With sugar making headlines for all the wrong reasons, manufacturers are actively searching for alternatives. However, many consumers remain wary of artificial sweeteners. Natural sweetening sources like honey and agave also present themselves as alternatives, but they are high-calorie options that can contribute to obesity, similar to sugar. By July 2018, manufacturers will be required to list “added sugars” on the Nutrition Facts panel, which will further motivate the reduction of sweeteners such as sugar, honey, fructose, and fruit juice concentrates. Solutions like Tate & Lyle’s combination of allulose, sucralose, and fructose may emerge as viable options, enabling food companies to strike a balance with fewer added sugars while incorporating sweetness from low- and zero-calorie sweeteners. It remains uncertain whether consumers will be willing to make these trade-offs. Will they persist in consuming added sugars as before, or will the new nutritional labels prompt some to steer clear of certain products? What is evident is that numerous manufacturers and ingredient suppliers are gearing up for change. Nonetheless, adapting to new sweeteners comes at a cost.
Despite the rapid expansion of the naturally derived sweetener market, stevia and monk fruit still represent a minor fraction of overall sweetener usage. Their adoption is hampered by higher prices compared to synthetic high-intensity sweeteners, as well as ongoing issues with aftertaste. Blends of sugar and stevia have gained popularity, especially in the beverage sector. For instance, in Europe, the Coca-Cola Company has reformulated its classic Sprite with 30% less sugar and incorporated stevia, without marketing it as a mid-calorie option. As manufacturers explore options such as citrate petites, the landscape of sweeteners continues to evolve, though the transition remains complex and costly.