Nutri-Score and NutrInform Battery: Effects on Performance and Preference in Italian Consumers

The impact of nutri-score on consumers' preferences for geographical indications. Evidence from a non-hypothetical experiment

The EU Farm to Fork strategy (F2F) promotes the compulsory adoption of a nutritional front of pack label to improve the diets of the citizens, supporting healthier food choices. In the public debate, Nutri-Score (NS) is the most favored candidate. Although being widely supported, oppositions on the political and producer levels are raised against the NS, due to the economic impact it could have on specific food sector, and specifically on Geographical Indications (GIs). Recent literature has stressed the need to explore it in more detail. The current study contributes to fill this gap by analyzing consumers' monetary preferences for GI products labelled with different NS levels. An incentivized non-hypothetical experiment was conducted on 188 Italian consumers. Different products representing different levels of NS were used. Specifically, a conventional pasta and the Pasta di Gragnano PGI (NS = A), a conventional flatbread (piadina) and the Piadina Romagnola PGI (NSC), and a conventional hard cheese and the Parmigiano Reggiano PDO (NS = D) were considered in the survey. Results reveal that the NS elicits favorable responses and unfavorable reactions in consumers' preferences, aligning with expectations for A and D scores, respectively. The perceived healthiness of the product significantly affects consumers' WTP, increasing it. Results stress the need to have effective communication strategies within the EU to reach the F2F goals. NS diminishes the premium in prices associated with GIs independently from its level, when considering those consumers who value more the GIs. However, the most well-known GIs does not suffer from this negative effect of the NS, as the positive value associated to the GI offset the negative effect of the NS.

Chemical Data and Relationships for a Scoring Algorithm of Extra Virgin Olive Oil's Nutritional Value

Extra virgin olive oil (EVOO) is a valuable product and is highly appreciated by consumers for its great nutritional value. However, to date, there has been a lack of uniform systems capable of ranking the nutritional value of EVOO based on its chemical composition in terms of macro- and micronutrients (including phenolic compounds and tocopherols). The aim of this study was to propose a scoring algorithm to rank the nutritional value of EVOO samples, considering their chemical composition in macro- and micronutrients and their sensitivity to oxidation phenomena. Data from more than 1000 EVOO samples were used to assess the variability of the data, considering the selected negative parameters (free acidity, peroxide value, spectrophotometric indices) and positive components (composition in tocopherols via HPLC-DAD, phenolic compounds via HPLC-DAD, and fatty acids via GC-MS) so as to ensure the universal validity of the scoring algorithm. The dataset included samples from the main producing countries worldwide, in addition to Australia, across several production years; data were selected to represent different production realities. A mathematical model was set up for each chemical component, resulting in six variable values. By combining these values with a dimensionless constant value, the algorithm for computing the nutritional value score (NVS) was defined. It allows the nutritional value of an oil to be ranked on a scale of 0 to 100 based on its chemical composition. The algorithm was then successfully tested using chemical data from about 300 EVOO samples obtained from laboratories from different Italian regions. The proposed NVS is a simple and objective tool for scoring the nutritional value of an EVOO, easy to understand for both producers and consumers.

A Little Bird Told Me… Nutri-Score Panoramas from a Flight over Europe, Connecting Science and Society

Within the Farm to Fork Strategy, the European Commission ask for a unified Front Of Pack nutritional label for food to be used at the European level. The scientific debate identified the Nutri-Score (NS) as the most promising candidate, but within the political discussion, some Member States brought to attention several issues related to its introduction. This misalignment led to a postponement of the final decision. With the aim to shed some light on the current stances and contribute to the forthcoming debate, the objective of the present work is to understand to what extent scientific research addresses the issues raised by the general public. We applied a structural topic model to tweets from four European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain) and to abstracts of scientific papers, all dealing with the NS topic. Different aspects of the NS debate are discussed in different countries, but scientific research, while addressing some of them (e.g., the comparison between NS and other labels), disregards others (e.g., relations between NS and traditional products). It is advisable, therefore, to widen the scope of NS research to properly address the concerns of European society and to provide policymakers with robust evidence to support their decisions.

A 20-Country Comparative Assessment of the Effectiveness of Nutri-Score vs. NutrInform Battery Front-of-Pack Nutritional Labels on Consumer Subjective Understanding and Liking

The incidence of overweight and obesity has generated significant concerns among European consumers and institutions. As part of a set of measures undertaken, the European Union (EU) called for one harmonized mandatory front-of-pack nutritional label (FOPL) to improve consumer food nutritional knowledge and encourage healthier and more informed food choices. Different types of FOPLs, ranging from nutrient-specific labels-such as the NutrInform Battery-to summary labels-such as the Nutri-Score-have been developed and introduced in different markets, reporting different degrees of effectiveness in terms of understanding. The aim of this study is to provide actionable insights by analyzing a specific part of the complex consumers' decision-making process in food when aided by FOPLs. Adopting a between-subject experiment on a sample of 4560 respondents in 20 EU member countries, the study compares the consumer subjective understanding and liking of two labels currently under examination by the EU bodies, the NutrInform Battery and the Nutri-Score. At an aggregated level, the results show that NutrInform Battery is more effective than Nutri-Score in improving consumer subjective understanding and leads to a higher liking towards the label. A detailed by-country analysis highlights either a superiority or a parity of NutrInform Battery for subjective understanding and liking. Theoretically, this study, through a large panel of respondents, adds the fundamental perspective on subjective understanding, complementing the findings of extant research on objective understanding, and further clarifies the role of liking as a complementary element in the food decision-making process toward heathier and more informed food choices. This might be of significant relevance in providing additional evidence that can be used by policymakers in their attempt toward the selection of a uniform FOPL at EU level.

Comparative understanding and preference of Nutri-Score and NutrInform Battery in a sample of Spanish consumers

BACKGROUND

Interpretive front-of-pack labels (FoPLs) are supported by World Health Organization as an important policy tool to promote healthy diets. At present, various FoPLs formats co-exist in the European Union (EU). However, as part of the Farm to Fork strategy published in 2020, the European Commission stated that it would propose a single mandatory FoPL. The aim of this study was to analyze Spanish consumers' preference and objective understanding of Nutri-Score and NutrInform, two FoPLs that are currently the subject of debate in the EU.

METHODS

In a representative sample of 1026 Spanish adults (50% women, mean age ± SD = 46 ± 14 years), objective understanding was assessed by asking participants to identify the healthiest food products in three food categories (breakfast products, breakfast cereals and added fats). The preference dimensions were tested by asking participants about the perceived helpfulness of the FoPL in discriminating the nutritional quality of food products (subjective understanding) and their overall assessment of the FoPL's ease of use, informativeness, trust and liking (perception).

RESULTS

In terms of objective understanding, Nutri-Score was significantly associated with an increase in consumers' ability to identify healthier food products across all food categories compared with NutrInform [OR (odds ratio) = 19.1 [14.2-25.7], P < 0.0001]. On the preference dimension, Nutri-Score was perceived as significantly easier to use and was more liked than NutrInform (standardized principal component analysis dimension, respectively, 0.32 ± 1.58 vs. -0.29 ± 1.66, P < 0.0001 and 0.080 ± 1.18 vs. -0.072 ± 1.17, P = 0.039).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides new evidence to support Nutri-Score in comparison with NutrInform in Spanish consumers, on both objective understanding and preference aspects.