Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Effect of Formulation, Labelling, and Taxation Policies on the Nutritional Quality of the Food Supply

  • Public Health Nutrition (T Gill, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Nutrition Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Food formulation, labelling, and taxation policies may encourage food (re)formulation. However, most literature focuses on their impact on consumer behaviours. This review summarizes the impact of various nutrition policies on food (re)formulation.

Recent Findings

Food (re)formulation targets (particularly mandatory policies) have been associated with positive reformulation of targeted products. Limited evidence (mostly from Health Star Ratings and the Tick) demonstrates that some labelling policies effectively incentivize food reformulation. No peer-reviewed evidence has examined warning labels and taxes on sugar in drinks, but limited grey literature evaluation suggests that those policies have stimulated reformulation to some extent.

Conclusions

The effect of nutrition policies on food (re)formulation is insufficiently studied. The impact of such policies on (re)formulation is likely greater when they are mandatory, aligned with other regulations, and thoroughly monitored and evaluated. Policies targeting (re)formulation have important limitations and broader food system policies will additionally be needed to significantly improve diets.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance

  1. Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 84 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks for 195 countries and territories, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet. 2018;392:1923–94.

  2. Health effects of dietary risks in 195 countries, 1990-2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet. 2019;393:1958–72.

  3. Swinburn BA, Sacks G, Hall KD, McPherson K, Finegood DT, Moodie ML, et al. The global obesity pandemic: shaped by global drivers and local environments. Lancet. 2011;378:804–14.

  4. Vandevijvere S, Chow CC, Hall KD, Umali E, Swinburn BA. Increased food energy supply as a major driver of the obesity epidemic: a global analysis. Bull World Health Organ. 2015;93:446–56.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Swinburn B, Sacks G, Vandevijvere S, Kumanyika S, Lobstein T, Neal B, et al. INFORMAS (International Network for Food and Obesity/non-communicable diseases Research, Monitoring and Action Support): overview and key principles. Obes Rev. 2013;14(Suppl 1):1–12.

  6. Vandevijvere S. Global trends in ultra-processed food and drink product sales and their association with adult body mass index trajectories. Obes Rev. 2019.

  7. Dunford EK, Taillie LS, Miles DR, Eyles H, Tolentino-Mayo L, Ng SW. Non-nutritive sweeteners in the packaged food supply-an assessment across 4 countries. Nutrients. 2018;10.

  8. Coyne KJ, Baldridge AS, Huffman MD, Jenner K, Xavier D, Dunford EK. Differences in the sodium content of bread products in the USA and UK: implications for policy. Public Health Nutr. 2018;21:632–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Poelman MP, Eyles H, Dunford E, Schermel A, L’Abbe MR, Neal B, et al. Package size and manufacturer-recommended serving size of sweet beverages: a cross-sectional study across four high-income countries. Public Health Nutr. 2016;19:1008–16.

  10. Ziauddeen N, Fitt E, Edney L, Dunford E, Neal B, Jebb SA. Variability in the reported energy, total fat and saturated fat contents in fast-food products across ten countries. Public Health Nutr. 2015;18:2962–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Arcand J, Blanco-Metzler A, Benavides AK, L’Abbe MR, Legetic B. Sodium levels in packaged foods sold in 14 Latin American and Caribbean countries: a food label analysis. Nutrients. 2019;11.

  12. Chepulis L, Mearns G, Hill S, Wu JHY, Crino M, Alderton S, et al. The nutritional content of supermarket beverages: a cross-sectional analysis of New Zealand, Australia, Canada and the UK. Public Health Nutr. 2018;21:2507–16.

  13. World Health Organization. Global action plan for the prevention and control of noncommunicable diseases 2013-2020. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Mantilla Herrera AM, Crino M, Erskine HE, et al. Cost-effectiveness of product reformulation in response to the Health Star Rating food labelling system in Australia. Nutrients. 2018;10.

