4.4 Article

Adoption of voluntary front of package nutrition schemes in UK food innovations

Journal

BRITISH FOOD JOURNAL
Volume 112, Issue 6-7, Pages 580-591

Publisher

EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1108/00070701011052673

Keywords

Production information; Innovation; Food packaging; United Kingdom; Labelling; Nutrition

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose - This paper aims to determine the response of manufacturers and retailers to voluntary UK front of package (FOP) schemes through food product innovations. Design/methodology/approach - A food innovation database (Global New Products Database) was used to track all food products released in the UK from January 1, 2002 to December 31, 2008. Meal, bakery and breakfast cereal products were classified into two groups, according to whether the food category was targeted by the Food Standard Agency (FSA) for FOP labelling. Analysis includes descriptive statistics and cross-tabulations of factors such as product category, type of FOP scheme, company, and year. Findings - Private label brands dominate food innovations in the UK. The use of FOP labels is selective among companies and across food categories. Guideline daily allowance (GDA) labelling is more widely adopted than the traffic light labelling system (TLS). Both systems have been more broadly adopted in target food categories when compared to non-target food categories. Research limitations/implications - The database used to conduct this research provides detailed data on food product innovations released in the UK. However, this is not linked to sales data and therefore cannot be used to analyse changes in consumption due to FOP labelling systems. Nevertheless, the response of food manufacturers and retailers in their innovation strategies is a critical piece to understanding how voluntary labelling polices may impact public health. Originality/value - The paper presents evidence of dynamics of supply-side responses to increasing consumer demand for healthier foods.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available