Calorie labelling in the out of home sector: consultation analysis

3. Implementing mandatory calorie labelling

Q1. Implementing mandatory calorie labelling

Question 1 – Should mandatory calorie labelling at point of choice, for example, menus, menu boards or digital ordering apps in the OOH sector in Scotland be implemented?

Overview

The consultation asked respondents whether they thought that mandatory calorie labelling should be introduced at the point of choice in the OOH sector.

The closed element of question 1 received a total of 660 responses (574 individuals and 86 organisations). The majority of those who responded to this question did not think that mandatory calorie labelling should be introduced (79%) while 18% thought that it should be implemented. A further 3% said that they did not know.

Individuals displayed higher levels of opposition to the implementation of mandatory calorie labelling (83%) than organisations (50%). Among organisations, out of home providers displayed higher levels of opposition to the implementation of mandatory calorie labelling than other organisation types. Manufacturers and retailers displayed the highest level of support for the introduction of mandatory calorie labelling while industry representative bodies, public sector and third sector bodies had more mixed views on the introduction of the policy.

In total, 603 respondents (523 individuals and 80 organisations) provided responses explaining their answer to question 1.

Views opposed to the introduction of mandatory calorie labelling at the point of choice

The most common view expressed in opposition to the introduction of mandatory calorie labelling was the potential negative impact on those with and recovering from eating disorders. Many respondents felt that mandatory calorie labelling would make eating out more difficult for those who have suffered or are suffering from eating disorders. Many of these responses included personal testimony of suffering from eating disorders and the potential triggering impact such a policy could have on recovery.

Related to this view, many respondents expressed the view that the introduction would have an impact on mental health and highlighted the potential dangers to children in particular that the policy would have in terms of encouraging calorie counting:

"As a sufferer of an eating disorder, this whole idea upsets me greatly. I am always in fear of relapse, and this is such a trigger for me. The whole enjoyment in going out for food will be stolen from me." [Individual]

"The young people we spoke to highlighted the potentially dangerous impact of mandatory calorie labelling for people living with or recovering from eating disorders. They felt clear calorie labelling on all Out of Home Sector foods at the point of choice could lead to those living with disordered eating to develop or redevelop calorie calculation habits detrimental to their health and wellbeing. Research from [organisation] shows that mandatory calorie labelling poses clear risks to people with eating disorders, all while there is limited evidence that calorie labelling achieves its intended outcome." [Organisation, Third Sector]

Many respondents focused on whether introduction of the policy would deliver on reducing obesity or encouraging people to make healthier choices. Respondents challenged the evidence presented in the consultation paper and pointed to the implementation of the policy in the USA as evidence that the policy may not have the desired effect. This view was prominent among individuals who were opposed to the introduction of mandatory calorie labelling but was also shared by a number of organisations, particularly in the public and third sector. For example:

"We understand the motivation behind the mandatory calorie labelling as a way of reducing overall calories purchased and consumed OOH as a response to the increasing rates of people living with overweight and obesity but the evidence to support this is lacking. Despite some studies presented in the rapid evidence review showing statistically significant results, the calorie reduction is not literally significant in terms of being enough to reduce a person's weight" [Organisation, Public Sector]

Among respondents focused on the policy not achieving its aims there was a feeling that the policy would not address issues around education or poverty which are contributors to the poor dietary choices of many in Scotland.

Another view expressed was that the introduction of calorie information was not sufficient enough in terms of providing people with information on the nutritional value of a meal. Among these responses some challenged the elevated status this policy would give calories as a signifier of nutrition:

"It gives incomplete and largely irrelevant information about the food. It's not about its nutritional content or its processing so its not a move about health at all. It's about shaming and appearing to take action to help health. It is not that at all." [Individual]

Many responses raised concerns about the potential costs to business that implementing the policy would have. In particular, out of home providers noted the pressures on the hospitality sector coming out of COVID-19 and the impact this policy could have on these businesses. For example:

"As a sector the last 25 months have been incredibly challenging. The current situation involves many staff shortages across the sector and at this present time implementing these mandatory changes will only bring about additional unmanageable asks for business owners and managers."[Organisation, Out of Home Provider]

Another view raised by respondents was that they thought the policy was intrusive on people's choices and was indicative of government policy increasingly unduly interfering in personal choice.

Other views that were expressed by those opposed to the policy included:

• that menus containing calorie information should be available on request as opposed to being the default;
• eating out is a treat or social activity and the policy takes away from this experience;
• the policy would be too complicated to implement;
• choices made at home were a greater contributor to obesity than choices made OOH; and
• organisations such as manufacturers, retailers and businesses called for regulatory alignment with England.^[10]

Views in support of introduction of mandatory calorie labelling at the point of choice

The most common view expressed in favour of the introduction of mandatory calorie labelling at the point of choice was that providing this information would give consumers in Scotland the information to make healthier choices.

