown were

maize, soybean, canola, sugar beet, alfalfa, papaya, squash, tomato, sweet pepper. These crops

were grown globally on almost every continent. (11) These crops have 2 major routes following

production. They are either sold “as is” on supermarket shelves or enter the processing line

where they are incorporated into other foods. Genetically modified food status is currently a

highly polarised topic. Some consumers perceive benefits from GM foods owing to its improved

taste, convenience, and cost. Others have concerns about health, environment and the possibility

of allergens existing in transgenic foods. (3, 12)

The labelling of GM foods should be seen as necessary to fully inform customers in their buying

decisions.

Currently major differences exist as to the label requirements for foods with respect to this.

Labelling of Irradiated Foods

Irradiation involves exposing foods to ionizing radiation: gamma rays from radioactive isotopes

or machine-produced, high-energy electrons and x-rays. Irradiation can retard spoilage and kill

microorganisms that can contaminate meat and poultry. Food irradiation has been approved by

over 40 countries and has been endorsed by the World Health Organization and the Food and

Agriculture Organization. (3)

Irradiated foods may taste different than non-irradiated foods as well suffer from nutritional

losses. Customers may have concerns about environmental safety. Customers should therefore

have all the information on the processing of the food in order to make an informed decision.

There is some ambiguity in the application of this as outlined in the Codex Stan 1-1985 (2010)

10

with regards to in process treatment as well as the declaration of said process if only some of the

ingredients were radiated.

DIFFERENCES IN LABEL REGULATIONS

No single nation has a food label standard or legislation requiring total disclosure in all of

these areas: ingredients, product quality, nutrient content, production methods, and more

information about substances that may cause adverse health effects.(3,8,10,12) As identified

above it can be seen that gaps in the label formulation and contents exist. Some countries have

chosen to implement mandatory status on certain requirements while others have left these as

voluntary. (See Table 1 and table 2) (12). as can be seen below few countries have mandatory

and enforced policies and legislations.

Source: http://agbioforum.org/v10n1/v10n1a06-gruere.htm#T2 (12)

11

Source: http://agbioforum.org/v10n1/v10n1a06-gruere.htm#T2 (12)

12

Differences also exist to which certain requirements are enforced. This section will attempt to

identify and examine the differences which exist in certain major regulatory bodies.

Caricom has devised a label policy in which it is hoped that countries will aspire to model their

legislations after. (13) According to table 1, many Caribbean countries do not have independent

legislations or standards. (12) Most Caribbean countries have their label regulations in their food

and drug acts. The only country to date that has proposed label regulations is Jamaica. (13)

The legislation put forward by CARICOM, however does not comprehensively cover issues

pertaining to GM status or irradiation. It also does not cover the issues with respect to QUID, or

the nutritional panel and serving size.

In the European Union, labelling is governed by Directive 2000/13/EC as well as Directive

2003/89/EC. The United Kingdom has stipulated the following mandatory requirements: the

name of the food; a list of ingredients; the amount of an ingredient which is named or associated

with the food; an appropriate durability indicator; any special storage conditions; the name of

business and manufacturer which may include the place of origin or the process used in the

manufacture; and instructions for using the food. (3, 4, 5)

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible for assuring that foods sold in the

United States are safe, wholesome and properly labelled. (13, 14) This applies to foods produced

domestically, as well as foods from foreign countries. (13)

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency requires the following of its importers and

manufacturers: Common name, Net quantity declaration, Dealer name and address, List of

ingredients, Nutrition Facts table, and Durable life date. These regulations are not applied to its

export. (15, 16)

13

In the European Commission rules apply to pre-packaged foods and to foods supplied to

restaurants, hospitals, canteens i.e. unpackaged produce or bulk food supply. In the United

States, however, mandatory labelling only applies to pre-packaged foods. Foods such as fresh

meats, seafood and produce can be labelled on a voluntary basis. (3)

Another large difference seen is the enforcement of GM status. Countries in the European

Commission have dictated that products be labelled with “contains GM ingredients” while the

