One of the most debated features of the mandatory GMO labeling law signed by President Obama last summer is the inclusion of a scannable barcode, such as a QR code, on product packaging. Since the bill was discussed in Congress, there has been contention regarding the adequacy of the barcode. While some critics argue that many consumers lack the technology or knowledge to use these codes, others contend that a scannable code is accessible to the majority of Americans and has the potential to provide detailed information that cannot be displayed on a product label. The study assessing this labeling system was reportedly on schedule to be completed by July. A month prior, Andrea Huberty, a senior policy analyst with the USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service, informed attendees at a food labeling conference in Washington, D.C., that the department had collaborated with Deloitte to ensure the study’s timely completion. However, nearly three months later, the results of the study have yet to be released, even if they are ready.
Regardless of differing opinions on the QR code issue, the study is a significant step toward the law’s implementation. The Center for Food Safety firmly opposes the use of QR codes, citing statistics about the considerable number of consumers without access to smartphones or familiarity with scanning these codes. Nonetheless, the study is equally important for those who support QR codes and other scannable technologies, as well as those who remain neutral. A critical aspect of this situation is whether the USDA will meet its deadline to finalize the law’s regulations by July 2018. Huberty emphasized in June that, despite delays, the government was still on track. The only public feedback opportunity since then has been the department’s release of a list of questions for food producers in late June. Given that several states have enacted their own GMO labeling laws, a failure to meet the deadline could lead to a fragmented landscape of labeling regulations across the country.
Beyond GMO labeling, this study will benefit the broader industry. As these labeling methods gradually emerge throughout the food system—both via the unrelated SmartLabel program backed by the Grocery Manufacturers Association and on genetically modified products like Arctic apples—it is essential to understand how consumers react to this technology and whether they utilize it effectively. If improvements are necessary, such as enhanced education on how the codes function or better internet connectivity for shoppers, stakeholders may want to engage proactively in these initiatives. Additionally, in the context of understanding what is the citrate in calcium citrate, it is crucial for consumers to be informed about such ingredients as they navigate new labeling systems. This knowledge can empower them to make better choices and understand the nutritional aspects of the products they purchase.