1

Food Labelling to Advance Better Education for Life(2008-2011)

2

• FLABEL (Food Labelling to Advance Better Education for Life)

• 7th Framework Programme • Small collaborative project (Contract N° 211905)• 3 years (Aug 2008-Aug 2011)• Total budget: 3.66 million EUR• EC contribution: 2.86 million EUR

Project characteristics

3

Conceptual framework

Search

ExposurePerception

Conscious, subconscious

LikingUnderstanding

and inferencesPerceived, Objective

UseOne-time, extended

direct, indirect

Environmental factors

Personal factors

Product related factors

label format

Effect on dietary intake

Label availability

4

Overall objectives

To determine how nutrition information on food labels can affect dietary choices, consumer habits and food-related health issues by developing and applying an interpretation framework incorporating both the label and other factors/influences.

To develop guidelines on use of nutrition information on food labels for EU policy and the food industry, especially SMEs, including recommendations for assessing the impact of ongoing and future legislative and voluntary food labelling schemes.

5

• European Food Information Council – EUFIC, BE/EU (Coordinator)

• Aarhus University, DK

• Agricultural University of Athens, GR

• Dokuz Eylul University (DEU), Turkey

• Saarland University, DE

• University of Surrey, UK

• University of Warsaw (UW), Poland

• Wageningen University, NL

• Tesco Stores Ltd, UK

• Confederation of Family Organisations in the European Union (COFACE)

• European Association of Craft, Small and Medium-sized Enterprises

(UEAPME), BE/EU

• European Community of Consumer Cooperatives (Euro Coop), BE/EU

Consortium

6

WP 9

Manage-ment

WP 2Attention & reading

WP 3Liking & attractive-ness

WP 4Under-standing & inferences

WP 5In-store use of labels

WP 6Effects of labels on dietary patterns

WP 8

Dissemi-nation

and stake-holder

involve-ment

WP 1Label incidence, penetration

and typology

WP 7Implications for public policy, retailers and

industry, SMEs

WP Overview

7

WP1Incidence, penetration and typology of

nutrition information on food labels

(EUFIC)

8

Examples of nutrition labels in the EU

9

• To provide a benchmark of consumer exposure to nutrition labels and public health awareness campaigns in different EU countries

• To identify major types of labels used, and major dimensions in which labels differ

WP1 - Objectives

10

1. Mapping labelling schemes in EU 27 + Turkey

2. Mapping presence and extent of public health nutrition awareness campaigns in EU 27 + Turkey (may impact on consumer response)

3. Interviews in 4 countries (including new member state/candidate country)

WP1 - Tasks

11

By April 2009 – Pan-EU insight into:

• Typology of labels

• How consumers categorise different forms of labels

• Extent of penetration of nutrition labels in the different parts of the EU

• Extent of public health nutrition awareness campaigns

WP1 - Deliverables

12

WP2 Attention and reading of labels

(Wageningen University Marketing & Consumer Behaviour Group)

13

• Identify and quantify key determinants of consumer attention to and reading of nutritional information on food labels in realistic situations

• Key dimensions and aspects of: • Label formats• Product assortment/shelf organisation and other retail

factors• Personal factors

• Multi-method approach combining obtrusive and unobtrusive measures

• Leading to validated research infrastructure

WP2 - Objectives

14

WP2 - Tasks

1. Identify candidate determinants • Desk research, input from other WPs (1 and 4)

2. Develop an experimental research protocol• Multi-method approach; unobtrusive vs obtrusive,

psychological vs physiological, experimental vs realistic

3. Assess and quantify impact of determinants• Systematic variation in experiments• Characteristics of labels, person, and choice context / task

4. Inform WP5 • key dimensions and experimental manipulations

15

WP2 - Deliverables

• Innovative research infrastructure (October 2009)• Based on eye tracking (on screen projection vs. realistic shelf)• Validated against other response tasks

• Quantified insight into (relative) importance of key determinants (March 2010)

• How label, context/task and personal factors affect attention and reading

• Best practice methodology (May 2010)• To assess and stimulate attention and reading

• Guidelines for WP5 (May 2010)

16

WP3 Liking and attractiveness

of labels

(Agricultural University of Athens)

17

• Identify and quantify key determinants of consumer liking and attractiveness of different types of nutrition information on food labels, by:• Identifying preferred labelling attributes with reference to particular

food categories and food choice contexts (e.g., raw versus processed; simpler versus complex foods).