United States has not taken a similar approach. In the United States it has been passed at the state

level but there are no federal laws in existence. (3, 12)

THE FUTURE OF LABELLING

The US FDA has announced it will be revamping its label with attention paid in 3 areas:

understanding of nutrition science, serving size requirements and labelling requirement for

certain package sizes and updated design. The FDA proposes changes requiring more detail with

respect to the “added sugars”, daily values of sodium, dietary fibre, potassium and vitamin D. the

reform calls for the removal of “calories from fat” since the type of fat (total fat, saturated fat and

trans fat”. The FDA has stipulated that serving sizes should reflect consumption in one sitting

such that a 20-ounce bottle of soda, typically consumed in a single sitting, would be labelled as

one serving rather than as more than one serving. (14) Consequently the calorie and nutritional

information would be reflected for 20oz rather than 8 oz. In the third aspect, the nutritional panel

should display the calories and serving sizes in a visible way so as to fully inform consumers. It

14

also proposes that the daily percent value be shifted with a clear footnote explaining its

importance. These proposed changes are shown below. (14)

Figure: Original vs. Proposed Label Changes

(http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocumentsRegulatoryInformation/

LabelingNutrition/ucm385663.htm#Summary) (15)

Canada Food Inspection Agency in 2013 has put forward the discussion with respect to

updating food labelling. They are currently collecting views from all stakeholders since they

15

would like to improve access to information about food labelling to increase awareness while

being able to protect Canadians and be able to respond more accurately to consumer, industry

and government needs. (16) The CFIA intends to focus its attention in 4 areas: Roles,

Responsibilities and Partnerships, Regulation, Policy and Program Development, Service

Delivery and IM/IT. The process is in the draft proposal stage with the final submission to be

post year end 2014. (16, 17)

The Food Safety Authority of Ireland has put out regulations in 2011 most of which will come

into effect by year end 2014. This regulation maintains the core components of their existing

rules but has added new requirements. This was done to complement the existing policies set

out by the European Commission. (18) The new requirements include that manufacturers and

distributors or importers of foods are responsible for presenting accurate food information to

consumers. They are also required to ensure compliance with the national food laws. The

amendments state that there are new mandatory information requirements which must be

disclosed to the public including the use of artificial sweeteners, beverages with high caffeine

contents. Another important amendment requires that alcohol contents be disclosed in

proximity to the common name and net quantity. (18) It has also stipulated that ingredients

which maybe allergenic in origin are distinguished so as to properly alert consumers of their

presence. The new regulations also address date freshness stating that once the sell by date is

passed the food is deemed unsafe applicable to all frozen foods. (18)

16

DISCUSSION

It can be seen that countries have recognised the gaps in the legislation of labels. Countries are

beginning to recognise this as can be seen with the United States, Canada and Ireland. Caribbean

countries have begun to develop independent laws to deal with label regulation with Jamaica

making the most progress thus far.

Even though the United States has made improvements to certain gaps, the issues of freshness

dating and the extent to which QUID will be implemented has yet to be determined. Issues with

regards to processing of raw materials in the production process also have to be addressed in a

meaningful since many US consumers have cited that information on GM status could influence

buying decisions. The proposed changes to US labelling regulations could have far reaching

implications for non-US manufacturers as well. Under the FSMA, products can be refused entry

since it would be in violation of the proposed label changes with regards to information

presented which could pose a threat to consumers of the food.

Canada while they have recognised the need to make modifications to their current label laws

have yet to put forward any drafts. Ireland has thus far been the most progressive having put out

their new regulations since 2011 giving manufacturers and distributors time to comply with

enforcement for certain sections having begun at the start of 2014.

In the improvement of labelling practices it would be beneficial for all countries to adopt a

universally accepted standard which is comprehensive. The Codex Alimentarius has put forward

its CODEX STAN 1 1985 with the last amendment being made in 2010. Currently some

countries are in the process of developing standards for their countries based on this standard.

17

In the future the Codex should play an important role in the development of food labelling and

the implementation of new requirements as technical advances in food processing occur. This

will aid in the smoother transition of trade as the global economy develops.