  15. Crino M, Herrera AMM, Ananthapavan J, Wu J, Neal B, Lee Y, et al. Modelled cost-effectiveness of a package size cap and a kilojoule reduction intervention to reduce energy intake from sugar-sweetened beverages in Australia. Nutrients. 2017;9.

  16. Pearson-Stuttard J, Hooton W, Critchley J, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of eliminating industrial and all trans fats in England and Wales: modelling study. J Public Health (Oxf). 2017;39:574–82.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Wilcox ML, Mason H, Fouad FM, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of salt reduction policies to reduce coronary heart disease in Syria, 2010-2020. Int J Public Health. 2015;60(Suppl 1):S23–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Watkins DA, Olson ZD, Verguet S, Nugent RA, Jamison DT. Cardiovascular disease and impoverishment averted due to a salt reduction policy in South Africa: an extended cost-effectiveness analysis. Health Policy Plan. 2016;31:75–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Mason H, Shoaibi A, Ghandour R, O'Flaherty M, Capewell S, Khatib R, et al. A cost effectiveness analysis of salt reduction policies to reduce coronary heart disease in four Eastern Mediterranean countries. PLoS One. 2014;9:e84445.

  20. Spiteri M, Soler LG. Food reformulation and nutritional quality of food consumption: an analysis based on households panel data in France. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2018;72:228–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Griffith R, O'Connell M, Smith K. The importance of product reformulation versus consumer choice in improving diet quality. Economica. 2017;84:34–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Leroy P, Requillart V, Soler LG, Enderli G. An assessment of the potential health impacts of food reformulation. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2016;70:694–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Jensen JD, Sommer I. Reducing calorie sales from supermarkets – ‘silent’ reformulation of retailer-brand food products. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2017;14:104.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Backholer K, Blake M, Vandevijvere S. Have we reached a tipping point for sugar-sweetened beverage taxes? Public Health Nutr. 2016;19:3057–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Backholer K, Blake M, Vandevijvere S. Sugar-sweetened beverage taxation: an update on the year that was 2017. Public Health Nutr. 2017;20:3219–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Backholer K, Vandevijvere S, Blake M, Tseng M. Sugar-sweetened beverage taxes in 2018: a year of reflections and consolidation. Public Health Nutr. 2018;21:3291–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Kanter R, Vanderlee L, Vandevijvere S. Front-of-package nutrition labelling policy: global progress and future directions. Public Health Nutr. 2018;21:1399–408.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. • Shangguan S, Afshin A, Shulkin M, et al. A meta-analysis of food labeling effects on consumer diet behaviors and industry practices. Am J Prev Med. 2019;56:300–14. This systematic review found that different food labeling interventions (including back of pack and menu labelling) influence industry practices, in particular to reduce product contents of sodium and artificial trans fat.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Afshin A, Penalvo JL, Del GL, et al. The prospective impact of food pricing on improving dietary consumption: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2017;12:e0172277.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Jaenke R, Barzi F, McMahon E, Webster J, Brimblecombe J. Consumer acceptance of reformulated food products: A systematic review and meta-analysis of salt-reduced foods. Crit Rev Food & Sci Nu tr. 2017;57(16):3357–3372. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2015.1118009.

  31. World Health Organization. Assessing national capacity for the prevention and control of noncommunicable diseases. Report of the 2017 Global Survey. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Barberio AM, Sumar N, Trieu K, Lorenzetti DL, Tarasuk V, Webster J, et al. Population-level interventions in government jurisdictions for dietary sodium reduction: a Cochrane review. Int J Epidemiol. 2017;46:1551–405.

  33. Hyseni L, Elliot-Green A, Lloyd-Williams F, Kypridemos C, O’Flaherty M, McGill R, et al. Systematic review of dietary salt reduction policies: evidence for an effectiveness hierarchy? PLoS One. 2017;12:e0177535.

