Responses to the updated Nutri-Score algorithms in Norway: A qualitative study among food system actors in the NewTools-project

  • Mari Mohn Paulsen Department of Food Safety, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway; and Centre for Sustainable Diets, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway
  • Bente Øvrebø Department of Food Safety, Norwegian Institute of Public Health; Centre for Sustainable Diets, Norwegian Institute of Public Health
  • Anne Lene Løvhaug Department of Nursing and Health Promotion, OsloMet – Oslo Metropolitan University.
  • Kaja Lund-Iversen Centre for Sustainable Diets, Norwegian Institute of Public Health; Research Administrative Support, Norwegian Institute of Public Health
  • Lene Frost Andersen Department of Nutrition, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Oslo
  • Arnfinn Helleve Centre for Evaluation of Public Health Measures, Norwegian Institute of Public Health
  • Marianne Hope Abel Centre for Sustainable Diets, Norwegian Institute of Public Health; Centre for Evaluation of Public Health Measures, Norwegian Institute of Public Health; Department of Physical Health and Ageing, Norwegian Institute of Public Health
Keywords: nutrient profiling, stakeholder responses, front-of-pack nutrition label, food system

Abstract

Background: Nutri-Score is a front-of-pack label grading foods and beverages from A to E indicating nutritional quality based on the foods’ favorable and unfavorable components, and a contender in the ongoing debate on the possible implementation of a harmonized mandatory front-of-pack nutrition label in the European Union. NewTools is a research project on scoring systems for foods involving 28 partners representing actors involved in the Norwegian food system.

Objective: This study aimed to explore views reported by Norwegian food system actors on the advantages and disadvantages with the updated Nutri-Score algorithms for food and beverages (2022–2023). This included Nutri-Score’s performance in ranking foods according to the national food-based dietary guidelines and to the nutritional challenges in Norway.

Design: A total of 28 project partners and 15 other food system stakeholders following the NewTools-project were invited to provide responses on the Nutri-Score algorithms and their application on foods and beverages in the Norwegian food composition table. Thirteen written responses were received and analyzed with qualitative content analysis.

Results: The responses to the updated Nutri-Score varied in content, reflecting mainly concerns. Examples of perceived concerns included excessive penalty of salt content; insufficient differentiation based on fat content in meat, sausages, cheese, and milk; and several unreasonable comparisons across food categories. They also expressed a concern that Nutri-Score may stimulate to increased food processing, and some reported inconsistencies between Nutri-Score’s classification of foods and national nutrition guidelines and policies.

Discussion and conclusion: Several concerns with the updated Nutri-Score algorithms were raised, including the weighting of specific nutrients, unfair outcomes when comparing across food categories, and inconsistencies with established Norwegian nutrition guidelines and policies. The results should be interpreted with caution, as some perspectives from the Norwegian food system may be missing.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References


1.
Afshin A, Sur PJ, Fay KA, Cornaby L, Ferrara G, Salama JS, et al. Health effects of dietary risks in 195 countries, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet 2019; 393(10184): 1958–72. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30041-8


2.
Candari CJ, Cylus J, Nolte E. Assessing the economic costs of unhealthy diets and low physical activity: an evidence review and proposed framework. Copenhagen (Denmark): European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies; 2017.


3.
World Health Organization. Healthy diet. Geneva: World Health Organization. 2020. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/healthy-diet [cited 1 August 2023].


4.
World Health Organization. Nutrition labelling: policy brief. World Health Organization; 2022. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240051324 [cited 1 August 2023].


5.
World Health Organization. Manual to develop and implement front‑of‑pack nutrition labelling: guidance for countries on the selection and testing of evidence‑informed front‑of‑pack nutrition labelling systems in the WHO European Region. Copenhagen, Denmark: World Health Organization. Regional Office for Europe; 2020. Available from: https://iris.who.int/handle/10665/336988 [cited 1 August 2023].


6.
European Commission. Proposal for a revision of the Regulation on Food Information to Consumers (FIC): Directorate-General for Health and Food Safety; 2022. Available from: https://food.ec.europa.eu/safety/labelling-and-nutrition/food-information-consumers-legislation/proposal-revision-regulation-fic_en [cited 1 August 2023].


7.
Bambridge-Sutton A. Nutri-Score backed by European Public Health Association amid algorithm debate. FoodNavigator; 2023. Available from: https://www.foodnavigator.com/Article/2023/03/20/Nutri-Score-backed-by-European-Public-Health-Association-amid-algorithm-debate [cited 1 August 2023].


