Are health star ratings on food labels failing to make a real impact? It seems so, as food manufacturers are struggling to meet the voluntary targets set for these labels. Originally, the goal was for 70% of products to feature these ratings by November 2025. But, as of November 2024, the uptake was only around 33%. That's a significant shortfall, isn't it?
So, how do these health star ratings work? They're determined by an algorithm that assesses a product's nutritional content, giving it a score between 0.5 and 5 stars. This rating system compares similar foods within the same category, making it easier for consumers to compare products.
Following a review in 2019, specific uptake targets were established. The aim was to have 50% of intended products using the labels by 2023, increasing to 60% the following year, and hitting the ambitious 70% mark by November 2025. But here's where it gets controversial... the Ministry of Primary Industries has revealed that the latest data from November 2024 shows a much lower adoption rate than hoped.
Vincent Arbuckle, the deputy director-general of New Zealand Food Safety, has stated that monitoring for 2025 will now commence, with data becoming available next year. He also mentioned that food ministers in New Zealand and Australia will consider in 2026 whether to propose mandating the system.
Professor Lisa Te Morenga, a nutritionist and Māori health researcher, points out that healthier products with higher star ratings have seen a good uptake. However, she also notes a reluctance among manufacturers to apply low ratings to less healthy products. "For unhealthy foods, no company is going to be that keen to put a half star or one star on a food if they don't have to,” she said.
But Food Safety Minister Andrew Hoggard suggests that businesses may be hesitant to invest in a system that could change. He has mentioned that businesses are looking for certainty regarding labeling requirements.
Hoggard plans to discuss a possible mandate at the next meeting with his Australian counterparts. This decision would initiate a process to gather data, assess costs, and ultimately lead to a final decision, likely about a year later. He emphasizes that his input will consider factors like the scheme's effectiveness in promoting healthier choices and the potential for increased costs. He is particularly concerned about not increasing food prices.
Consumer NZ supports mandating the scheme, arguing that manufacturers have had ample time to adopt the system. Te Morenga agrees, stating that mandating health star labeling is the best approach. She believes it will encourage manufacturers to improve their products, provide consumers with the information they need, and create a level playing field.
What do you think? Do you believe mandating health star ratings is the right move, or should it remain voluntary? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