  34. Ghebreyesus TA, Frieden TR. REPLACE: a roadmap to make the world trans fat free by 2023. Lancet. 2018;391:1978–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. World Health Organization. Draft thirteenth general programme of work, 2019–2023. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  36. World Health Organization. Global NCD monitoring framework. Geneva: World Health Organisation; 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  37. World Health Organization. Sugars intake for adults and children. Guideline. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2015.

  38. World Cancer Research Fund. NOURISHING framework - use economic tools to address food affordability and purchase incentives. 2019. https://www.wcrf.org/sites/default/files/Use-economic-tools.pdf Accessed June 2019.

  39. Redondo M, Hernandez-Aguado I, Lumbreras B. The impact of the tax on sweetened beverages: a systematic review. Am J Clin Nutr. 2018;108:548–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Frederici C, Detzel P, Petracca F, Dainelli L, Fattore G. The impact of food reformulation on nutrient intakes and health, a systematic review of modelling studies. BMC Nutr. 2019;5.

  41. Nilson EAF, Spaniol AM, Goncalves VSS et al. Sodium reduction in processed foods in Brazil: analysis of food categories and voluntary targets from 2011 to 2017. Nutrients. 2017;9.

  42. He FJ, Brinsden HC, MacGregor GA. Salt reduction in the United Kingdom: a successful experiment in public health. J Hum Hypertens. 2014;28:345–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Temme EHM, Hendriksen MAH, Milder IEJ et al. Salt reductions in some foods in the Netherlands: monitoring of food composition and salt intake. Nutrients. 2017;9.

  44. Pigat S, Connolly A, Cushen M, Cullen M, O'Mahony C. A probabilistic intake model to estimate the impact of reformulation by the food industry among Irish consumers. Int J Food Sci Nutr. 2018;69:938–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Curtis CJ, Clapp J, Niederman SA, Ng SW, Angell SY. US food industry progress during the National Salt Reduction Initiative: 2009-2014. Am J Public Health. 2016;106:1815–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Arcand J, Jefferson K, Schermel A, Shah F, Trang S, Kutlesa D, et al. Examination of food industry progress in reducing the sodium content of packaged foods in Canada: 2010 to 2013. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2016;41:684–90.

  47. Health Canada. Sodium reduction in processed foods in Canada: an evaluation of progress toward voluntary targets from 2012 to 2016. Ontario: Heallth Canada; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Allemandi L, Tiscornia MV, Ponce M, Castronuovo L, Dunford E, Schoj V. Sodium content in processed foods in Argentina: compliance with the national law. Cardiovasc Diagn Ther. 2015;5:197–206.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Kaldor JC, Thow AM, Schonfeldt H. Using regulation to limit salt intake and prevent non-communicable diseases: lessons from South Africa's experience. Public Health Nutr. 2018:1–10.

  50. • Downs SM, Bloem MZ, Zheng M et al. The impact of policies to reduce trans fat consumption: a systematic review of the evidence. Curr Dev Nutr. 2017;1. This systematic review found that policies aimed at reducing trans fats in the food supply are effective and may contribute to reducing diet-related inequalities. Trans fat bans are likely the most effective and economical approach to reducing trans fats in the food supply.

  51. Restrepo BJ, Rieger M. Denmark’s policy on artificial trans fat and cardiovascular disease. Am J Prev Med. 2016;50:69–76.

  52. Center for Science in the Public Interest. Artificial trans fat: a timeline. Key milestones in a 25-year-long campaign to get artificial trans fat out of the food supply. Washington: Center for Science in the Public Interest; 2019. https://cspinet.org/sites/default/files/attachment/Trans%20timeline.pdf Accessed June 2019.