8.
Southey F. Does Nutri-Score discriminate against traditional foods? FoodNavigator; 2020. Available from: https://www.foodnavigator.com/Article/2020/12/11/Does-Nutri-Score-discriminate-against-traditional-foods [cited 31 July 2023].


9.
Hercberg S, Touvier M, Salas-Salvado J, Peña Quintana L. The Nutri-Score nutrition label A public health tool based on rigorous scientific evidence aiming to improve the nutritional status of the population. Int J Vitam Nutr Res 2022; 92: 147–57. doi: 10.1024/0300-9831/a000722


10.
The Scientific Committee of the Nutri-Score. Update of the Nutri-Score algorithm. Update report from the Scientific Committee of the Nutri-Score 2022. Paris, France: Santé Publique France; 2022.


11.
The Scientific Committee of Nutri-Score. Update of the Nutri-Score algorithm for beverages. Second update report from the Scientific Committee of the Nutri-Score V2 – 2023. Paris, France: Santé Publique France; 2023.


12.
Dréano-Trécant L, Egnell M, Hercberg S, Galan P, Soudon J, Fialon M, et al. Performance of the front-of-pack nutrition label Nutri-Score to discriminate the nutritional quality of foods products: a comparative study across 8 European countries. Nutrients 2020; 12(5): 1303. doi: 10.3390/nu12051303


13.
Ter Borg S, Steenbergen E, Milder IE, Temme EH. Evaluation of nutri-score in relation to dietary guidelines and food reformulation in The Netherlands. Nutrients 2021; 13(12): 4536. doi: 10.3390/nu13124536


14.
The Scientific Committee of the Nutri-Score. Update of the Nutri-Score algorithm – yearly report from the Scientific Committee of the Nutri-Score 2021. Paris, France: Santé Publique France; 2022.


15.
European scientists and health professionals for Nutri-Score. Why the European Commission must choose the Nutri-Score nutrition label – a public health tool based on rigorous scientific evidence – as the harmonized mandatory nutrition label for Europe 2023. Available from: https://nutriscore-europe.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/NS_rapport-EU-V10_230202.pdf [cited 8 August 2023].


16.
Santé Publique France. Nutri-score. 2023. Available from: https://www.santepubliquefrance.fr/en/nutri-score [cited 9 August 2023].


17.
Julia C, Hercberg S. Research and lobbying conflicting on the issue of a front-of-pack nutrition labelling in France. Archiv Public Health 2016; 74(1): 1–5. doi: 10.1186/s13690-016-0162-8


18.
France24. In EU, a food fight over nutrition labels. 2023. Available from: https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20230309-in-eu-a-food-fight-over-nutrition-labels [cited 9 August 2023].


19.
FoodNavigator. Does Nutri-Score discriminate against traditional foods. 2021. Available from: https://www.foodnavigator.com/Article/2020/12/11/Does-Nutri-Score-discriminate-against-traditional-foods [cited 9 August 2023].


20.
EU Ref. Area(2020)6859343 – 18/11/2020. Overview of country position and requests on Nutri-Score. 2020. Available from: https://www.asktheeu.org/en/request/8770/response/29238/attach/2/3%201%20Ares%202020%206859343%20NESTLE%20Annex%201.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1 [cited 9 August 2023].


21.
Norwegian Institute of Public Health. About NewTools [Om NewTools]. Norwegian Institute of Public Health; 2022. Available from: https://www.fhi.no/kl/studier/newtools/om-newtools/om-newtools/ [cited 11 July 2024].


22.
Øvrebø B, Brantsæter A, Lund-Iversen K, Andersen L, Paulsen M, Abel M. How does the updated Nutri-Score discriminate and classify the nutritional quality of foods in a Norwegian setting? Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2023; 20(1): 1–15. doi: 10.1186/s12966-023-01525-y


23.
Mattilsynet. Matvaretabellen. 2021. Available from: www.matvaretabellen.no [cited 4 July 2023].


24.
O’Brien BC, Harris IB, Beckman TJ, Reed DA, Cook DA. Standards for reporting qualitative research: a synthesis of recommendations. Acad Med 2014; 89(9): 1245–51. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000388


25.
Norwegian Institute of Public Health. Rammeverk for samhandling i NewTools-prosjektet (Framework for engagement of stakeholders in the NewTools project). 2022. Available from: https://www.fhi.no/kl/studier/newtools/om-newtools/rammeverk-for-samhandling-i-newtools/ [cited 19 September 2023].


