The impact of nutri-score on consumers' preferences for geographical indications. Evidence from a non-hypothetical experiment.

The EU Farm to Fork strategy (F2F) promotes the compulsory adoption of a nutritional front of pack label to improve the diets of the citizens, supporting healthier food choices. In the public debate, Nutri-Score (NS) is the most favored candidate. Although being widely supported, oppositions on the political and producer levels are raised against the NS, due to the economic impact it could have on specific food sector, and specifically on Geographical Indications (GIs). Recent literature has stressed the need to explore it in more detail. The current study contributes to fill this gap by analyzing consumers' monetary preferences for GI products labelled with different NS levels. An incentivized non-hypothetical experiment was conducted on 188 Italian consumers. Different products representing different levels of NS were used. Specifically, a conventional pasta and the Pasta di Gragnano PGI (NS = A), a conventional flatbread (piadina) and the Piadina Romagnola PGI (NSC), and a conventional hard cheese and the Parmigiano Reggiano PDO (NS = D) were considered in the survey. Results reveal that the NS elicits favorable responses and unfavorable reactions in consumers' preferences, aligning with expectations for A and D scores, respectively. The perceived healthiness of the product significantly affects consumers' WTP, increasing it. Results stress the need to have effective communication strategies within the EU to reach the F2F goals. NS diminishes the premium in prices associated with GIs independently from its level, when considering those consumers who value more the GIs. However, the most well-known GIs does not suffer from this negative effect of the NS, as the positive value associated to the GI offset the negative effect of the NS.

A Little Bird Told Me Nutri-Score Panoramas from a Flight over Europe, Connecting Science and Society.

Within the Farm to Fork Strategy, the European Commission ask for a unified Front Of Pack nutritional label for food to be used at the European level. The scientific debate identified the Nutri-Score (NS) as the most promising candidate, but within the political discussion, some Member States brought to attention several issues related to its introduction. This misalignment led to a postponement of the final decision. With the aim to shed some light on the current stances and contribute to the forthcoming debate, the objective of the present work is to understand to what extent scientific research addresses the issues raised by the general public. We applied a structural topic model to tweets from four European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain) and to abstracts of scientific papers, all dealing with the NS topic. Different aspects of the NS debate are discussed in different countries, but scientific research, while addressing some of them (e.g., the comparison between NS and other labels), disregards others (e.g., relations between NS and traditional products). It is advisable, therefore, to widen the scope of NS research to properly address the concerns of European society and to provide policymakers with robust evidence to support their decisions.

Is it really a piece of cake to label Geographical Indications with the Nutri-Score? Consumers' behaviour and policy implications.

To improve the dietary habits of the population, the EU, within the Farm to Fork strategy (F2F), is strongly supporting the Nutri-Score (NS) Front Of Pack (FOP) label. Under the NS system, Geographical Indications (GIs) are generally scored as "unhealthy" food, given the predominance of products of animal origin among GIs which are, notoriously, high-fat products. This study aims to determine the impact of the NS label on consumers' preferences for two Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) cheeses, in comparison with generic ones. A Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) was conducted on 600 Italian consumers through the estimation of a Random Parameter Logit model. Results highlighted that Italian consumers are generally not familiar with the NS and perceive it as a positive characteristic of the product, even if it is signalling an unhealthy choice (D score). However, consumers aware of the Nutri-Score meaning are willing to pay less to buy a product considered "unhealthy" according to this system. Furthermore, we found that consumers who already knew the NS system have homogeneous behaviours in rejecting the product, independently of the association with a PDO certification. This result has important implications on the agri-food sector. If the Nutri-Score becomes mandatory in the EU, consumers might refuse many GIs due to their negative Nutri-Score values. However, the quality of these products is recognized and protected worldwide. In this vein, the GI policy could be questioned by the F2F strategy: both of them aims to reduce information asymmetry producing, at the same time, contrasting results. Within the Geographical Indication policy, the PDO and PGI goods are protected for their quality attributes, which are strictly linked to their geographical origin of the products and traditional know-how. However, the EU adoption of the Nutri-Score could damage these products, reducing their perceived quality/value.