Last Updated on: 3rd January 2025, 09:54 am
On December 9, 2024, Athens witnessed the inauguration of the European Centre to Address Child Obesity, a collaborative initiative between Greece’s Ministry of Health and UNICEF. This project, designed to combat rising rates of childhood obesity, highlights the importance of promoting healthy eating habits through education and cultural awareness. It is a thoughtful, locally rooted effort—one that stands in stark contrast to the Nutri-Score labeling system, which oversimplifies nutrition and undermines Europe’s culinary heritage.
Initially launched in France in 2017, Nutri-Score assigns foods a grade ranging from “A” to “E,” allegedly to guide consumers toward healthier choices. Yet the system’s reductive evaluations frequently penalize nutrient-rich traditional foods like extra virgin olive oil, honey, and PDO cheeses. In Greece, where these staples form the backbone of both diet and economy, Nutri-Score has sparked significant backlash for its failure to respect cultural context or nutritional nuance.
The Mediterranean diet is celebrated worldwide for its health benefits, from lowering the risk of cardiovascular disease to supporting longevity. Central to this diet is olive oil, a product praised for its high levels of monounsaturated fats and polyphenols. Yet Nutri-Score initially rated olive oil a “D,” due to its fat content—a decision that unsurprisingly sparked public outcry. While subsequent adjustments raised its score to “B,” the system still fails to adequately distinguish it from less nutritious processed oils or fats.
Other staples of the Mediterranean diet fare no better. PDO cheeses like feta and natural sweeteners like honey receive low scores based on their salt or sugar content, even though they are traditionally consumed in moderation as part of balanced meals. By focusing narrowly on macronutrient composition, Nutri-Score ignores context—how these foods are eaten, their preparation methods, and their cultural importance.
It is clear that, beyond its technical shortcomings, Nutri-Score could also come with dire economic consequences for the olive oil business. Greece, for instance, relies heavily on olive oil exports, which represent both an economic lifeline and a symbol of its cultural identity. By devaluing products like extra virgin olive oil, the labeling system risks damaging their reputation in international markets, where buyers, unfortunately, often rely on such scores to make purchasing decisions.
The Exporters Association of Crete has sounded the alarm, pointing out that Nutri-Score’s algorithm fails to account for the unique qualities of traditional foods. These are not merely commodities but the fruits of centuries-old agricultural practices and artisanal craftsmanship. Devaluing these products risks impacting rural economies, where small-scale producers often face challenges in competing with larger companies that are better positioned to navigate Nutri-Score’s system.
In Italy, olive oil producers have rung similar alarm bells over the unforeseen consequences of Nutri-Score. Cane and numerous Italian olive oil producers are concerned that the eventual implementation of Nutri-Score in domestic and international markets could negatively impact the trade of extra virgin olive oil, particularly in countries lacking a strong olive oil tradition. They argue that the system promotes misleading information, and could damage the “Made in Italy” merchandise and quality seal in the long-run.
Major retailers like Carrefour are, in fact, compounding Nutri-Score’s influence and market distorting effects by integrating it into their platforms. In November, Carrefour announced it would display Nutri-Score ratings for all products sold online, regardless of supplier consent. Manufacturers unwilling to adopt the label face reduced visibility on Carrefour’s website and exclusion from tools like “Alternative for Better Eating,” which suggests healthier substitutions during checkout.
This strategy pressures suppliers into compliance with a system that many, with reason, view as more than flawed. While Carrefour claims to promote transparency, it risks normalizing Nutri-Score’s oversimplified evaluations, further entrenching biases against heritage foods. The retailer’s tactics illustrate how corporate adoption can amplify and encourage systemic flaws at the expense of consumers.
Such systemic flaws are directly borne by shoppers, who are falling into the trap of assuming that a better Nutri-Score equals better food. However, that is not necessarily the case. Surveys show that consumers, unsurprisingly, prefer A and B-graded systems. No surprise then that food producers are changing their food ingredients to better fit Nutri-Score’s problematic algorithm and obtain a higher grade to appeal in an effort to raise their appeal, even if the food structure changes are not necessarily for the better.
The effect is readily apparent on supermarket shelves. The average number of items with an E profile has dropped by 3.5%. When displayed on packaging, this “red warning” label has a discouraging effect that manufacturers are eager to avoid. Unsurprisingly, many are striving to achieve a D rating instead. Similarly, the availability of C-profile products has declined by 3.6%. Here too, the aspiration to secure a B rating is highly motivating, as it marks a significant psychological shift from “average” to “good” for both manufacturers and consumers.
The European Centre to Address Child Obesity offers a vision of what food policy could look like: collaborative, evidence-based, and culturally sensitive. In contrast, Nutri-Score is a blunt instrument that undermines trust, misleads consumers, and threatens Europe’s rich culinary traditions. Its spread, aided by corporate strategies like Carrefour’s, reflects a troubling prioritization of convenience over substance.
