Citation
(2015), "Executive summary of “Comparative practices of food label claims from US, EU and selected Southeast Asian countries”", Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 32 No. 7. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-11-2015-051
Publisher
:Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Executive summary of “Comparative practices of food label claims from US, EU and selected Southeast Asian countries”
Article Type: Executive summary and implications for managers and executives From: Journal of Consumer Marketing, Volume 32, Issue 7
This summary has been provided to allow managers and executives a rapid appreciation of the content of the article. Those with a particular interest in the topic covered may then read the article in toto to take advantage of the more comprehensive description of the research undertaken and its results to get the full benefit of the material present.
Plenty evidence shows that product packaging often impacts on consumer purchase behavior. Different design elements and brand details included on packaging serve to convey information to the consumer. In addition, many consumers are also influenced by labels indicating the nutritional content of the product and any health benefits it can provide.
Labels on packaged food products serve as important communication channels between manufacturers and consumers. How the nutritional information is conveyed can determine consumer perceptions, preferences and choices. It has also been noted that such as eating habits, health and brand loyalty have been linked with repeated exposure to different packaging cues.
According to certain scholars, consumers are particularly inclined to use information and marketing claims made on packaging for products they lack familiarity with. In this sense, claims made on labels are viewed positively in that they present details that the consumer would struggle to acquire from other sources. But skeptics point to the high tendency for marketers to misinform consumers and make false or misleading claims. In countries like the USA, this has prompted policy makers to insist on information being clear and accurate.
As inadequate diet is commonly associated with obesity and other serious health problems, it is important that consumers better understand the information stated on food labels. Relevant studies have been carried out in Western societies, but knowledge of how consumers in Asia use food labels to make dietary choices is to date minimal. It is known that many Asian consumers lack experience with packaged goods and have low levels of language literacy. This makes them “highly vulnerable” to the complex details found on product labels. Addressing the issue is important, given the shift in shopping habits. Many consumers now prefer supermarkets and convenience stores to traditional fresh food markets. Obesity is a growing problem for health authorities in many Asian countries.
Claims made on food packaging labels are usually ordered into four classifications by health authorities:
Nutrient content claim (NCC), describing the nutrient levels contained in the food. Typical examples are references to fat, fiber and calcium. In the view of some observers, NCCs can mislead consumers by overstating positive nutritional attributes and downplaying those which are less healthy.
Nutrient function claim (NFC), which describes how each nutrient helps the body grow, develop and function, such as calcium helping to strengthen bones. A sub-division of this category is “reduction of disease risk claims” (RDRC), whereby a certain food provides the consumer with nutrients able to reduce the risk of contracting a certain disease or condition.
Marketing claims (MC), which reflect an emphasis of the food being tasty and wholesome. Also incorporated here are “other health claims” (OHC) that state or imply associations between a food or its ingredients with health. Such claims have proved most controversial because of their capacity to mislead.
Non-nutrient claims (NNC), which might include references to the food being natural, free from additives or preservatives or other claims the consumer would struggle to verify. Demand is growing for use of terms such as “natural” or “fresh” to be regulated, given their potential to misinform consumers who are attracted to these characteristics.
Food safety regulations differ considerably across continents and nations. Many regulatory frameworks are based on the Codex Alimentarius, published jointly in 2003 by the World Health Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the USA. However, regional and national variations are evident even among countries that have adopted Codex. Among such differences are the nutrition and health claims permitted on labels and the ways in which information must be conveyed to the consumer.
Regulation in the European Union (EU), for instance, demands that label information is harmonized across the region. Energy and nutrition claims must be presented as amounts per 100 g or 100 ml and percentage of recommended daily intake. Clarity of information and language used is another key requirement.
Harmonization has partly occurred within Southeast Asia, although national differences are evident. These mainly relate to which nutrient-related claims manufacturers are allowed to display on food packaging. The degree to which it is mandatory to include nutritional details also varies across nations regarded as emerging economies with rising levels of affluence. Health authorities within individual nations are responsible for administering the regulations used.
Prior scrutiny of food label claims has focused mainly on Europe and the USA. The present study aims to develop greater understanding of labeling practices in Southeast Asia, where minimal research has been conducted thus far. Changes in food purchase and consumption patterns increase the importance of such work. Singapore is chosen as the study context because it lacks an agricultural industry and thus has the largest percentage of imported food compared to other countries in the region.
Data were gathered from food labels on items displayed in stores of the two leading supermarket chains in Singapore. Products represented different categories, and a total of 303 “unique” food items were included. Choice of products was based on their allocated shelf space and lack of seasonal consumption patterns. Researchers coded general information about such as the brand, product name, weight and country-of-origin along with data relating to any types of nutrient, health or marketing claims made on the label or packaging. Samples were eventually ordered into USA, EU and Southeast Asia categories. In the latter, only Singapore, Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia and the Philippines were included.
Analysis involved comparing the Southeast Asian countries with their US and EU counterparts to ascertain differences in claims stated on food labels. Various findings made prompt Lwin to note certain “critical points” pertaining to food labeling practices:
Food manufactured in the five Southeast Asian countries contained a high number of NCCs, NNCs and MCs. Most prominent were claims relating to vitamins and minerals, fat, cholesterol and sugar. The main concern is that people could be enticed to over-consume certain foods in the mistaken belief that they are beneficial to health.
Marketers in Singapore and Malaysia were prone to make more NFCs than in the USA and the EU. Specific claims about improving digestion and bone health were noted.
Use of MCs, OHCs and NNCs was prevalent in Southeast Asia. Academics have noted that terms such as “fresh” and “natural” can lead to consumer misconceptions about the healthiness and nutritional value of a food product.
Food products in Singapore include the different types of NCC more than on the other nations studied. The fact that Singapore uses more NFCs, NNCs, MCs and OHCs indicates that its consumers are highly likely to encounter multiple claims on product labels and packaging.
Given the prevalence of claims on products manufactured in Southeast Asia, the author believes that regulation bodies should more closely monitor claims made on food packaging. She likewise points out the need for guidelines and education programs aimed toward the “low-literate” consumer segments more prone to misunderstand the information provided. Campaigns to raise awareness and increase familiarity with nutrition labels are similarly recommended. Another education possibility is the application of “health awareness skills” in supermarkets and other relevant retail settings. Lwin also believes a “more uniform regulatory framework” which produces greater regional harmonization would be beneficial.
Future studies could examine different packaging literacy levels of consumers and other contextual variables. Use of different foods and sample could help generate a more completely representative picture of each nation studied. Scrutinizing food labeling practices over time is another research option.
To read the full article enter 10.1108/JCM-10-2014-1191 into your search engine.
(A précis of the article “Comparative practices of food label claims from US, EU and selected Southeast Asian countries”. Supplied by Marketing Consultants for Emerald.)