18

CONCLUSION

It can be concluded countries have recognised the importance that labels play in consumer

purchasing and food safety. However to date many countries including most Caribbean countries

have not developed stand alone policies or laws which address food labelling. Few countries

currently have mandatory and enforced label laws.

These label laws in the countries which they exist are not all encompassing. Different countries

have identified weaknesses in the coverage and scope of their laws. These laws were considered

adequate when they were ratified and accepted, however, many of them today fail to address new

and prevailing issues. Issues of concern are those with respect to genetically modified status,

irradiation and nutritional content. Currently some countries have identified the importance

addressing these issues and have begun to impose new and updated requirements to their existing

laws.

19

REFERENCES

1. Moore,M. Food Labeling Regulation: A Historical and Comparative Survey.

http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:8965597. (accessed Mar 26,2014)

2. Deselnicu ,OC. The Value and Role of Food Labels: Three Essays Examining Information

Flows in the Food System for Experience and Credence Attributes.Ph.D Disertation,Colorado

State University, Fort Collins,Co,2012.

3.Center for Science in the Public Interest, Food Labeling for the 21st Century,

Washington,D.C,1998.

4.Hawkes,C. Government and voluntary policies on nutrition labelling: a global overview. In

Innovations in Food Labelling. Woodhead, Florida,2009; 37-57.

5. Hawkes,C. Nutrition labels and health claims: the global regulatory environment. WHO:

Geneva,2004. 7-22, 35-55.

6.Codex Alimentarius. Codex Committee on Food Labelling.

http://www.codexalimentarius.org/committees-task-forces/en/?

provide=committeeDetail&idList=7 (accessed Mar 30 2014)

7.Codex Alimentarius, General Standard for the Labelling of Prepackaged Foods,Codex Stan 1-

1985, 2010.

8.Cheftel, JC., Food and nutrition labelling in the European Union. Food Chem.,2005,93,531-

550.

20

9.Stuart, SA., The Relationship between mandatory and other food label information. Brit. Food

J. [online] 2010,112, 21-31 www.emeraldinsight.com/0007-070X.htm (accessed Mar 23 2014).

10. Roodenburg, AJC., Popkin JC., Seidell JC., Development of international criteria for a front

of package food labelling system: the International Choices Programme.Eur. J.Clin.Nutr.,

2011,65,1190-1200.

11. James,C. Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2012; in Brief No. 44.

ISAAA: Ithaca, NY, 2013

12. Rao SR., Gruère GP., A Review of International Labeling Policies of Genetically Modified

Food to Evaluate India’s Proposed Rule. J. Agrobiotech. Manage. Econ. [Online] 2007, 10(1),

51-64 http://agbioforum.org/v10n1/v10n1a06-gruere.htm (accessed Mar 23 2014)

13. Food Safety and Quality Jamaica. Understanding Label Rules.

http://www.fsjamaica.org/en/food_industries/labelling_and_packaging/rules/ (accessed 3 Apr

2014)

14. FDA. Labeling & Nutrition Guidance Documents & Regulatory Information

Guidance for Industry.

http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocumentsRegulatoryInformation/

LabelingNutrition/default.htm (accessed Mar 25 2014)

21

15. FDA. Proposed Changes to the Nutrition Facts Label.

http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocumentsRegulatoryInformation

/LabelingNutrition/ucm385663.htm#Summary (accessed Mar 25 2014)

16. CFIA. Discussion Paper for Food Labelling Modernization

http://www.inspection.gc.ca/food/labelling/labelling-modernization-initiative/

consultations/discussion-paper/eng/1369936679236/1370294142986 (accessed Mar 26 2014)

17. CFIA. Imported Food Sector Regulatory Proposal http://www.inspection.gc.ca/food/non-

federally-registered/imports/regulatory-proposal/eng/1326141954943/1326142115688

(accessed Mar 30 2014)

18. Food Safety Authority of Ireland, Overview of Changes to Food Labelling Introduced under

the New Food Information Regulation; FSAI: Dublin, 2012

22

23