26.
Helsenorge. The Keyhole – for healthier food. 2023. Oslo, Norway: The Norwegian Directorate of Health. Available from: https://www.helsenorge.no/en/kosthold-og-ernaring/keyhole-healthy-food/ [cited 19 September 2023].


27.
Graneheim UH, Lundman B. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today 2004; 24(2): 105–12. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001


28.
Graneheim UH, Lindgren BM, Lundman B. Methodological challenges in qualitative content analysis: a discussion paper. Nurse Educ Today 2017; 56: 29–34. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2017.06.002


29.
Slettebø T. Participant validation: exploring a contested tool in qualitative research. Qual Social Work 2021; 20(5): 1223–38. doi: 10.1177/1473325020968189


30.
Nowell LS, Norris JM, White DE, Moules NJ. Thematic analysis: striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. Int J Qual Methods 2017; 16(1). doi: 10.1177/1609406917733847


31.
The Norwegian Directorate of Health. Partnership for a healthier diet. 2022. Available from: https://www.helsedirektoratet.no/english/partnership-for-a-healthier-diet [cited 19 September 2023].


32.
The Norwegian Directorate of Health. Kostrådene (The dietary recommendations). 2016. Available from: https://www.helsedirektoratet.no/faglige-rad/kostradene-og-naeringsstoffer/kostrad-for-befolkningen [cited 14 August 2023].


33.
The Scientific Committee of Nutri-Score. Update of the Nutri-Score algorithm – yearly report from the Scientific Committee of the Nutri-Score 2021. Paris, France: Santé Publique France; 2022.


34.
The Norwegian Directorate of Health. NNR2022 chapters: public consultation. Oslo: Helsedirektoratet; 2022. Available from: https://www.helsedirektoratet.no/horinger/nordic-nutrition-recommendations-2022-nnr2022 [cited 10 July 2023].


35.
Nordic Councils of Ministers. Nordic Nutrition Recommendations 2023. Integrating environmental aspects. 2023. Available from: https://www.norden.org/en/publication/nordic-nutrition-recommendations-2023 [cited 10 July 2023].


36.
Fortuna G. France might drop support for Nutri-Score, say Italians. Euractiv; 2021. Available from: https://www.euractiv.com/section/agriculture-food/news/france-might-drop-support-for-nutri-score-say-italians/ [cited 31 August 2023].


37.
Stiletto A, Cei L, Trestini S. A Little Bird Told Me… Nutri-Score Panoramas from a Flight over Europe, Connecting Science and Society. Nutrients 2023; 15(15). doi: 10.3390/nu15153367


38.
Eriksen K. Høringsfristen ute for kostholdsrådene – mange innspill om ultraprosessert mat. 2023. Available from: https://www.dagensmedisin.no/folkehelse-folkehelseinstituttet-kreftregisteret/horingsfristen-ute-for-kostholdsradene-mange-innspill-om-ultraprosessert-mat/568323 [cited 19 September 2023].


39.
Bjerkholdt B. Krangler om ultraprosessert mat: – en hype, sier fedmeekspert. nrk; 2023. Available from: https://www.nrk.no/vestfoldogtelemark/krangler-om-ultraprosessert-mat_-_-en-hype_-sier-fedmeekspert-1.16421493 [cited 19 September 2023].


40.
Srour B, Hercberg S, Galan P, Monteiro CA, Szabo de Edelenyi F, Bourhis L, et al. Effect of a new graphically modified Nutri-Score on the objective understanding of foods’ nutrient profile and ultraprocessing: a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Nutr Prev Health 2023; 6(1): 108–18. doi: 10.1136/bmjnph-2022-000599


41.
The Norwegian Ministry of Health and Care Services. Effective dietary policy measures: report from the expert group on cost-effective policy measures to promote healthier diet and reduce social inequalities in nutrition (In Norwegian). Oslo, Norway: The Norwegian Ministry of Health and Care Services; 2024.
Published
2024-10-01
How to Cite
Mohn Paulsen M., Øvrebø B., Løvhaug A. L., Lund-Iversen K., Andersen L. F., Helleve A., & Abel M. H. (2024). Responses to the updated Nutri-Score algorithms in Norway: A qualitative study among food system actors in the NewTools-project. Food & Nutrition Research, 68. https://doi.org/10.29219/fnr.v68.10254
Section
Original Articles