  53. Arcand J, Scourboutakos MJ, Au JT, L’Abbe MR. Trans fatty acids in the Canadian food supply: an updated analysis. Am J Clin Nutr. 2014;100:1116–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Downs SM, Marie TA, Ghosh-Jerath S, Leeder SR. Aligning food-processing policies to promote healthier fat consumption in India. Health Promot Int. 2015;30:595–605.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Downs SM, Thow AM, Ghosh-Jerath S, McNab J, Reddy KS, Leeder SR. From Denmark to Delhi: the multisectoral challenge of regulating trans fats in India. Public Health Nutr. 2013;16:2273–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. • Public Health England. Sugar reduction: achieving the 20% A technical report outlining progress to date, guidelines for industry, 2015 baseline levels in key foods and next steps. 2017. London: Public Health England. While most of the action globally has focused on sodium and trans fat reduction in the food supply, there has not been much action on sugar reduction. Public Health England's structured approach to sugar reduction is one of the existing examples to stimulate the food industry to reduce sugar in foods, especially those that are highly consumed among children.

  57. Public Health England. Sugar reduction and wider reformulation programme: report on progress towards the first 5% reduction and next steps. London: Public Health England; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Combris P, Enderli G, Gauvreau C, et al. Public and private actions for improving the nutritional quality of foods: impacts and limits. Cahiers de Nutrition et Diététique. 2014;49:22–31.

  59. World Cancer Research Fund. NOURISHING framework - Nutrition label standards and regulations on the use of claims and implied claims on food. London: World Cancer Research Fund; 2019. https://www.wcrf.org/sites/default/files/Nutrition-labels.pdf Accessed June 2019.

  60. Huang Y, Kypridemos C, Liu J, Lee Y, Pearson-Stuttard J, Collins B, et al. Cost-effectiveness of the US Food and Drug Administration added sugar labeling policy for improving diet and health. Circulation. 2019;139:2613–24.

  61. Bleich SN, Economos CD, Spiker ML, Vercammen KA, VanEpps EM, Block JP, et al. A systematic review of calorie labeling and modified calorie labeling interventions: impact on consumer and restaurant behavior. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2017;25:2018–44.

  62. Namba A, Auchincloss A, Leonberg BL, Wootan MG. Exploratory analysis of fast-food chain restaurant menus before and after implementation of local calorie-labeling policies, 2005-2011. Prev Chronic Dis. 2013;10:E101.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Bruemmer B, Krieger J, Saelens BE, Chan N. Energy, saturated fat, and sodium were lower in entrees at chain restaurants at 18 months compared with 6 months following the implementation of mandatory menu labeling regulation in King County, Washington. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2012;112:1169–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Bleich SN, Wolfson JA, Jarlenski MP. Calorie changes in large chain restaurants: declines in new menu items but room for improvement. Am J Prev Med. 2016;50:e1–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Bleich SN, Wolfson JA, Jarlenski MP, Block JP. Restaurants with calories displayed on menus had lower calorie counts compared to restaurants without such labels. Health Aff (Millwood ). 2015;34:1877–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Wu HW, Sturm R. Changes in the energy and sodium content of main entrees in US chain restaurants from 2010 to 2011. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2014;114:209–19.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Labonte ME, Poon T, Gladanac B, et al. Nutrient profile models with applications in government-led nutrition policies aimed at health promotion and noncommunicable disease prevention: a systematic review. Adv Nutr. 2018;9:741–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Jones A, Shahid M, Neal B. Uptake of Australia’s Health Star Rating system. Nutrients. 2018;10.

  69. • Mhurchu CN, Eyles H, Choi YH. Effects of a voluntary front-of-pack nutrition labelling system on packaged food reformulation: the Health Star Rating system in New Zealand. Nutrients. 2017;9. This study from New Zealand is the first one providing evidence of the impact of the voluntary Health Star Rating front-of-pack labeling system on food reformulation 2 years after its implementation. While the number of foods displaying the Health Stars was still low, the authors demonstrated that the Health Stars are driving reformulation to some extent.

  70. Morrison H, Meloncelli N, Pelly FE. Nutritional quality and reformulation of a selection of children’s packaged foods available in Australian supermarkets: has the Health Star Rating had an impact? Nutr Diet. 2018.

  71. Julia C, Kesse-Guyot E, Ducrot P, Péneau S, Touvier M, Méjean C, et al. Performance of a five category front-of-pack labelling system - the 5-colour nutrition label - to differentiate nutritional quality of breakfast cereals in France. BMC Public Health. 2015;15:179.

