As consumers increasingly prioritize health, the food industry is witnessing a significant shift driven by a strong demand for recognizable, natural ingredients and a widespread aversion to artificial sweeteners, flavors, and colors. This evolution presents manufacturers with a critical choice: adapt to these changing consumer preferences or risk being overshadowed by trendier, healthier alternatives. However, navigating this transition is no simple task. The term “clean label” holds different meanings for different consumers. For some, it signifies products devoid of allergens, processed ingredients, and saturated fats, while others associate it with all-natural or organic formulations.
At a panel held by the Institute of Food Technologists in June, Steven Walton, the general manager of HealthFocus International, noted that the clean eating movement is rooted in a “reason to reject mindset.” This perspective is largely influenced by fears surrounding herbicides and synthetic materials and their potential effects on human health. Nutrition expert Richard Black emphasized to Food Dive that consumers often seek words like “natural,” “organic,” and “GMO-free” to make quick purchasing decisions, reassuring themselves about safety and nutritional quality. He pointed out that nutrition is a complex science, and despite our limited understanding, it is deeply personal; food becomes a part of our identity, unlike any other consumer product.
Black further highlighted that these values are considered three to five times more important than technical expertise, with younger consumers especially willing to pay a premium for them. For instance, 68% of millennials are prepared to spend more on organic foods, believing it enhances both their health and the environment. This trend provides legacy brands with a lucrative opportunity to cultivate a health-conscious image around their offerings, provided they can manage reformulation, marketing, and timing effectively. However, achieving this is a challenging endeavor, and companies continue to explore new strategies. Unfortunately, reformulations tied to clean labels or product enhancements have not always yielded success. Coca-Cola’s “New Coke” remains one of the most infamous reformulation failures in the industry, still remembered over 30 years after its introduction.
In the summer of 1985, Coca-Cola decided to revitalize its classic soda recipe to regain consumer interest and address declining market shares. This initiative was not about the label but rather the taste. The company invested millions testing the new soda, which consumers preferred in blind taste tests. However, when the product was finally launched, it incited chaos, with protests and consumer backlash as many felt their beloved original formula was being replaced. “What the post-hoc analysis seemed to indicate is that people like to choose low-calorie, improved products, but don’t want their standard taken away,” Black stated.
Recognizing the potential for a similar backlash, Kraft Heinz took a different approach when reformulating its iconic Kraft Macaroni and Cheese. The company kept the changes under wraps for months, having conducted three years of research that revealed consumers wanted simpler foods without chemicals but were wary of any alterations in taste. In 2015, Kraft removed artificial colors and preservatives from its macaroni and cheese, replacing them with natural ingredients like paprika, annatto, and turmeric, yet maintaining the product’s signature vibrant orange color. Over 50 million boxes of the revamped product were sold without consumers realizing significant changes had taken place.
Lynn Dornblaser, director of innovation and insight at Mintel, praised Kraft’s stealthy approach, suggesting that had the company publicized the changes, it might have faced negative feedback despite consumer preferences for healthier foods. This scenario illustrates the complexity of consumer behavior; while shoppers claim to favor healthier options, their purchasing habits may not always align. Healthy food is often perceived as less flavorful, which can lead to assumptions about altered taste, even if the product remains unchanged.
Kraft officially announced the changes in March 2016 through playful ads, encouraging fans to share their experiences with the hashtag didntnotice. This marketing strategy reflects a growing trend among companies seeking to enhance their products’ health profiles discreetly. Similarly, DanoneWave quietly improved its yogurts by reducing fat and sugar without advertising the changes on packaging.
Nestlé is seeking to address consumer hesitations regarding ingredient changes by leveraging innovative technology. In December, the chocolate manufacturer revealed it had found a natural method to restructure sugar molecules, allowing for up to 40% reduction in sugar without compromising sweetness. “With this new restructured sugar, you essentially get the same payoff, the same taste of sugar on your tongue,” explained Lisa Gibby, vice president of corporate communications at Nestlé. They are currently patenting this faster-dissolving sugar and plan to introduce confectionery products made with it next year.
This is particularly significant as 47% of global consumers desire foods with limited or no added sugar, as indicated by a Euromonitor survey. However, the demand for reduced sugar does not necessarily extend to indulgent products, as many consumers express a stronger aversion to artificial sweeteners than to sugar itself, with natural sweeteners often altering flavor and texture. Nestlé’s innovation might strike the right balance between consumer demand for clean labels and their expectations for product experience, which will be crucial when the new products hit the shelves in 2018.
Additionally, as companies strive to improve their health profiles, a question arises about how is calcium citrate made? Understanding the production processes of such ingredients could further enhance consumer trust and transparency in the food industry, paving the way for a healthier future.