Food Business News - February 23, 2016 - 11

Consumers not clear on clean label deﬁnition

LONDON - More than a third
of respondents in a global survey from Canadean said they
do not have any understanding about the term "clean label." Melanie Felgate, senior
consumer insight analyst for
London-based Canadean, said
food and beverage manufacturers thus might want to
choose other terms to promote products.
"The 'clean label' term
generally resonates with consumers as an indicator that a
product is natural or chemical-free," she said. "However,
the fact that a significant proportion of consumers don't

understand the term or interpret it to mean, for example,
that a product could be gluten-free, suggests that brands
should continue to place their
marketing focus on core benefits, rather than simply promoting their products as 'clean.'"
Canadean's survey took
place in December and involved 27,185 respondents
from 31 countries. When asked
what the term "clean label"
means, 36% said free from artificial ingredients while 34% said
natural/organic claims and 34%
said they did not know what
"clean label" means.
"What's interesting is that

in the U.S. where the clean
labelling movement is arguably more advanced, almost
half of consumers (45%) do
not understand its meaning,"
Ms. Felgate said. "The lack
of clarity may actually turn
consumers away from brands
marketed in this way, rather
than promoting the simplicity
that should underpin the ideals of clean labelling."
Other answers globally
were no pesticides/chemicals/
toxins (31%), free from allergens (24%), no G.M.O.s (23%),
minimally processed (16%),
simple/short ingredient lists
(11%) and transparent packaging (7%). The survey found
1 in 10 consumers said they
would be willing to pay over
5% more for a product claiming to be clean label.
"The term 'clean label' resonates differently among consumers globally, and moreover
a third of consumers (34%)
do not actually have any understanding of what it means
at all," Ms. Felgate said. "This
may reflect the fact that the
term 'clean label' is more

widely used in industry than
as a marketing claim in itself. However as the 'clean'
movement gains mainstream
traction, as reflected by the
popularity (of) social media
hashtags such as #cleaneating,
it is important that marketers
understand what 'clean' actually means to the consumer."
She said Minneapolis-based
Caribou Coffee has taken a
smart approach to clean label
promotions.
"While Caribou Coffee promotes the removal of artificial flavorings as their 'clean
label pledge,' the message
given to consumers focuses
strongly on the sensory benefits," Ms. Felgate said. "The
brand emphasizes the 'realness' of its ingredients to provide a 'superior flavor,' with
slogans like 'change you can
taste' and 'it just got real' taking center stage. Highlighting
these sensory advantages will
resonate much more strongly
with consumers than relying
solely on the potentially confusing clean label message to
sell the brand." FBN

W.H.O. report urges tax on sugar-sweetened drinks
GENEVA, SWITZERLAND -
A World Health Organization
report on childhood obesity
includes a recommendation
to tax sugar-sweetened beverages. The report from the
W.H.O.'s "Commission on
Ending Childhood Obesity"
also covers such areas as the
marketing of foods and nonalcoholic beverages to children and the implementing of
school meal standards.
"Overall, the rationale for
taxation measures to influence
purchasing behaviors is strong
and supported by the available evidence," the report said.
"Further evidence will become
available as countries that
implement taxes on unhealthy
foods and/or sugar-sweetened beverages monitor their

February 23, 2016

progress. The commission
believes there is sufficient rationale to warrant the introduction of an effective tax on
sugar-sweetened beverages."
The report said price influences low-income consumers
the most.
"Fiscal policies may encourage this group of consumers to make healthier
choices (provided healthier
alternatives are made available) as well as providing an
indirect educational and public health signal to the whole
population," the report said.
Some countries may consider taxes on food high in fat
and sugar, the report added.
In response, the Washingtonbased American Beverage Association said no evidence shows

taxes on grocery items like beverages improve public health.
"Recent studies on the effect of a soda tax in Mexico
show that it resulted in a reduction of 4.9 calories per day,
an amount not even measurable on a bathroom scale," the
association said. "Moreover,
despite tax proponents' unfounded claims that soft drink
consumption is the driving
factor behind obesity, health
data prove that the prevalence
of public health challenges
such as obesity continues to
grow even though sugar consumption from soda dropped
by 39% since 2000."
The W.H.O. report cited a
study published on-line Jan. 6
in the BMJ. The study found
a an excise tax of one peso

per liter on sugar-sweetened
beverages implemented on
Jan. 1, 2014, in Mexico has
been associated with an overall 12% reduction in sales.
Globally, at least 41 million children age 5 and under
are overweight or obese, according to the W.H.O. report.
Overweight prevalence in that
age group rose to 6.1% in 2014
from 4.8% in 1990.
The report, which was released Jan. 25, listed six areas
that may help to end childhood obesity: intake of healthy
foods; physical activity; preconception and pregnancy
care; early childhood diet and
physical activity; health, nutrition and physical activity
for school-age children; and
weight management. FBN

FOODBUSINESS NEWS

Food Business News - February 23, 2016

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Food Business News - February 23, 2016