• Identifying how levels of label complexity affect liking and attractiveness.

• Explaining differences in consumer liking and attractiveness by consumer preferences for simplicity, completeness, and (lack of) coerciveness and linking them to socio-economic status.

WP3 - Objectives

18

WP3 - Tasks

1. Assess how major dimensions in which labels differ affect liking and attractiveness for different food categories

2. Link individual differences in liking to consumer interest in simplicity, completeness, and lack of coerciveness of label information. Derive segmentation based on consumer liking.

3. Investigate relationship between liking and level of complexity of labels (considering repeated exposure) • For the population at large and for segments identified in Task 2.

19

WP3 - Deliverables

• Quantification of liking of different labelling attributes per food context/food category and a clustering of food categories based on preferred labelling attributes (March 2010)

• A consumer segmentation based on preferences for labelling simplicity, completeness, and lack of coerciveness (March 2010)

• Quantitative insight into consumer liking of labels, the level of their complexity and the impact of repeated exposure to label information (May 2010).

20

WP4 Understanding and health

inferences from labels

(University of SurreyFood, Consumer Behaviour &

Health Research Group)

21

WP4 - Objectives

• Understand how consumers infer healthiness from labels in combination with other information. This involves:

• Determining how consumers infer overall healthiness of products from labels, possibly in combination with other information sources.

• Evaluating consumers' ability to determine healthiness of products from labels, possibly in combination with other information sources, based on varying goals (i.e. overall healthiness, low energy, low salt, low fat).

• Determining the extent to which inferences about the healthiness of products are stimulus- vs. memory-based, inductive vs. deductive and/or based on singular vs. comparative judgements.

22

WP4 - Tasks

1. Focus groups - to determine the required and desired information to evaluate the healthiness of food products

2. Qualitative laddering interviews - to determine how consumers infer healthiness when confronted with products with different types of labels and other informational elements

3. Food sorting tasks - to determine the relative healthiness of foods, as determined by an objective classification of the healthiness of each food, with regard to differing goals, i.e. overall healthiness, low energy, low salt, low fat.

4. Experimental studies - in which label information and exposure time to information will be manipulated to determine the basis of inferences about the healthiness of products.

5. Cross-national survey - health perceptions of products will be related not only to label information, but also to other variables

23

WP4 - Deliverables

• Validated research protocols for determining how consumers infer overall healthiness of products from labels (May 2009).

• Qualitative insight into consumers' ability to determine healthiness of products from labels, differentiated for different consumer segments (e.g. on attitudes to health; health risks) (May 2010).

• Best practice guidance to ensure optimal consumer understanding of food labels with regards to the healthiness of foods (Aug 2010).

24

WP5 In-store use of labels

(Saarland UniversityInstitut für Konsum- und Verhaltensforschung)

25

WP5 - Objectives

• Identify and quantify the actual use of food labels in real-life store choice situations

• Quantify how much actual use can be increased by implementing an ‘ideal format’ nutrition label (result from WP1-4 and tested in a real-world point of sale setting).

26

• Obtrusive and unobtrusive methods

– Mobile eye tracking, electrodermal response

– PoS interviews

– Hidden observations, sales figures from scanner data

WP5 - Methodology

27

WP5 - Tasks

1. Benchmark study - examine consumers’ recognition and use of labels that are currently in use.

2. New label study - compare a new “ideal label format” (input from WP 1-4) with the results of the benchmark study (in one EU country).

3. Extension studies - validation in two other European countries.

4. Situational factors - influences of different placements of products in shelves and visual cues.

5. Controlling experimental data with sales figures from scanner data

28

WP5 - Deliverables

• Validated research protocols for:

• Observational in-store quantification of consumer attention and use of nutrition information (Jan 2009).

