Simplified nutrient labelling: consumers’ perceptions in Germany and Belgium

Abstract

Growing consumer interest in food and health has motivated the European food industry to provide more simple information about the nutritional composition of foods. In addition to the traditional back-of-pack nutrition table, simplified front-of-pack labels have been introduced by the food industry to allow consumers making better informed and healthier food choices. In this study, consumers' perceptions of simplified nutrition information, namely Guideline Daily Amount (GDA) and Traffic light (TL), in Germany and Belgium are explored. Consumer surveys in Germany (n = 147) and Belgium (n = 128) were conducted in 2008. Data were analysed by means of descriptive statistics and regression analysis. In both countries, the GDA is the most widely used simplified nutrition label. Whereas most consumers in Belgium indicate a preference for the GDA, in Germany the Traffic light is favoured most. Regression analyses indicate that the predilection for the different labels is affected by socio-demographic characteristics and perceptions towards the respective labels. European nutrition policy makers and food industries should be aware of cross-country differences regarding the perception of simplified nutrition labels. The challenge for both stakeholder groups is to raise awareness of the potential function of simplified labels in making informed and healthy food choices among European consumers.

European consumers’ perceived importance of qualifying and disqualifying nutrients in food choices

“…As no important difference was found between countries regarding the perceived importance of both qualifying and disqualifying nutrients, provision of information about the same nutrients on food labels across countries is proposed. The labelling format is perhaps more important as suggested by Möser, Hoefkens, Van Camp, and Verbeke (2010) who found that whereas most consumers in Belgium indicated a preference for the GDA, in Germany the TL was favoured most. More important than cross-country differences are the differences in perceived nutrient importance according to the level of health consciousness, age, gender and diet status, which may require a segmentation and targeted information provision.…”

The Growing Role of Front-of-Pack Nutrition Profile Labeling: A Consumer Perspective on Key Issues and Controversies

“…Other dimensions include the choice between qualifying and disqualifying nutrients and the choice for a reference base (e.g., per 100 g/ml/kcal, serving) (Drewnowski, 2007;Verhagen and Van den Berg, 2008;Möser et al, 2010). In general, the various dimensions on which the schemes differ are not independent from each other and combinations of different approaches have been suggested.…”

The science on front-of-package food labels

“…One study recommended that calorie information be presented in a neutral, white box because when it was displayed inside a starburst shape consumers interpreted the attention-grabbing nature of the symbol as an indication that the calorie information was for the whole (20) 9. Mö ser A, Hoefkens C, Van Camp J et al (2010) (21) 10. Levy AS, Mathews O, Stephenson M et al (1985) (22) 11.…”