  72. Kanter R, Reyes M, Swinburn B, Vandevijvere S, Corvalan C. The food supply prior to the implementation of the Chilean law of food labeling and advertising. Nutrients. 2018;11.

  73. Kanter R, Reyes M, Corvalan C, Vandevijvere S, Swinburn B. Anticipatory effects of the implementation of the Chilean Law of Food Labeling and Advertising on food and beverage product reformulation. Obes Rev. 2019;In press.

  74. Universidad de Chile. Ley De Etiquetado: Cambios en composición de alimentos y de conductas tras su implementación. Santiago: Universidad de Chile; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Downs SM, Bloem MZ, Graziose MM. Salt and the city: a preliminary examination of New York City’s sodium warning labels. FASEB J. 2017;31 (abstr).

  76. Ning SX, Mainvil LA, Thomson RK, McLean RM. Dietary sodium reduction in New Zealand: influence of the Tick label. Asia Pac J Clin Nutr. 2017;26:1133–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Thomson RK, McLean RM, Ning SX, Mainvil LA. Tick front-of-pack label has a positive nutritional impact on foods sold in New Zealand. Public Health Nutr. 2016;19:2949–58.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Young L, Swinburn B. Impact of the Pick the Tick food information programme on the salt content of food in New Zealand. Health Promot Int. 2002;17:13–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Williams P, McMahon A, Boustead R. A case study of sodium reduction in breakfast cereals and the impact of the Pick the Tick food information program in Australia. Health Promot Int. 2003;18:51–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Vyth EL, Steenhuis IH, Roodenburg AJ, Brug J, Seidell JC. Front-of-pack nutrition label stimulates healthier product development: a quantitative analysis. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2010;7:65.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  81. Duckett S, Swerissen H, Wiltshire T. A sugary drinks tax: recovering the community costs of obesity. Melbourne: Grattan Institute; 2016.

  82. FoodNavigator. Cut sugar supplies and push up prices to incentivise reformulation report urges. Food Navigator. 2019. https://www.foodnavigator.com/Article/2019/02/21/Cut-sugar-supplies-and-push-up-prices-to-incentivise-reformulation-report-urges. Accessed June 2019

  83. The Guardian. Time to stockpile Irn-Bru? How the sugar tax will change our favourite drinks. 2018. https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2018/apr/02/time-to-stockpile-irn-bru-how-sugar-tax-change-nations-favourite-drinks Accessed June 2019..

  84. Hashem KM, He FJ, MacGregor GA. Cross-sectional surveys of the amount of sugar, energy and caffeine in sugar-sweetened drinks marketed and consumed as energy drinks in the UK between 2015 and 2017: monitoring reformulation progress. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e018136.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  85. Euromonitor International. Soft drinks in the United Kingdom. Euromonitor Int. 2019.

  86. • Briggs ADM, Mytton OT, Kehlbacher A, et al. Health impact assessment of the UK soft drinks industry levy: a comparative risk assessment modelling study. Lancet Public Health. 2017;2:e15–22. This study modelled the potential effect of three possible industry responses to the UK sugar levy implemented in 2018 on obesity, diabetes, and dental caries. Out of the three scenarios modelled (reformulation to reduce sugar concentration, an increase of product price, and a change of the market share of high-sugar, mid-sugar, and low-sugar drinks), the best scenario for health was found to be reformulation.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Ecorys. Food taxes and their impact on competitiveness in the agri-food sector. Rotterdam: Ecorys; 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  88. Vallgarda S, Holm L, Jensen JD. The Danish tax on saturated fat: why it did not survive. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2015;69:223–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Scrinis G, Monteiro CA. Ultra-processed foods and the limits of product reformulation. Public Health Nutr. 2018;21:247–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Monteiro CA, Cannon G, Moubarac JC, Levy RB, Louzada MLC, Jaime PC. The UN Decade of nutrition, the NOVA food classification and the trouble with ultra-processing. Public Health Nutr. 2018;21:5–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Capewell S, Lloyd-Williams F. The role of the food industry in health: lessons from tobacco? Br Med Bull. 2018;125:131–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Scott C, Hawkins B, Knai C. Food and beverage product reformulation as a corporate political strategy. Soc Sci Med. 2017;172:37–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Muth MK, Karns SA, Mancino L, Todd JE. How much can product reformulation improve diet quality in households with children and adolescents? Nutrients. 2019;11.