• Assessing influence of consumer values and types of decision making processes on actual use of nutrition label information (July 2009).

• Evidence on impact of the ‘ideal format’ label on attention and use at the PoS vs existing nutrition labels (July 2010).

• Evidence on effects of the amount of labelled products and optimised surroundings (few vs. many, additional cues) regarding arousal, attention and use of nutrition information (Jan 2011).

• Quantified insight on effectiveness of a nutrition label and its presentation at the PoS on promoting healthy choices (July 2011)

29

WP6 Effects of labels on dietary intake

(Aarhus University MAPP – Centre for Research on

Customer Relations in the Food Sector)

30

WP6 - Objectives

• Analysing how nutrition labels on food products affect • product choices • composition of shopping baskets• overall patterns of dietary intake

• Combination of three types of data:• Sales data• Product data

• Personal data

31

WP6 - Tasks

1. Development of research protocol to combine scanner data, product data and personal data

2. Selection of a number of target shops with different geographical settings for specific time period

3. Definition of dependent variables on three levels:product category, shopping basket, overall dietary intake

4. Data processing, estimation and cross-validation

32

WP6 - Deliverables

• Estimates on how much the introduction of new types of nutrition labels, especially FOP signposting, affects product sales in the category labelled; separation of labelling effects from effects emanating from the reformulation of products (Nov 2009).

• Evidence on whether labelling-induced healthy choices in one product category lead to changes in other product categories in consumers’ shopping baskets, possibly offsetting any positive health effects (Jan 2010).

• Evidence on how effects of labels on product choice affect dietary intake (concerning a subset of products) (Jan 2010).

• Evidence on how these effects differ between countries and socio-economic groups (Jan 2010).

33

WP7 Implications for public policy, retailers, industry and SMEs

(Aarhus University MAPP – Centre for Research on

Customer Relations in the Food Sector)

34

WP7 - Objectives

• To take the results of FLABEL project research and derive implications for public policy, retailers and industry, especially SME’s• Derive implications for public policy in the area of food labelling

and health claims• Develop proposals for the assessment of the effect on existing

and proposed legislation• Derive implications for industry on the use of nutrition

information on food labels, taking competitiveness into consideration

35

WP8 Dissemination, exploitation and

stakeholder involvement

(EUFIC)

36

WP8 - Objectives

• Disseminate and extend the results of the project to a wider audience at European level.

• Special attention will be placed on the dissemination of the information in new member states and candidate countries.

37

WP8 - Tasks

1. Communication and dissemination plan, creation of the project identity

2. Production of dissemination materials (leaflets, project template, press-releases, mi-terma and final report with outcomes, articles in EUFIC’s multi-lingual Food Today newsletter)

3. Dissemination via web sites (www.flabel.org , www.eufic.org , partners websites, etc)

4. Networks for exchange (other EU projects, EU Platform for action on diet, physical activity and health).

5. Stakeholder involvement (SAB)

6. Final workshop to present the final results to the target audiences (opinion leaders/regulators, food industry with special focus on SMEs, and with a good representation of new member states and candidate countries)

38

WP9Management

(EUFIC)

39

FLABEL Expected results 20111st EU benchmark study on incidence/penetration of nutrition labels.

Insight on the determinants of consumer attention, reading, liking and understanding of different types of nutrition labels (dealing with trade-offs between simplicity, completeness and coerciveness of nutrition labelling).

1st EU study into actual nutrition label use (in-store observation, retail scanner data), providing insights into how nutrition labels impact behaviour and consumption patterns.

Evidence on how consumers infer the healthiness of products, and how the nutrition label information interacts with other information in this process (e.g. media, advertising and school education).

Insight on the role of nutrition labels in food decision-making in families with children, and how labels can be used to positively influence children’s dietary intake.

Best practice proposal for nutrition labels, tested in real world.

Best practice methods for assessing the effect of nutrition labels that can be used in the evaluation of labelling policies.

40

Thank you for your attention