This view was expressed by both individuals and organisations in the public and third sector as well as industry representative bodies. For example:

"It is vital that the public can make informed choices about food. Improved, informative labelling should be given more emphasis so that the consumer is aware of how many calories and adverse food sources are in out of home foods, just as they can with foods purchased for consumption in the home." [Organisation, Other]

Several respondents expressed the view that requiring calorie information would be beneficial in terms of giving people choice and control when selecting what they eat in an OOH setting. Benefits were outlined for those who were currently trying to lose weight and the lack of transparency of the current system was noted as an issue when making choices in OOH settings.

Another reason given in support of the policy from retailers and manufacturers was that the introduction of the policy would create a level playing field between retail and the out of home sector when it comes to information provided to consumers.

Other responses highlighted the potential for the introduction of the policy to encourage OOH providers to make alterations to their offer in terms of portion size of calorie content:

"One important indirect consequence of calorie labelling on menus could be a reduction in calories across the menu, which has been observed in academic research and also self-reported by those in the sector already trialling it." [Organisation, Third Sector]

Among those who expressed support for the policy, a desire for regulatory alignment with England and avoiding a one size fits all approach for all sizes of business was a consistent theme.

Q2. Exemptions from mandatory calorie labelling by sector

Overview

Question 2 - Should any of the sectors listed be exempt from mandatory calorie labelling? If yes, please explain why.

The consultation asked respondents whether they thought that any of the organisations listed in Section 1.2 of the consultation document should be exempt from mandatory calorie labelling and why.

The organisations listed at Section 1.2 were as follows:

• Cafes, all types of restaurants, takeaways, pubs/bars, bakeries, sweet and dessert shops, vending machines, workplace canteens, hotels, mobile caterers, leisure and entertainment venues;
• Supermarkets, delicatessens and convenience stores who provide "food on the go";
• Places where we purchase food and non-alcoholic drinks when commuting or travelling;
• Manufacturers and suppliers of food to the OOH sector;
• Food delivery services, including online services;
• OOH businesses in the public sector, including food provided for staff and visitors in prisons, military settings, and adult care and health care settings; and
• Any other venue or outlet that sells non-prepacked food ready for immediate consumption.

Of the 637 respondents (561 individuals and 76 organisations) who provided a response to the closed element of this question, 70% thought that some of the organisations listed should be exempt from mandatory calorie labelling while 23% did not and 7% said they didn't know.

A higher proportion of individuals (72%) expressed the view that any of the sectors listed should be exempt than organisations (59%). Among the responses who felt there should be exemptions, there was a significant number of respondents who felt all of the sectors listed should be exempt as they disagreed with the policy as a whole.

Among organisational responses, out of home providers that responded were particularly likely to agree that some exemptions should be in place, while industry representative and third sector bodies were also more likely to agree with some exemptions. Views were more mixed across public sector organisations.

In total, 450 individuals and 67 organisations provided responses explaining their answer to question 2.

Views expressed in agreement with exemptions

Many respondents felt that there should be exemptions in place for small businesses such as catering vans, small cafes and bakers as opposed to any specific sector. This view was prevalent among small and micro businesses who responded to the consultation.

Among the reasons given for the exemption of small businesses was that the introduction of the policy would place a disproportionate burden on these businesses in terms of time and cost. Within this group of responses there was also a focus on the bespoke nature of the offering in many small OOH food providers which would make implementing the policy difficult on a practical basis given the frequency of menu changes:

"It's asking too much of small business owners to calculate the calories of every item on their menu. Especially when things change daily." [Individual]

Another concern raised was with the introduction of the policy in healthcare or public sector settings as many people eating in these settings do not have an option to eat elsewhere. Others felt that the potential impact of the offering in the public sector was over-emphasised in the consultation document:

"93% of respondents to [organisation's] survey did not support the introduction of mandatory calorie labelling on menus in public sector settings, with respondents commenting reasons such as that it was an "even worse decision as there is already little choice for some people in these environments." [Organisation, Third Sector]

"OOH in the public sector. There is a misconception about the opportunities of scale that these businesses have. In many cases the meals are made individually. The recipes used would need to be analysed. Who does this? Dietitians already overstretched and in short supply and the catering staff are unlikely to have the time or skill to do this accurately" [Individual]

Other less commonly expressed views by those who agreed with exemptions were that the policy should only apply to pre-packaged food in OOH settings and that the policy should only apply to large chains.

Views expressed in disagreement with exemptions

The main sentiment among those who felt that there should be no exemptions was that if the policy was to be introduced then there should be consistency across all sectors and business sizes in order to best achieve the goals set out for the policy:

"We know from evidence that the majority of items purchased OOH are high in fat, salt and sugar and that we are consistently failing to meet Scottish Dietary Goals. Micro and small businesses also make up a significant proportion of OOH outlets in Scotland and account for a large proportion of OOH visits, so it is important that they are not exempt from the regulations." [Organisation, Third Sector]

"For people to make healthier choices they need to have access to the full nutritional information not just calories and believe it is important that this is provided by every sector producing food." [Individual]

A small number of respondents expressed the view that any exemptions available may lead to some OOH providers seeking to re-designate themselves in order for exemptions to apply to them.

However, a number of respondents qualified that while they did not think that there should be sectoral exemptions, exemptions should apply for small businesses due to the disproportionate burden the implementation of the policy would have on them.