Search results

The Bureau of Economics in the Federal Trade Commission has a three-part role in the Agency and the strength of its functions changed over time depending on the preferences and ideology of the FTC’s leaders, developments in the field of economics, and the tenor of the times. The over-riding current role is to provide well considered, unbiased economic advice regarding antitrust and consumer protection law enforcement cases to the legal staff and the Commission. The second role, which long ago was primary, is to provide reports on investigations of various industries to the public and public officials. This role was more recently called research or “policy R&D”. A third role is to advocate for competition and markets both domestically and internationally. As a practical matter, the provision of economic advice to the FTC and to the legal staff has required that the economists wear “two hats,” helping the legal staff investigate cases and provide evidence to support law enforcement cases while also providing advice to the legal bureaus and to the Commission on which cases to pursue (thus providing “a second set of eyes” to evaluate cases). There is sometimes a tension in those functions because building a case is not the same as evaluating a case. Economists and the Bureau of Economics have provided such services to the FTC for over 100 years proving that a sub-organization can survive while playing roles that sometimes conflict. Such a life is not, however, always easy or fun.

The purpose of this paper is to review and compare the scientific and regulatory environments for nutrition and health claims on foodstuffs in the USA, Japan and the European Union.

A review of the literature and the relevant legislation in the three different countries is conducted. Regulations are reviewed and scientific evidence requirements are outlined in each country.

Full regulatory approval for claims across all three countries requires the support of robust scientific evidence. To obtain this, companies must submit comprehensive dossiers and detailed applications to the regulators with full descriptions of the tests and studies completed during product development. However in the USA and Japan, an alternative process exists. A health claim that is suggested but not supported by scientific evidence is known as a qualified health claim and is permitted in the USA and Japan, but not in the EU.

The paper demonstrates the difference in regulatory requirements in different countries which leads to different claims being permitted in different countries. It also leads to different levels of scientific support for similar claims which causes consumer confusion and develops an uneven playing pitch for the industry. Given that the industry operates in a global market place, it is imperative that a consensus is reached as to the level of scientific evidence required to approve a health claim. In that way, consumers can be safeguarded from being misled, consumer confusion will not be a concern and products can be globally distributed in line with the increasing liberalisation of trade.

This paper is of value to regulators and the food industry.

In a number of recent multi-billion dollar cases brought against cigarette manufacturers, plaintiffs have in part alleged that the cigarette manufacturers (1) conspired not to compete on the basis of health claims or the introduction of potentially safer cigarettes since the 1950s, and (2) engaged in fraudulent advertising by making implied health claims in advertisements selling ‘low tar’/‘light’ cigarettes. In this type of litigation, defendants’ actions could be due to alleged illegal behaviour as asserted by plaintiffs, or be the result of market forces that may have nothing to do with allegedly inappropriate acts. We examine the economic evidence relating to these allegations, taking into account some of the major influences on cigarette company behaviour. In particular, our analyses show that much of the cigarette manufactures’ behaviour can be explained by Federal Trade Commission and related government actions, rather than conspiracy or fraudulent acts. We find the economic evidence is inconsistent with an effective conspiracy to suppress information on either smoking and health or the development and marketing of potentially safer cigarettes. Regarding ‘lower tar’ and ‘light’ cigarettes, the economic evidence indicates that the cigarette manufacturers responded to government and public health initiatives, and that disclosing more information on smoking compensation earlier than the cigarette companies did would not have had any significant impact on smoking behaviour.

Enormous variation exists internationally in the regulation of nutrition and health messages on the food label. For the consumer, the health claim on the label becomes a value‐added point of product differentiation. Therefore, for the food industry, access to a health claim is a key marketing variable. It is important to understand the role of the public policy process in establishing health claims as developing nations mature and choose an approval process to advance their own food regulatory environment. Their choice of approach, and the type of participants contributing to the process, will influence the type of health claim outcome and the latitude of marketing permitted on the food label. This paper identifies and compares the regulatory approaches, in effect in early 1977, used to establish health claims in Japan, Australia and the European Union. There does not seem to be a clear international “lead” nation regulatory model for health claims, and this suggests global economies of scale are elusive for product development and marketing based on health claims.

The purpose of this paper is to fulfil gaps in knowledge regarding food packaging practices in Southeast Asia by examining the informational content of food labels on a variety of packaged foods.

Using local and imported food products found in supermarkets in Singapore, a quantitative content analysis of food label claims in a wide range of packaged food products was conducted. A codebook was developed to capture the attributes of the food labels and claims, content categories, product names, food categories, sources of manufacture and countries of brand origin. The three main regions of analysis of country of manufacture were the USA, European Union (EU) and Southeast Asia.

Analysis of food products manufactured in five Southeast Asian countries revealed the presence of various claims in food products, and a number of specific claims exceeded the percentages found in products from the USA or EU. The results showed that a significant proportion of products from Southeast Asian countries display nutrient content and nutrient function claims, as well as general marketing claims and non-nutrient claims. However, there were variations in practice amongst the five Southeast Asian countries.

The sample was limited in being collected from one geographic location. Future research needs to expand data collection both geographically and longitudinally.

The findings are valuable for the national health authorities in addressing policies on food package labelling, and homogenization efforts pertaining to regional/international labelling policies. These in turn could influence food marketing practices.