  94. Ng SW, Dunford E. Complexities and opportunities in monitoring and evaluating US and global changes by the food industry. Obes Rev. 2013;14(Suppl 2):29–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Neal B, Sacks G, Swinburn B, Vandevijvere S, Dunford E, Snowdon W, et al. Monitoring the levels of important nutrients in the food supply. Obes Rev. 2013;14(Suppl 1):49–58.

  96. Harrington RA, Adhikari V, Rayner M, Scarborough P. Nutrient composition databases in the age of big data: foodDB, a comprehensive, real-time database infrastructure. BMJ Open. 2019;9:e026652.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  97. Neal B, Sacks G, Shahid M, Taylor F, Huffman M. FoodSwitch: state of the food supply. Sydney: The George Institute for Global Health; 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  98. Harris JL, Hyary M, Schwartz MB. Effects of offering look-alike products as smart snacks in schools. Child Obes. 2016;12:432–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. van Gunst A, Roodenburg AJC, Steenhuis IHM. Reformulation as an integrated approach of four disciplines: a qualitative study with food companies. Foods. 2018:7.

  100. Khandpur N, Swinburn B, Monteiro CA. Nutrient-based warning labels may help in the pursuit of healthy diets. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2018;26:1670–1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  101. Lee Y, Mozaffarian D, Liu J, Sy S, Abrahams-Gessel S, Wilde P, et al. Health impact and cost-effectiveness of volume, tiered, and sugar content sugar-sweetened beverage tax policies in the US: a micro-simulation study (OR28-04-19). Curr Dev Nutr. 2019;3.

  102. Reeve B, Magnusson R. Food reformulation and the (neo)-liberal state: new strategies for strengthening voluntary salt reduction programs in the UK and USA. Public Health. 2015;129:351–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Magnusson R, Reeve B. Food reformulation, responsive regulation, and “Regulatory Scaffolding”: strengthening performance of salt reduction programs in Australia and the United Kingdom. Nutrients. 2015;7:5281–308.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  104. Jones A, Magnusson R, Swinburn B, Webster J, Wood A, Sacks G, et al. Designing a healthy food partnership: lessons from the Australian food and health dialogue. BMC Public Health. 2016;16:651.

  105. World Cancer Research Fund. NOURISHING framework - Improve nutritional quality of the whole food supply. London: World Cancer Research Fund; 2019. https://www.wcrf.org/sites/default/files/5_Improve%20Nutritional%20Quality_May2019.pdf Accessed June 2019..

  106. Roache SA, Gostin LO. The untapped power of soda taxes: incentivizing consumers, generating revenue, and altering corporate behavior. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2017;6:489–93.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  107. Richardson B, Winkler J. FRC Brexit briefing. Sugar reduction in post-Brexit UK: a supply-side policy agenda. London: Food Research Collaboration; 2019.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Scientific Institute of Public Health (Sciensano), Brussels, Belgium

    Stefanie Vandevijvere

  2. School of Public Health and Health Systems, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada

    Lana Vanderlee

Authors
  1. Stefanie Vandevijvere
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lana Vanderlee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefanie Vandevijvere.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Stefanie Vandevijvere and Lana Vanderlee declare they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Public Health Nutrition

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vandevijvere, S., Vanderlee, L. Effect of Formulation, Labelling, and Taxation Policies on the Nutritional Quality of the Food Supply. Curr Nutr Rep 8, 240–249 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13668-019-00289-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13668-019-00289-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation