The Nutri-Score saga: why Europe’s food labeling revolution is on hold

The European Commission’s decision to move away from Nutri-Score and its implications for nutritional labeling in Europe.

On March 1, 2025, the European Commission announced a pivotal change regarding the Nutri-Score, a nutritional labeling system developed by researchers at the University of Paris. While this “traffic light” label was designed to provide clear nutritional information to consumers, its mandatory implementation across Europe is no longer prioritized. This decision signals the introduction of a new system, marking a shift in the European approach to nutritional labeling. This development, confirmed by an investigation by Radio France, raises questions about the future of food labeling in Europe.

The role of nutritional labels in consumer choices

For consumers aiming to maintain a healthy lifestyle, choosing the right food products in supermarkets can be challenging. Fresh food, often perceived as healthier, comes with uncertainties about its origin, cultivation methods, and chemical use. Similarly, selecting animal proteins poses difficulties in verifying ethical standards and the absence of harmful substances in animal feed.

The complexity is further compounded by the challenge of understanding nutritional values on labels. Consumers frequently spend considerable time comparing information to determine which foods are beneficial or detrimental to their health, often misled by advertising claims. Even those knowledgeable about nutrition face the daunting task of navigating through highly processed foods. There is a clear need for a system to guide food choices, as not everyone has an academic background in nutritional sciences. Every individual deserves to know what they are consuming and the impact of these foods on their health.

The rise of Nutri-Score as a preferred solution in Europe

The discussion on nutritional labeling in Europe began in 2003 with the European Parliament’s proposal on Nutrition & Health Claims, leading to the creation of regulation EC 1924/06. This regulation introduced the concept of nutritional profiles to clarify the nutritional value of food products and prevent misleading labels on unhealthy foods that appear healthy due to added minerals or vitamins.

Despite more than a decade passing, Europe struggles to advance on this issue due to significant pressure from the food industry. Some countries have independently developed nutritional labels, including France’s Nutri-Score. Although not officially adopted, it appears on some products, using a color-coded system from green to red and letters from A to E for easy and intuitive understanding.

The development and challenges faced by Nutri-Score

Nutri-Score was developed by researchers from the University of Paris and Inserm, France’s equivalent of Italy’s Istituto Superiore di Sanità. This system assigns scores based on an algorithm by Serge Hercberg, considering energy intake and the content of fats, saturated fats, carbohydrates, sugars, proteins, salt, and fiber. Its effectiveness led to adoption in Belgium, France, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Spain, and Switzerland, with Finland currently evaluating its use.

In 2020, the Farm to Fork strategy committed the European Commission to adopt a science-based nutritional logo by 2022. Nutri-Score was the leading candidate but faced significant opposition in various countries. By March 2025, the Commission seemingly shelved the matter, leaving many questions about Europe’s nutritional future.

Influence of food industry lobbying

The abandonment of Nutri-Score as the primary solution is attributed to various factors, including significant pressure from food industry lobbies seeking to protect their interests. Notably, the Italian government ideologically opposed the label, arguing it could harm national food traditions. Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni labeled the system “discriminatory,” while Agriculture Minister Francesco Lollobrigida described it as “dangerous.” According to Foodwatch, Italy exerted strong influence, supported by countries like Romania, Greece, and Hungary, to oppose Nutri-Score’s implementation.

In recent years, European Commission officials have held numerous meetings with representatives of food industry lobbies but only two with civil society, raising concerns about the transparency and fairness of the decision-making process.

The paradox of Nutri-Score’s food classifications

Criticism of Nutri-Score extends beyond economic or ideological reasons. The Italian Competition Authority (AGCM) rejected the label, deeming it misleading and potentially deceptive to consumers. The label’s classification was considered arbitrary, failing to account for individual nutritional needs. The evaluation criteria, including energy intake and fat and sugar levels, were criticized for applying to 100 grams of product without considering actual portions. This results in paradoxical situations where extra virgin olive oil and Parmesan cheese are classified as harmful, while items like potato chips and diet sodas receive favorable scores.

The ongoing delay in implementing a new labeling system

In response to the current situation, Italy proposed an alternative to Nutri-Score called Nutrinform Battery, which assesses foods based on their impact on the overall diet. This system replaces the traffic light with a battery indicating nutritional values per portion.

The European Commission has clarified that the future label will not be a mere copy of existing tools, implying the need for a new research and development process. This could take years, leaving consumers to continue navigating supermarket aisles without clear and reliable guidance on their purchases.

Riproduzione riservata © - WT