The findings are useful in crafting educational programming and guidelines for health and nutrition education.

This research is the first to explore food labelling practices in multiple Southeast Asian countries and compare them cross-sectionally with EU and US practices.

Milk and yoghurt provide essential sources of nutrition throughout the life cycle in the Irish diet. Health claims on dairy product labels were popular in the 1980s, and since the introduction of the nutrition and health claims (NHC) Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 in 2007, many new regulated claims have been used to communicate product benefits. Meanwhile, COVID-19 and the Farm to Fork strategy have heightened consumer awareness of health issues. All of these factors have contributed to a change in our food environment and interest in health. In addition, the European Commission is working to introduce a legislative proposal on nutrient profiles (NP) to restrict the use of NHC on foods that are high in salt, fat or sugar. This qualitative study aims to research knowledge on adults’ attitudes, perceptions and behaviour towards NHC on dairy products.

The study used a thematic analysis using transcripts from a series of discussion groups, attended by adults (n = 24). The participants also completed an introductory questionnaire.

The study noted positive attitudes towards dairy protein. This attitude was common across age, gender or life stage. There were misperceptions regarding yoghurt composition and health benefits. There were negative perceptions of low-fat nutrition claims on yoghurt, which led to a preference for full-fat dairy products. This requires further insight and research.

Participants from a wider socio-demographic group could have broadened the research limits of this project.

These findings will interest policymakers, regulators, dieticians and the food industry.

One of the objectives of the Nutrition and Health Claims Regulation (EC) No. 1924/2006 (NHCR) is protection and promotion of innovation in the food industry. The purpose of this paper is to explore the impact of the NHCR on both innovation and the sourcing of external knowledge in the European Union (EU) food sector.

An online survey was conducted which resulted in a sample of 105 EU companies for the study. Structural equation modelling was used to examine the nature of relationships that existed among the challenges related to the implementation of the NHCR, external sources of knowledge and innovation.

Challenges related to the NHCR are currently found to have a negative direct impact on product innovation. However, they have a positive indirect effect on product innovation, especially in the case of small and medium-sized enterprises. They also seem to positively affect external knowledge sourcing. Additionally, sources of external knowledge are found to have a positive effect on product and process innovations.

This study provides insights to different stakeholders in the food industry who might wish to work jointly and address the various issues related to the requirements of the NHCR and facilitate compliance with the regulation.

Understanding the impact of the NHCR on innovation seems pivotal because innovation plays an important role in the EU food sector. To this purpose, the paper delivers insights into some main compliance challenges and their effect on innovation.

This paper aims to compare the use of front-of-pack nutrition claims made on 32,257 food labels launched in 2009 in the US and the EU.

Information from Mintel's Global New Product Database was analyzed, for 25,417 products launched in the EU and 6,840 in the US. The hypothesis was that “products launched in the US and EU have a different frequency of front-of-pack nutrition claims”. Using inferential statistics, significant differences (two-tailed Z-tests) in the number of claims are explored and compared to differences in legislation standards and consumer preferences.

The initial analysis revealed that there were six significant differences between the presence of the seven health and nutrition claims across 16 product categories in the US and the EU. Further analysis of the 16 product categories revealed a range of significant differences between the frequency of US and EU claims.

The emerging relevance of front-of-pack nutrition labeling as a marketing tool makes such differences pertinent. This paper marks the first systematic comparison of the use of claims between the US and EU.

This research investigates the effectiveness of the four health claims that the European Union (EU) authorized for extra-virgin olive oil (EVOO) in terms of perceived text clarity, text interestingness, message credibility and information diagnosticity, along with the claims' effect on product attractiveness and consumers' purchase intention.

An experimental study with 185 participants investigated consumer response to the four claims. A one-way MANOVA analyzed differences in the aforementioned variables, while a sequential mediation model assessed the relationship among perceived text clarity of the EVOO health claims, information diagnosticity, product attractiveness and purchase intention.

The four EU-authorized health claims differ in terms of perceived text clarity, message credibility, information diagnosticity and product attractiveness. Specifically, the health claim on EVOO polyphenols scored lower than the other three health claims on the aforementioned dependent variables. Importantly, clearer health claims are perceived as more useful and may increase product attractiveness and consumers' purchase intention.

The research sheds light on the effectiveness of EVOO health claims. Since the use of such health claims is not a common practice in the EVOO market, a deeper understanding of consumers' perception and attitude toward them could inspire better guidelines and suggestions for claim usage and improvement.

Claims about environmental impact, health effects and taste of food products are restricted in the EU. The purpose of this paper is to quantify how much such claims would change the willingness to pay (WTP) for organic products in Croatia.

For estimating the WTP under different claims the authors used an experimental auction. Participants (258) bid for real food products (organic and conventional tomatoes and apples) and are endowed with cash at a location where they usually go shopping.

For the sample the authors find that consumers are willing to pay on average a premium of 42 percent for organic apples and 59 percent for organic tomatoes. On top of that, WTP increases between 16-20 percent for environmental claims and 12 percent for health claims. Taste-related claims are not significant.

Sellers and producers of organic food can benefit from adding claims to organic labels. To protect consumers from manipulation, regulators are well advised to be cautions when allowing claims about credence attributes of food.

The authors quantify the influence of claims about organic products on the WTP by using experimental auctions which are particularly suitable to investigate effects which cannot be observed on the market.