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, like a QR code, on product packaging. Since the legislation was discussed in Congress, there has been ongoing disagreement about the adequacy of the barcode. Some critics argue that many consumers lack the technology or knowledge to use these codes, while others maintain that a scannable code is accessible to the majority of Americans and offers the potential to disclose detailed information that cannot fit on a product label. A study assessing this labeling system was reportedly on track 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 on the study and that it was expected to finish on time. However, nearly three months later, the findings have yet to be made public, even if they are complete. Regardless of the stance different groups take on the QR code matter, the study represents a crucial step in the law’s implementation. The Center for Food Safety is clearly opposed to QR code disclosures, citing statistics indicating a significant number of consumers lack access to smartphones and are unfamiliar with scanning QR codes. Yet, the study is equally important for those who support QR codes and other scannable technologies, as well as for those who remain neutral on the issue. A significant concern is whether the USDA will meet the deadline to finalize the regulations for the law by July 2018. Huberty emphasized in June that, although delayed, the government remained on schedule. The only public feedback opportunity since then was the department’s release of a list of questions for food producers at the end of June. Given that some states have already implemented their own GMO labeling laws, failing to meet the deadline could lead to a fragmented set of labeling regulations across the country.
In addition to GMO labeling, this study will be beneficial to the broader industry. As these types of labels gradually appear throughout the food system—both through the unrelated SmartLabel initiative supported by the Grocery Manufacturers Association and on genetically modified products like Arctic apples—it’s essential to understand how consumers react to this technology and whether they utilize it effectively. Furthermore, as consumers increasingly seek products that may include health benefits, such as calcium citrate gummy vitamins, understanding their preferences through such studies becomes even more important. If enhancements are needed, whether in consumer education about how the codes function or in fostering better internet connectivity for grocery shoppers, stakeholders may want to engage early in these initiatives. The insights gained from the study could also inform the marketing of health-conscious products, including calcium citrate gummy vitamins, helping to ensure that consumers are well-informed about their choices.