With the Food Standards Agency (FSA) about to test five food labelling systems, Sainsbury's set to launch its own scheme in January and Tesco not far behind, manufacturers are holding their breath as they wait to see how shoppers will react to this wealth of information.
The principle of using labelling to combat obesity is gaining ground, but so far there has been little hard evidence to suggest how such a scheme would work in practice or whether shoppers will shun products marked red to denote high fat, sugar or salt content.
A trial recently conducted by the Co-operative Group may provide a clue.
The group's grocery division, which was the first to introduce nutritional signposting on its own-label food in 1986, commissioned a study to see how consumers would react if comparative information could be made available for branded lines. 'We wanted to see whether you can influence consumers without preaching to them,' explains David Croft, the Co-op's head of brand.
The retailer could not just stamp its own signposting on other companies' packaging. Instead, it put the information on labels on the edge of shelves, using a simple system to indicate high, medium and low levels of salt and fat. Nutritional information was derived from the panels on the back of packaging, supplemented by data from company websites.
Point-of-sale activity
Earlier research by the Co-op had found that even among shoppers who bother to check the salt, sugar or fat content of a product, many are still unsure how much they should ideally consume each day. So the retailer displayed additional material in-store such as leaflets, shelf wobblers and recipe cards to give guidelines on the recommended daily intake of fat, salt, calories, fruit and vegetables.
There were also specific dietary warnings - pointing out that consuming excessive salt is linked to high blood pressure, which increases the risks of strokes and heart attacks, for example.
Exit interviews established that two-thirds of shoppers were aware of the material. The majority of these found the shelf-edge labels useful and said they had a clear understanding of what the high, medium and low labels meant.
Sales tracking underlined the impact of the labelling. Stores in the trial saw a 3% increase in sales of all products compared with the control group (see box), indicating how retailers could stand to benefit from signposting.
The news for manufacturers, however, is mixed. Across branded products, there was a 10% increase in sales of products signposted as being low in salt. But those flagged up as high in salt saw sales fall by 5%. The effect was not so pronounced for fat signposting, but there was nevertheless a slight increase in sales of low-fat products and a comparable fall in sales of high-fat items.
'Our exit interviews told us that not everybody changes products because of the labelling,' says Croft. 'Of the people who did change products, they made a particular choice between one or two products. So this is influencing people, but it is a minority at a micro level.'
Profound influence, adds Croft, requires more. 'You need signposting, detailed information on the back of the pack and the broader information to put it into context.'
Co-op also trialled a composite rating score of food from one to 10, with 10 representing products high in fat and salt, and one the healthiest food, such as fresh fruit and vegetables. The measurement scale was developed with the help of Dr Mike Rayner, director of the British Heart Foundation Health Promotion Research Group at Oxford University, the same group that is handling the FSA's nutrient-profiling project.
This system was not printed on point-of-sale material, but consumers were asked how useful they found it. Despite its simplicity, it was not popular. 'The one to 10 rating was not considered as good as providing the absolute values,' says Croft. 'When you see a single number on a label, you know there must be an awful lot of information behind that, but you don't know what it is.'
Brand reaction
Croft maintains that brand owners did not raise any major concerns about the trial. He expects the Co-op to begin a 'strong dialogue' with brand owners about the findings and even collaborate with leading brands on future initiatives. A second, bigger, trial is planned.
A spokeswoman for United Biscuits, some of whose brands were signposted as high in fat in the trial, described the test as 'part of the whole process of ending up with a good system'. A spokesman for Kellogg, which is to put guideline daily amount data on packs early next year, simply said: 'We need to do what is best for our consumers.' It declined to comment on the fact that its Corn Flakes were marked as high in salt.
Food manufacturers remain apprehensive about nutritional labelling, and with good reason. The Co-op trial demonstrates that, as part of a wider consumer information scheme, signposting has the scope to change some consumers' purchasing behaviour.
CASE STUDY - CO-OP
- The Co-op's food labelling trial ran for six weeks until the end of October.
- It featured more than 300 branded products across four categories: cereals, biscuits, yoghurts and international sauces/cuisine.
- The signposting was carried out in 10 stores: five in London and five in Glasgow. Sales in these stores were monitored during the trial period and compared with sales in a control group of 10 stores - again five in London, five in Glasgow.
- Exit interviews were conducted with customers of three of the trial stores to gauge opinion on the signposting of products and the supporting point-of-sale material.
.jpg)
.jpg)